Chroma/Cerebellum 1988 2049

The cerebellum is responsible for precise coordination and control of the body – its timing, balance, and delicacy of movement. Imagine the flowing artistry of a dancer, the easy accuracy of a professional tennis player, the lightning control of a racing driver, and the sure movements of a painter’s or musician’s hands; imagine also, the graceful bounds of a gazelle and the stealth of a cat. Without the cerebellum, such precision would not be possible, and all movement would become fumbling and clumsy. It seems that, when one is learning a new skill, be it walking or driving a car, initially one must think through each action in detail, and the cerebrum is in control; but when the skill has been mastered – and has become ‘second nature’ – it is the cerebellum that takes over. “Moreover, it is a familiar experience that if one thinks about one’s actions in a skill that has been so mastered, then one’s easy control may be temporarily lost. Thinking about it seems to involve the re-introduction of cerebral control and, although a consequent flexibility of activity is thereby introduced, the flowing and precise cerebellar action is lost. No doubt such descriptions are oversimplified, but they give a reasonable flavour of the cerebellum’s role. The very existence of solid bodies, the strengths and physical properties of materials, the nature of chemistry, the colours of substances, the phenomena of freezing and boiling, the reliability of inheritance–these, and many other familiar properties, require the quantum theory for their explanations. Perhaps, also, the phenomenon of consciousness is something that cannot be understood in entirely classical terms. Perhaps our minds are qualities rooted in some strange and wonderful feature of those physical laws which actually govern the world we inhabit, rather than being just features of some algorithm acted out by the so-called ‘Objects’ of a classical physical structure. Perhaps, in some sense, this is ‘why’ we, as sentient beings, must live in a quantum world, rather than an entirely classical one, despite all the richness, and indeed mystery, that is already present in the classical universe. Might a quantum world be required so that thinking, perceiving creatures, such as ourselves, can be constructed from its substance? Such a question seems appropriate more for a God, intent on building an inhabited universe, than it is for us! But the question has relevance for us also. If a classical world is not something that consciousness could be part of, then our minds must be in some way dependent upon specific deviations from classical physics"Can superpositions and wave-function collapse can be found at the human or macro scale. Most physicists would still say no because of the decoherence problem, where microscopic quantum effects ‘wash out’ in large, wet and warm environments like the brain (Waldner, 2017). However, that opposition is clearly challenged by the emergence of quantum biology and especially quantum decision theory. Classical decision (‘rational choice’) theory assumes that people have a portfolio of preferences and beliefs in their minds, which ideally obey the rules of classical logic and thereby make their holders rational. Moreover, although rarely explicit, it seems clear that a tacit assumption of this model is that the brains behind the human mind are classical. If they are rational, then actors can be assumed to know their own types, but often not those of others; as classical states, others can be assumed to have types, but they are hidden away in other brains. Thus, the primary strategic problem facing rational actors in such a world is trying to determine others’ types so that interaction will be optimal (think security dilemma theory) Type Indeterminacy: A Model of the KT (Kahneman–Tversky)-Man’.26 Playing off ‘Harsanyi Man’, the ideal Bayesian rational actor operating under uncertainty, Lambert-Mogiliansky et al. represent a person’s ‘state’ as a superposition of all their potential types relevant to a given situation, each of which is modelled as a distinct vector in an n-dimensional decision space. A very different picture emerges from quantum decision theory, best explained by Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky and co-authors in an essay suggestively entitled ‘Type Indeterminacy: A Model of the KT (Kahneman–Tversky)-Man’.26 Playing off ‘Harsanyi Man’, the ideal Bayesian rational actor operating under uncertainty, Lambert-Mogiliansky et al. represent a person’s ‘state’ as a superposition of all their potential types relevant to a given situation, each of which is modelled as a distinct vector in an n-dimensional decision space. The superposition of these vectors does not collapse into an actual type until a measurement (interaction) occurs, whether on one’s own or on someone else’s initiative. At that point, depending on the context, one vector will become what is called ‘preferred’ and a single type will emerge in the collapse of the wave function (manifested as ‘behaviour’). Note that this is the exact opposite of the standard, classical view. Rather than being an expression of underlying, well-defined preferences and beliefs, the latter become well-defined only through the act of measurement itself. Thus, whereas Harsanyi Man’s problem is merely uncertainty about others’ types, KT ‘Man’ (sic) does not even know her own type until she makes a choice. Perhaps the feeling of ambivalence is more genuine than classical metaphysics would have us believe. When consciousness becomes a chimera of the human and the artificial, not only new scientific but new philosophical and spiritual cosmologies of a quantum bent might well be needed if we are to be ‘at home in the universe’ The Ghost in the Machine refers to long-standing philosophical objection to the mind-body dualism that treats mind [the Ghost] as inhabiting but separate from the body. NC3 is an extreme example where one can’t separate the material fromthe mental. Behavior matters, especially organization. NC3 is the ghost in the machine, neither independent nor purely material, joining annihilative intention with warheads. The nuclear commander’s psyche, including his or her secret fears, neuroses, psychosis, paranoia as well as rationality, infuse NC3. But these psychological impulses collide with organizational cybernetics, procedural failure, accidents, degraded decision-making, stereotypical thinking, misinterpretation.

The “individual” is the dividual (Deleuze 1995, 180). The dividual is the individual as affective infra-climate, in relation to itself, commotionally poised for what may come, storm or shine, doldrums or halcyon days...The affective infra-climate of the dividual poised for what may come is the rabbit hole of the economy. The unknown nondecisions and not-quite-occurrences recurring endlessly in a turbulence of tendency are complex in the same way as the economy as a whole. Both are like the weather, quasi-chaotic self-organizing systems. This puts a whole new perspective on “rational” choice. The individual, Foucault said, is unconditionally referred to itself, and this referral is irreducible and nontransferable. This means that rational decision is unconditionally, irreducibly, nontransferably referred to an infra-individual zone of indistinction with affect. Rationality and affect become “functional equivalents” by Luhmann’s definition: interlocked and mutually intensifying, in a zone of indistinction, at the “forward threshold” of economic existence. The individual is in an infra-state of readiness potential. Trust and distrust are together as co-present potentials for what might come next. They are in superposition, in the sense in which the word is used in quantum physics. Though inseparable, their distinction is not erased. It is held in ready reserve. The affective feeling of the readiness potential, Luhmann continues, presupposes a “corresponding reserve of energy which is elsewhere not determined” (Luhmann 1979, 80). Under these conditions the subject of interest is not in a position to know how any given act it takes will turn out. But it cannot not act. You can only defer so long, or so much, and only in certain areas of your activity. Any act you perform triggers the process leading to a resolution of the commotion of affective states held complexly together in tension on the infra-individual readiness potential into a determinable outcome registrable in terms of success or failure. In short, making a choice leads to the collapse of the superposition of affective states. To borrow the vocabulary of quantum physics, it collapses the affective wave packet. Readiness-potential wave packets collapse, affectively systemically, in real time (or its functional Internet equivalent). Individual actions are affectively entangled at a distance. It is only the complex playing out of the entanglements that decides in the end what will have been a success and what a failure. Complexly correlated to each quantum of success or failure, there will come to expression determinate affective states of trust or distrust, satisfaction or frustration. Individual economic actors are infra-connected. They are connected at a distance, in the recesses of their affective rabbit holes. They communicate at a distance, in immanent affective proximity, churning in and turning around the regressive endpoints of their respective (in)dividualities. The infra-level resonates transindividually. Individuals ” “spook each other or goad each other on, turning around what is nontransferable in them as individuals: their infra-individual affective commotion. They resonate, at the limit of the economy, in their dividuality. As they reciprocally perturb each other, their readiness-potential wave packet collapses, correlated transindividually at a distance. Quanta of trust and distrust fly off in all directions. These affective emissions feed up into macrolevel expressions of economic success or failure, which no sooner feed back down from the system’s macro level into the affective infra-fray. The process as a whole is neither governable nor quantifiable. It is affective-relational. Given the paradoxical bond between the affectivity of the relational process and the troubled rationality of its emergent orderings, the system that is the sum of the orderings is at best metastable: precariously stable, tottering between bouts of system equilibrium loss and processual vertigo. Non-consciousness becomes the key economic actor

Priming conditions emergent awareness (creatively modu- lates its formation) rather that causing a response (reproducing a preexisting model). it implies complex thought-like processes occurring as a nonconscious dimension of emergent percep- tion, too rapidly for thought actually to have been performed. The implications of priming for the philosophy of perception, con- sciousness, and decision have barely begun to be plumbed. a. n. Whitehead’s concept of “nonsensuous perception” (Whitehead 1967a, 180–183; Massumi 2014b) and C. s. Peirce’s concepts of “perceptual judgment” and “abduction” are far better start- ing points for this task than either the archaic behaviorist model informing theories of subliminal influence or the neuronal reductionism informing much of today’s experimental psychology The Darpa program concerned with attention and related perceptual issues is the augmented Cognition Program. The pro- gram’s purpose is to develop wearable technology enabling real- time brain and physiological monitoring of states of awareness, lapses in attention, and the nonconscious perceptual processes occurring in the gaps. The monitoring technology is designed to be networkable in such a way as to enable tactical coordination aimed at diagnosing and overcoming limitations in battlefield perfor- mance related to deficits in attention, reaction time, and memory- formation capacity, either inherent in the human perceptual appa- ratus or induced by fear, stress, fatigue, and the “fog of war.” The program also has a positive aim: it is proposed that the technology be used in training to help soldiers develop perceptual techniques to increase their “cognitive load” capacities beyond average pa- rameters. These techniques include ways of increasing vigilance by diffusing attentiveness across the perceptual field (“continuous partial attention”) or by distributing focused attention (“multitask- ing”). The strategy of increasing vigilance by diffusing attention is particularly relevant here, in that it amounts to an operationaliza- tion of what is discussed below in terms of the “in-bracing” of “bare activity” understood as incipient action-ability. Chapter 4 treats at length the most radical lines of attack in the u.s. mili- tary’s post–soviet union project of operationalizing the “blink” in perception and cognition through techniques of attention, habit, and priming integrated systemically into informational network.

The "FOG of War" from Clausewits draws toward FOG (Four Ocean Geometry) as a Barometric Quadrilateral In-Pressuring Cognitive Behaviour - FOG as condition could be located anywhere, it is a free radical, e.g. FOG centralising on Namibian dual use A-SAT / space surveillance and reconnaissance facility to describe a) a cognitive scenario and b) its profile in Four Ocean Neighbourhood pre- / during / post- an incident.
If the heavens conformed so perfectly to a measure, then even an untutored . . . child could calculate its movements over a thousand years with ease. But due to inconsistences and what doesn’t fit the measurements, even the most clever reckoner cannot fully grasp its operations.” (Su Shi) The human heart is equally mysterious. The good commander, for this reason, must have real intelligence (in both senses of that word). He must know the basics of human psychology (the uses of fear, the advantages of carrots versus sticks, etc.), but he must also have a strong sense of the unimaginable richness and variety of human experience. Pavlovian rewards do not motivate people nearly as well as social scientists once assumed.” To that end, reading The Art of War schools us in the significance of three Chinese concepts that barely figure in the comparable Western discussions, but are nonetheless crucial when we contemplate any arena of rule-free action: quan (“contingency”; “balance of forces”; the careful weighing of options); shi (“disposition” or “strategic position”), and shi (“timing” and “timely opportunity”).”