Posted by smokeymadison on December 21, 2004, at 20:20:03
In reply to Re: 1.4 » smokeymadison, posted by alexandra_k on December 21, 2004, at 18:00:06
>>In the Cotard delusion the delusion seems to result from a LOSS of emotion if you will, and thus it doesn't seem to be extreme distress that is so relevant.
yes, but what caused the loss of emotion? it is still possible that extreme emotion caused the loss of emotion (the brain shutting down to protect itself). maybe. in severe depression, the brain does sort of shut down to prevent suicide.
so you are interested in localized brain damage causing specific delusions. and the whole time i have been focusing on delusions found in schizophrenia, BPD, and the mood disorders, etc. i really don't think that delusions caused by localized brain injury are really that different than those caused by extreme emotional distress. i mean, i think that eventually psychodynamic and neurological theories will mesh.
so a certain part of the brain is injured. the result is delusions 2-6. each of these bring to mind the test scientists do with chimps/gorillas to see if they recognize themselves in the mirror (i spent a semester in philosophy working on whether chimps/gorillas had the same moral status as human beings.) they put a spot on their face and then put them in front of a mirror to see if the primate will try to wipe off the dot, meaning that they know that it is them in the mirror. the results were mixed. highly educated and well trained primates recognized themselves whereas primates who had been kept in small cages and had been neglected did not. well-reared primates recognized their handlers by signing their names.
but of course, all that has to do with development of the brain. but i think what can be developed can also be lost through tramatic experiences. what if that certain part of the brain that is damaged is somehow connected directly to those specific experiences (memories)accumulated during infancy that allow a person to recognize themselves and/or others? i know that there are stages in infancy in which a baby LEARNS to recognize him/herself and LEARNS to recognize others as well as a host of other things. By learned i mean the the brain has developed.
there is plenty of debate as to whether these things are learned unintentionally or whether they are wired--meaning that they are inevitable in the span of infancy. all i know is that there is a time in infancy when, if the baby could talk, their utterances would be considered delusions 2-6. so somehow, it seems, the damage to that certain part of the brain has "set back" the adults to the point where they were in infancy. this is all my b*llsh*tting of course, i really don't know.
SM
poster:smokeymadison
thread:432333
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/write/20041210/msgs/432643.html