Analogical to 3/4D-Digital

29→30 坎→離 & 51→52 震→艮

䷜ ䷝ / ䷲ ䷳

• And vice-versa – throughout the sequential "Global Input/MoΔeM/Local Output" suite
• Also referred to as "Multiverse Analogical Input/MoΔɜM/Local Tolerated Output" – 

Is the 道 View of XXI "the World"〜That the World is Defined or Produced by the Tension of Chaos & Order (29→30 / 坎→離 & 51→52 / 震→艮)〜Proven True by Our Brain Structure?

Reflections in furtherance to a Jordan Peterson lecture on biblical matters.

Has J. Peterson just been taking a huge tangent – from the topic at hand – to assert and reveal a biological proof that the Dào is true? Let us rewind.

Hereinafter is Jordan Peterson's step by step tangential discussion of how the very structure of your brain proves 道 (and a bunch of other concepts, unpacked):

Being first restated that the Daoist View on "Being" is that of an eternal balance between chaos and order. And that there is a strong affinity between 坎 & 震 and between 離 & 艮 and a real intimacy between the pair 29-30 & 51-52.

A neuropsychologist, named Elkhonon Goldberg – that has studied at Moscow State University, under the great Alexander Romanovich Luria (Алекса́ндр Рома́нович Лу́рия; 16 July 1902 – 14 August 1977) a Russian Imperial then Soviet Russian neuropsychologist often credited as a father of modern neuropsychological assessment, and then moved to the United States, in 1974 – wrote that we have two brain hemispheres, a left and a right hemisphere. The left is often viewed as related to right-handed people, even more so to right-handed males – as women appear to be more neurologically diffuse and that, precisely, is one of the particulars that makes them more robust to head injury, for example – and maybe men are less diffuse, which makes them somewhat more specialized, and somehow more subject to brain damage.

Anyway, no one exactly knows why we do have these two hemispheres, i.e. the left and the right ones. It is well-known, though, that they house quasi-independent consciousness; because if and as the corpus callosum, that unites them, is divided一which occurred in cases of intractable epilepsy, for instance一each hemisphere is capable, to a certain degree, of developing its own consciousness; the right being generally non-verbal and the left, verbal. Hence the general and popular idea that the left is a verbal hemisphere while the right one is non-verbal.

Can this be right? Animals, although they have bifurcated hemispheric structure, do not have speech abilities.

Therefore, if it is a proper or correct assumption, it is certainly not causally right.

Instead, E. Goldberg hypothesized that the hemispheres have undergone specialisation for routinization and non-routinization, or for novelty and familiarity or for chaos and order. Can this be viewed as a signal of multi-method or multi-trait construct validation? It is noteworthy that Elkhonon Goldberg came up with this historical pathway that is entirely independent of any mythological inspired thinking, really separately. In fact, it was motivated more by the materialist Russian neuropsychology approach and method (which were such for political as well as for scientific reasons) than anything else.

Thus, it has been postulated that we have one hemisphere that reacts almost immediately to things unknown or unfamiliar to us, that is more imaginative and diffuse and is more associated with negative emotion because receptive feeling is what one should experience immediately upon encountering something that cannot be instantly understood. Negative emotion is a form of thinking – right? – it’s like, “I am in a situation where things are not what they should be.” And, actually, the right hemisphere absolutely does that: it very swiftly prompts images to help us figure out what might really be. From there, the left hemisphere takes on the delivered package and develops it into something that is more articulated and algorithmic and fully understandable, therefore comprehended.

Thence, there is this dynamic balance between the right and the left hemispheres where the left tries to impose order onto the world. Vilayanur Subramanian Ramachandran – a renown neurologist in California who developed a theory much like Goldberg’s – said that the left hemisphere imposes routinized order on the world and the right hemisphere reacts to novelty and generates novel hypotheses. And he thinks – there is some good evidence for this – that what is happening during a dream is that information is moved from the right hemisphere to the left hemisphere, in small homoeopathic doses, so that the novel revelations issued by the right hemisphere do not abolish or utterly demolish the algorithmic structures that the left hemisphere has been so carefully busy to put together….

Our mind makes the assumption – that what it is that we are biologically adapted to – is (a unique, really, the one and only) reality. To a Darwinian, this is actually an axiomatic definition. Because nature is what selects – by definition, that is what nature is – it is the selector. And if nature – that selects – has forced upon us a dual hemispheric structure because half of us has to deal with chaos and the other half has to deal with a localised order, then we can make a pretty strong inferential case that our anthroposphere and biosphere – the world we, as humanity, co-create – are made out of chaos and order.