|
Rhizomorph
Psychedelic Researcher



Registered: 04/24/20
Posts: 785
|
Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory?
#26872524 - 08/09/20 11:33 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Dr.Carhart Harris came up with a theory of conscious states that may explain the therapeutic mechanism of psychedelics. It suggests that in states of high entropy (high degree of disorder, like that of a psychedelic experience), our brains are far more flexible and suggestible to personality change.
has anyone heard of this theory before or have any thoughts about it?
Article for anyone who likes to read: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3909994/
|
Qyu
That weird HotTopic girl


Registered: 03/20/20
Posts: 18
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: Rhizomorph]
#26872542 - 08/10/20 12:00 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I definitely feel myself being way more flexible and open minded toward my personal psyche. I like it. I will try to give it a read.
|
Rhizomorph
Psychedelic Researcher



Registered: 04/24/20
Posts: 785
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: Qyu]
#26872587 - 08/10/20 01:04 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I find this guy explains it fairly well too if you don't feel like doing the reading & sifting through data & whatnot (skip to about a minute in to get past the intro):
Edited by Rhizomorph (08/10/20 01:05 AM)
|
Ombisha
Transmutant



Registered: 02/17/20
Posts: 667
Loc: Tartaria
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: Rhizomorph]
#26883615 - 08/16/20 03:06 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I dont know about that theory in particular, but what i know to be proven is that mushrooms (and other psychedelics) increase a fun little thing called neuro-plasticity, which basically means, that brain (or you, depending on how you look at it) can "rewrite" its neuron pathways much more easily.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6082376/
|
lord_nikon6983
Seeker


Registered: 08/10/20
Posts: 26
Loc: Da Burgh
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: Ombisha]
#26904014 - 08/28/20 11:46 AM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
This makes a lot of sense to me. Thx for sending me down a cool new path!
-------------------- Not all those who wander are lost
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: lord_nikon6983]
#26905522 - 08/29/20 06:51 AM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
entropic brain theory is ok as a way to review what we know so far, however its flaw of oversimplification -i.e. chaos interferes with cascades of associative processing, affecting the emergent property of consciousness - actually explains no particular experience or result of psychedelics, and assumes that chaos is other than cascade with signal extension like pressing the right pedal on a piano.
this is the fault of fNMR and other slow reading technology which misses individual brain signal propagations but is good at showing noise/chaos.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
Ferdinando


Registered: 11/15/09
Posts: 3,664
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: redgreenvines]
#26905559 - 08/29/20 07:24 AM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
you are a good model
or mentor
buddha was like a model or mentor
like chauncy gardener
but like we find that you are a model of truthfullness and morality and order
like buddha
we can think oh I can be like you
and without it that it woulndt be negative
and better with it
that kind of thing is universal and true for all
I hope that philosphy will keep being there
-------------------- with our love with our love we could save the world
|
Rhizomorph
Psychedelic Researcher



Registered: 04/24/20
Posts: 785
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: redgreenvines]
#26906614 - 08/29/20 08:18 PM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: chaos interferes with cascades of associative processing, affecting the emergent property of consciousness - actually explains no particular experience or result of psychedelics, and assumes that chaos is other than cascade with signal extension like pressing the right pedal on a piano.
I don't think the theory is suggesting that chaos is separate to cascades of associative processing. I could see how it could be interpreted as such if you were to view chaos as a holistic actor on all functional networks. But the application of the theory (from my interpretation) is applicable to specific networks and not others. For example, large increases in mediotemporal lobe activity - a form of chaos in this context - dampens other networks. If the dampened networks are correlated with specific phenomenological aspects of psychedelic use, these experiences could be explained by the chaos upstream. (of course correlations never = causation but my main point is that the correlation is unlikely to be confounded or arbitrary)
Also, the article I shared above applied controls by comparing psilocybin to epileptic activity and electrical stimulation of similar brain regions in people who are sober.
Yes fMRI metrics are susceptible to be confounded by neural "noise", but there are usually statistical tests that can be done to determine the impact and effect sizes of the noise. In this case the decreased synchronization of resting state functional networks such as the default mode network would likely be unaffected by this noise if you ask me. That is if we keep in mind the negative relationship between it and other networks. fMRI's can detect more than you may think after you factor in the statistics, controls, and validity/reliability measures.
My main point is that, although the theory itself is not so specific as to directly identify any specific experience or result of psychedelics, it is specific enough to be used as a way to identify these experiences by further exploring the individual networks. Current research is still exploring the specifics. A unifying theory of functional networks has the potential to be groundbreaking for determining and understanding the specifics. As such, I see it as more than just a "review of what we know so far". Just my  of course 
I've also never heard of somebody refer to fMRI as fNMR so I assumed you were talking about fMRI. I may just be confused though, in which case my above thoughts probably do not apply.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: Rhizomorph]
#26911520 - 09/01/20 09:27 AM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
my point is, that the fmri methodology which shows noise, is not showing what is happenning in the non-noise category. like looking at the streetlights in time lapse

the blood flow, and energy usage monitored over time (anything longer than 1/15th of a second) produces a blurred artifact of what was happening so some degree. However, just as we cannot tell how many vehicles or even what kinds of vehicles lights are depicted in the photo, we are nowhere near using the fmri artifacts to explain signal interaction or mental state quality from the blur. All you get is a bit of enhanced landscape.
Signals that can be followed at 1/15th of a second or faster will provide more groundwork for theory, as that is the range in which we are operating.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
Rhizomorph
Psychedelic Researcher



Registered: 04/24/20
Posts: 785
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: redgreenvines]
#26911930 - 09/01/20 01:03 PM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I suppose I see what you are saying. I still think fMRI is useful for understanding where the cars are going & how fast. This can help us infer the function & understand the directionality of the cars/neural networks themselves. But more sensitive technology would certainly be useful in understanding the actual components of the neural networks (or the models of the cars). 
All I'm saying is that each type of brain scan is useful in its own way. In the case of this theory I do not think we need to avoid the "noise" as you are putting it. I thought you meant the noise was background neural activity interfering with what is trying to be measured by fMRI. However, if you're suggesting the noise is the activity of the networks themselves, then I would say measuring the "noise" is the goal of fMRI, in which case the "noise" provides a useful understanding of network interaction. Understanding this interaction has the potential to help us understand the specifics of the networks/cars until more sensitive technology is used.
We also need to be aware of how much we are looking at the brain's parts holistically or individually. There are many aspects of functional networks that simply cannot be understood by looking at brain regions individually. This is where the fMRI could be considered better in some ways than other types of technology. Understanding specifics comes at the cost of understanding neural integration.
I agree that technology operating at 1/15 of a second would provide more groundwork, and I hope studies like this come out, but as with many things in the realm of neuroscience & psychology, some inferring needs to be done until we access that technology. Statistics also help us to understand the chances of us being wrong - measures of validity & statistical significance allows us to be fairly confident that what we're measuring is accurate. It's not a perfect system, but at the very least the fMRI reveals something new about the way the brain communicates under the influence of psychedelics. And I don't believe that should be overlooked as just a review of what we already know.
Until more sensitive technology is used we can build knowledge based on what we have access to. I don't think the theory is overstating the findings behind it, but even if it is we can work off the themes in the theory to advance knowledge. It's just a theory after all
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: Rhizomorph]
#26913648 - 09/02/20 11:58 AM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
all the points necessary to convince people of what exactly? the theory produces no useable facts.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
Rhizomorph
Psychedelic Researcher



Registered: 04/24/20
Posts: 785
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: redgreenvines]
#26915247 - 09/03/20 09:31 AM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I don't think science works by acting like an original article's findings are facts. It works by suggesting them as potential facts given the evidence and then replicating them, undergoing peer-review, etc. until there is enough external validity to deem them a fact.
Sure this would be facing heavy criticism if this were a physics/chemistry study, but psychology is anti-positivist (relies on indirect empirical findings rather than direct ones) given that consciousness itself is not empirical, except to the observer.
If this theory ends up being successful according to the scientific method/process, the theory would then be regarded as a fact. Just because it is not yet doesn't mean it won't be or that it lacks potential.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Anyone heard of Entropic Brain Theory? [Re: Rhizomorph]
#26920550 - 09/06/20 06:56 AM (3 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
unfortunately it has as much going for it as the goofy radio tuning theory for explaining the content of thoughts. I look at the fmri like Kirlian photography, and that is still mostly not well understood.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
|