Ledoux’s presentation of the Instruction versus Selection debate (regarding how, why, and when synaptic connections are formed in the human brain—as well as the extent to which they are influenced by inherent or exterior conditions) dovetailed wonderfully with Luria’s account of the synesthete/mnemonist, S. Not only does the former provide a conceptual basis for (at best) attempting to understand S.’s mind; but the latter—the case detailed by Luria—is an informative illustration of what happens when one of the two complementary mechanisms outlined by Ledoux (synaptic regression) seems to be missing from the picture. Thus Ledoux’s concept that a union between the two often opposed schools of thought (“selectionist nativism vs. instructional constructionism”) underlies ‘normal’ primate brain functioning is given weight—inasmuch as the consequences of a brain leaning more to one side of the debate (so to speak) are readily observed.
It would seem that, both metaphorically and physically, S.’s brain was incapable of undergoing a necessary pruning of connections—whether these were physical (neuronal) or conceptual (associative) by nature. Indeed, that S. was indeed synesthetic implies that the connections between his cortical sensory-association-areas had not undergone the usual parsing and dissociation found in a conventional adult brain (as per the Synasthesia Quick Guide). This structural abnormality (or gift, depending on your perspective) gave rise not only to the functional crossing over of his senses (inasmuch as he could taste and feel color, while perceiving words as colors and syllables as shapes), but also to a psychological and cognitive inability to parse and dissociate nonrelevant or unnecessary information. As Luria describes, “…whenever [S.] would have to deal with a sotry that had been read to him…S.’s faces would register confusion and finally utter bewilderment…‘This is too much. Each word calls up images; they collide with one another, and the result is chaos’…a far more difficult and exhausting job…than others do for whom the written word does not summon up such graphic images; who operate more simply and directly by signaling out key points in a passage—those that offer a maximum of information” (Luria 65). In a way, S.’s compensatory process of cutting down the details of incoming information, via his methods of “shorthand” (described by Luria under the chapter, The Art of Forgetting), can be likened to a self-imposed pruning: a top-down, conscious executive enactment of what usually occurs on a nonconscious, automatic level.
Though S. did find a coping mechanism for his inordinate retention of memory, he still experienced difficulties filtering out the extraneous voices, sounds, and bits of irrelevant sensory stimulation—such as when he began to confuse number sets on blackboards shown to him during his career as a professional mnemonist (Luria 69). Even his process of writing down that which he intended to forget—an apparent reversal of conventional behavior regarding memory—proved unfruitful, as images/words/concepts he wanted to erase repeatedly popped into his mind. This, of course, directly reminded me of particular disorders involving anxiety and obsessive thought patterns. Though S. should by no means be classified as obsessive compulsive or diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder, the symptoms (or, reflections) of his anomaly are analogous to those symptoms (or behavioral manifestations) of such disorders. Simply put, the inability for S. to let go of a certain set of numbers or a string of phonemes—and the necessary compensatory behavior to rid himself of this persistence) seems similar to the inability of those afflicted with obsessive compulsive and anxiety disorders to release themselves from their compulsive thoughts, behaviors, obsessions. All such situations, in a broad and perhaps overly generalized manner, involve an inability to let go of superfluous stimuli, a difficulty putting to rest or quieting the mind.
All such examples, however, are in turn mere exaggerations of normal human functioning. Every individual experiences the desire to forget something that will not leave his or her head—for instance, an annoying melody, or a traumatic memory. In turn, most have experienced an inability to cease fixating on (or thinking of), say, an event in the future—such as an impending test or deadline; a nervousness about hearing back from an employer or college after applying. Additionally, as Luria is quick to point out, most humans have “…remnants of synesthesia…which are of a very rudimentary sort (experiencing lower and higher tones as ‘warm,’ others as ‘cole’; ‘seeing’ Friday or Monday as having different colors)…” (Luria 27). Thus synesthesia, also, is an exaggeration of the norm (as regards general/conventional human functioning). [Attentional disorders are also called to mind here, as they may be conceived of as an inability to filter that which otherwise normal individuals hear/see but are not distracted by].
In sum, every instance of exaggeration which may be termed anomalous curves back to the original dichotomy between Instruction versus Selection—and what happens when one side of the debate is more emphasized than the other. Perhaps, then, the ‘norm’ of functioning should indeed be perceived in Ledoux’s complementary sense, with innate characteristics (genes) giving rise to a plethora of structures, which environmental influences cut and parse according to both chance and conditioning. It is only when one such mechanism (either the preprogramming or, in this case, the ‘post-programming’) steps out of sync with the other that an anomaly arises—though this anomaly may be the very thing that individuates one from another.
No comments:
Post a Comment