Understanding consciousness 

Understanding consciousness has long been hampered by use of over-simplistic working hypotheses, such as: there is only one consciousness, or that all awareness is consciously accessible. This Single Mind Fallacy is here replaced with more accurate neuroscience-informed Paradigm Shift in order to include the existence and action of powerful behavioral sources found in the preconscious, subconscious, and unconscious. Thus, a modular consciousness model is both required and illuminating. 

As the first step, McLean's Triune Brain Model was expanded to the Quadrimental Brain Model, due to the discovery of extensive non-motor properties of the cerebellum. However, because of the bilaterality of the vertebrate brain, this model was insufficient and thus led to the development of the DQM with its semi-independent modular consciousness elements (Morton, 2011, 2015). The DQM accommodates multiple elements of consciousness, including those originally proposed by Freud and others. By rapid access by the temporarily dominant consciousness module to the central seat of power, the DQM can account for essentially all of human behavior from diabolic to divine. 

In the DQM, the cerebral hemispheres contribute to normal waking consciousness. That is #1, The left hemisphere "Reporter" specializes in top-down analysis of important details, including language. #2, The right hemisphere "Imaginer" specializes in bottom-up analysis of the global view, including spatial imagery. 


Five evolutionarily earlier brain elements

Five evolutionarily earlier brain elements powerfully operate outside of hemispheric consciousness. #3 The ancient limbic cingulate cortex appears to be the site producing a unilateral executive "Ego.” Critically, the Ego acts at least one second t o s e v e r a l s e c o n d s i n advance of our conscious awareness of the intention to act. This is strong support for the DQM. 

The Ego determines whether to use, #4. the unilateral brain core reptilian "Id" to pursue a win-lose, violent solution. Or to use, #5. the unilateral cerebellar social brain "Superego" to pursue a win-win nonviolent solution to the issue at hand. #6. A mutated-defective developmental arrest repair program ("xDARP") is also housed on the cerebellar opposite to the Superego. Its unconscious activation leads to inappropriate struggles, often between mates, which are the Source of common escalating conflicts leading to crimes of passion. The xDARP is similar to Freud's "Thanatos", Hubbard’s “Reactive Mind”, and Tolle's "Pain Body". 

Last, besides the “Id”, the other unilateral element of the brain core, #7, the “Servant", is a final effector of behavioral output. It selflessly obeys higher brain directional imperatives, be they from a currently dominant internal brain element, or even from an external hypnotic Dominator

The #5, social brain neocerebellar Superego appears to be the Source of the seemingly mysterious, hidden, non-supernaturalist "Higher Intelligence" or "Holy Spirit", which comes to the fore in life-altering, near-death experiences. These include some initiations, religious conversions, deep meditation, or hallucinogen-induced "Ego death and transcendence" experiences. Such incidents appear to have been at the origin of the world religions. They also can best be directly explained by the DQM. 

Thus, we are a "Society of Seven'', a committee of self-aware elements, most of which are outside of normal consciousness. The Dual Quadbrain provides a logical and testable framework accounting for all of human consciousness and behavior. 


INTRODUCTION: The Paradigm Shifts of this Book 

What is a Paradigm Shift? 

Everybody is familiar with a paradigm shift, although some may not realize it. A paradigm shift results in a radical change of thinking contexts that opens a completely new set of possibilities for action. As an example: While watching a good mystery movie, the author gives out certain facts meant to adjust our thinking to conclude that one of the characters involved is guilty of the crime. However, one of the last events of a good thriller is the introduction of a new fact that changes everything. At that point, an “Aha” occurs in a flash of light and we immediately discard our earlier reasoning, which we now can see was wrong. We quickly realize that our earlier conclusion was faulty due to lack of a key important fact that has changed the entire picture. As a result, a surprising but now most logical person is obviously the culprit. That’s a paradigm shift. 

Of course, a good joke often shocks us with a paradigm shift at its end: 

  • Question: What has many keys but can't open any doors? Answer: A piano. 
  • Or, at an auction in Manchester a wealthy American announced that he had lost his wallet containing £10,000 and would give a reward of £100 to the person who found it. From the back of the hall a Scottish voice shouted, “I'll give £150!” 
  • Or a very drunk man comes out of the bar and sees another very drunk man. He looks up in the sky and says,  “Is that the sun or the moon?” The other drunk man answers, “I don't know. I'm a stranger here myself.” 
  • Or, a Scotsman who was driving home one night, ran into a car driven by an Englishman. The Scotsman got out of the car to apologize and offered the Englishman a drink from a bottle of whisky. The Englishman was glad to have a drink. “Go on,” said the Scot, “have another.” The Englishman drank gratefully. “But don't you want one, too?” he asked the Scotsman. “Perhaps,” replied the Scotsman, “after the police have gone.” 

This book takes usual thinking (The Single Mind Fallacy), that there is only one brain consciousness of whose activity we are well aware. It then supplies some critical facts that change everything to bring about a paradigm shift providing a new reality about the brain and mind. The theme of this book is the discovery that there are seven self-conscious modular elements in the brain that influence behavior. These include the right and left cerebral hemispheres of whose normal awareness Freud said everyone was aware. He famously added three additional elements which he felt existed quite outside of our awareness. These were the early versions of his EgoSuperego, and Id. Here, the self-conscious activities of each of these three elements will become obvious. Added to the above five brain elements are two additional unconscious behavioral modules of considerable importance. First is a mutated, and thus defective developmental arrest repair program, the xDARP, unrecognized Source of neurotic behavior. And last but not least is the Servant Brain, the final output Source for any and all behavior. 

These seven modules freely move in and out of the brain’s central seat of control in a manner not easily detectable from within, except by our or others’ observations of differences in our resulting behavior. Such can be illustrated, say, by a young man romantically playing a guitar for his girlfriend. Who, upon seeing a competitor placing an arm around his beloved, stops playing and flies into a fit of rage? That young man may feel that he is the same person while making music as when stomping his foot and bristling in anger. Indeed he is! But, unbeknownst to him the brain element specialized for playing romantic music has been displaced by another one specialized in doing battle. 

This in itself is an important paradigm shift. Rather than having one set of brain tools to optimize our survival, we have evolved seven specialist modules, each uniquely equipped to efficiently stay on top of things. The existence of this DQM of modular consciousness brings understanding to a number of previously unexplainable behaviors that have long troubled humanity, many of which are described in this book. 

In Chapter One, Julian Jaynes Origin of Self-consciousness’ by the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, a previously suggested path of evolution to human self-consciousness is expanded, leading to the inception of DQM. 

In Chapter Two: The Quadrimental Brain, the preliminary set of concepts of a four-layer brain are presented as the foundation of the DQM. 

In Chapter Three, Binary Expansion to the DQM, is based upon the fact that the entire brain, aside from the secretory pineal gland, is bilateral. This opens the space to accommodate all elements needed to understand human behavior from the diabolic to the divine. There has been a recent understanding of the existence and properties of several self-conscious brain systems outside of normal consciousness. 

Chapter Four, Modular Consciousness: Our Society of Seven, describes the practical contributions of each of the seven brain systems. 

CHAPTER 1: Origin of Self-Consciousness by the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. 

The Ancient World and the Bicameral Mind 

Pre-human hominids separated from the apes and repeatedly left Africa beginning several million years ago. Remains of hominids who lived in the Caucasus between in the Caspian and Black Seas in Russia have been unearthed in the ancient town of Dmanisi, along with several types of tools. Their cranial volume was found to be around 700 cubic centimeters (cc), up from about 400 ccs for the modern apes. For comparison, our own present brain volume is about 1200cc. These people have been reliably dated as living 1,700,000 years ago! They were the earliest Caucasians. Because they are the first hominids known to use tools, they were called “Handy Man”: Homo habilisFigure 1 illustrates something of their appearance and location. 

Over the passage of unimaginable eons and thousands of generations, by the time the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons lived only some 500,000 years ago, hominid cranial capacity had increased to over 1700 cc. That is 500 ccs or 140% larger than our own! Evidence has been uncovered that these hominids were very smart, caring for their invalids and their aged, creating and playing musical instruments, crafting elegant hunting weapons, even fashioning religious icons, including earth mother goddesses. It literally has been a devolution in brain size ever since.

Figure 1. The Dmanisi Man with tools, the first Caucasian, dated at 1.7 million years bp   

There have been numerous ice ages in the past half a million years since the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons lived. The later hominids obviously had the intelligence to survive in the glaciers that often covered their territories. Yet, because they lived in balance with their environment, their numbers stayed low. Other hominids lived in the tropics as well. After the last ice age began to thaw only about 15,000 years ago, the global human population was quite small, maybe 3 million totals. However, at around 5,000 years ago something dramatically changed. For the first time in the over 2 million years and hundreds of thousands of generations that had gone by, for the first time the numbers of humans rapidly began to increase. Something had changed! As a result, our population has since exploded! We now are over 7 billion souls. What happened?! 

Julian Jaynes in his book “The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind”, Houghton Mifflin, 1976, provided the first hint of an explanation to account for this. In it, he documented a change in hominid mentality that began to occur about 5000 years ago. He provided compelling evidence that before this point humans were not truly conscious, and that over the next 2000 years they developed self-consciousness. As a result by 1000 BC the world began radically to change. 


Hominid bicameral consciousness: 

Is self-consciousness necessary to survive and live a good life? Clearly, the answer is no. Animals and even human babies do not have it. Self-consciousness, like the introspection that we are able to perform while automatically driving a car or playing a piano, constitutes only a small element on top of usual mental behavior. Self-consciousness is not necessary for the learning or performance of skills, speaking, writing, listening, or reading. It is not required for the formation of concepts, for thinking or judgment, which is often automatically performed, nor is it necessary for reason, where the best insights are often subconscious in origin. 

Thus, evidence suggests that humans before 1000 BC were conscious like animals but had no sense of self. They functioned perfectly well using their subconscious reptilian brain core Id complex, which automatically followed its ancient survival routines. That is, of cooperating in family building and viciously attacking non-family predators. If in situations of social stress, when they didn’t know what to do, they asked “God”, often by praying to hand-held personal idols. Their subconscious cerebellar (social-brain superego-Source) “God-Within” replied in the form of visions or later by internal voice broadcasts, much like the self-generated voices of the schizophrenic. These “divine” answers were complete, superior, and gratifying. 

This was the bicameral mind of the hominids before about 2000 BC, as documented by Julian Jaynes. He asserted that self-consciousness came after the origin of language and writing, which emerged around 3000 BC. He provided evidence that the gaining of self-consciousness could be seen in the written poetry of the Iliad, ancient Greek literature describing historical events occurring around 1000 BC. In his analysis, the first part of Iliad showed no concept of will, mind, soul, subjective consciousness, or of mental acts, such as introspection or  thinking. There was no subjective mind-space, self-awareness, no Internal Reality to introspect upon. These key elements were found in the much later Odyssey. 

If this were so, what initiated their advanced behavior? According to his model, their actions originated in the actions and (hexameter) speech of the internal gods. The gods always have their way. In terms of the Dual Quadbrain Modular Consciousness Model, developed here, the gods were produced by the cerebellar social brain superego, based on memories of parents or other authority figures. The gods were never miraculous nor stepped out of natural laws but acted as superior humans. They led, advised, and ordered. They spoke wisdom. Response was amazement, wonder, eureka! The gods were the hallucinations only seen or heard by the ones they internally spoke to, those non-subjective noble automatons who knew not what they did. Volition, planning, initiative, originated in the hidden Superego Source, God-Within and was then “told” to the individual, who obeyed because he could not see what to do by himself. It was a theocracy where every man was a slave to the voices heard within whenever novel situations occurred. 

The voices appear to have first been parental, which often continued after the death of the father and leading to the presence of home shrines. They continued after the death of clan leaders. Later kings became deified and treated as still living, whose voices directed others. They could be sought in large central houses of the gods. Millions of handheld personal idols have been found with enlarged eyes that apparently “spoke” to their owners. 

Jaynes rightly called this mentality the Bicameral Mind. He and others thought it had something to do with the right and left hemispheres. But that was not correct. 

As we shall see, the bicameral mind was completely based upon two subcortical consciousness modules. The first was the Id brain core that directed normal ancient behavioral routines. This was separated from and not normally aware of the hidden consciousness of the second element of Jaynes’ Bicameral Mind, the social brain Superego, God Within. Under conditions of social stress and need, this Source spoke to the Id, guiding it when necessary via vocal or other hallucinations. This was experienced as the illusion that a personal external God vocally answered their prayers and guided them in times of emergency. 


Arrival of Human Self-Consciousness: 

True human self-consciousness emerged from the breakdown of this hominid bicameral mind. That is, after about 2000 BC, for reasons possibly related to a strengthening Ego, an increasing loss of contact with cerebellar superego God appears to have occurred among the population. Voices or even oracles no longer spoke in times of need giving answers. Its prized directive visions became less and less available until by today their remnants only can be found in 2000-year-old scriptures. 



Increasing  Loss  of  Divine  Wisdom  after  Its Suppression by a Strengthening Ego 

The arrival of self-consciousness in humans ultimately was forced upon them to replace the silenced voices of their inner gods. They developed a logic about living in a way that could in part replace the voice of the Superego. Ironically, since then humans have yearned 

to regain access to this divine inner wisdom. Indeed, its certainty and wisdom were not replaced by the newly arriving hemispheric Intellect and Imagination of self-consciousness. Humanity has continually looked for it in ways, many of which continue into the present. This quest was first outlined by Julian Jaynes in his “Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind”. 

In brief, it was as follows. At the time of the Law of Hammurabi (1792 BC), God and man spoke face to face. Five hundred years later, in 1230 BC, Tumult-Ninurta I, tyrant of Assyria, kneels low before an empty throne. The gods will not listen to him. A little later, about 1000 BC, King David of Israel wrote: 

As the stag pants after the water brook So pants my mind after you, O God! 
My mind thirsts for God! For the living God!
When shall I come face to face with God? 

As the voices became less common, “mouth washing” ceremonies were adapted to clarify the voices of the idols. Formalized prayer appeared for the first time, praising and flattering the god, and begging for favors. Later sacrifices were performed to bribe the gods. With time and further desperation, these became human sacrifices. This attempt to get the god’s attention by human slaughter became extreme in Central America and many other places. Then, angelic intercessors were invoked. With the continuing lack of divine communication, it was imagined that the gods were angry and were attacking humans. Lucky charm protections appeared as amulets around the neck or wrist. Medicine has become concerned with the exorcism of malevolent demons. Written magical incantations multiplied. 

With the loss of the voices, various means of divining information first emerged, including magical omen like predictions, that is, “if this happens, then this will occur”. There were newfound medical omens where the messages from the gods could be deciphered from the size and arrangement of the organs of sacrificed animals. There were star-based, horoscopic omens. Men began to cast lots in an attempt to find clear “yes, no, or who” answers from a god. There was no concept of chance or randomness. The results only could have been caused by the gods. 

The concept of the immortal soul, the foundation of Dualism, was invented about 600 BC. The soul was not life, but that which exists after life has ceased and it separates from the body. At first, the soul went to Hades. However, soon the idea came that the soul instead transmigrates into the body of a newborn infant or animal to continue living in another. This profoundly inaccurate and pernicious concept was fixed in thought by Plato’s writings. It then evolved through Gnosticism into the great religions, and on to Descartes, thence to be one of the great spurious quandaries of modern psychology. 

At special locations in Greece, such as Delphi, there remained some who could still hear their inner god. They were called Oracles and could be consulted to provide immediate elaborate answers to problems posed. This became the central method used by leaders for making important decisions for well over a thousand years after the breakdown of the bicameral mind. To questions asked of supreme priestesses under sacred laurel trees, the reply was given at once, completely, and uninterruptedly in the first person. These women, who were once simple farm girls, underwent an induction into a trance which resulted in an archaic authorization. Plato called Oracle at Delphi “the interpreter of religion to all mankind”. The oracles became erratic and uninterpretable after around 60 AD. 

According to Jaynes, speaking idols were pretty much gone and useless by 1000 BC. But, by 100AD idolatry had remarkably returned. “In churches, temples, and in shrines the world over, religious statues are still being carved, Painted, and prayed to. The Virgin Mary and Jesus hang in our cars, buses, and living rooms. Church bells ring across towns and country-sides on feast days, as in bicameral Mesopotamia 4000 years ago, except now the idols are silent.” 

Prophesy and possession began to appear about 400 BC. Ironically, possession was not a duplication of the bicameral mind. No god spoke through human lips in ancient Greece. But now it became the complete domination of the person and his speech without later memory of the event. Possession replaced the bicameral mind. Socrates said “God-possessed men speak much truth, but to know nothing of what they say.” “… for prophesy is a madness, and the prophetess at Delphi and the priestesses at Dodona, when out of their senses have conferred great benefits on Hellas, both in public and private life, but when in their senses, few or none.” Aristotle said the possessed, “…do not know, before being seized by the spirits, what they are going to say, any more than after having recovered their natural senses do they remember what they have said, so that everyone knows what they say except themselves.” 

Before the breakdown of the bicameral mind, the god spoke to the individual who remained conscious, received and remembered. Here, the opposite was true, yet by the trance-induced possession, the voice of the superego could still be heard by others, if not by the often simple, unsophisticated medium herself. And in such a deep trance, the cerebellar superego “god” would seem to reveal past or future, or answer questions and make decisions, as in the older Greek oracles. 

There are god and demon possessions in the modern world, for example in the Umbanda religion containing over half of the population of Brazil, where mediums dance into possessed ecstasy. Through them the (cerebellar superego) gods can be consulted for, and may give, decisions on any illness or personal problem, on getting or keeping a job, on financial business practices, family quarrels, love affairs, or even, among students, advice about scholastic grades. 

In modern glossolalia a similar situation exists. An individual can enter into a trance and begin speaking in tongues within a religious group in front of a benevolent charismatic leader, which are not understood or remembered by the speaker. Their analysis indicates a subcortical output of epic dactyls similar to those of the ancient Iliad, regardless of the language of the speaker, according to Jaynes. It is as if they were possessed by the cerebellar social brain Holy Spirit whose language output was in the form of epic dactyls. 

In the case of modern demon possession, almost always the persons possessed by a demon are uneducated, usually illiterate, believe in spirits and demons and also live in a society that does. Possession was chiefly a linguistic phenomenon, not one of actual conduct. The demons were not violent, but highly intelligent, bargaining and keeping agreements. The exorcism cure always was by the command of an authoritative person, speaking in the name of a more powerful god or authority figure. 

Also, in certain altered states of consciousness, we can still hear them, such as in near death experiences, or by use of entheogens (“god manifesting” psychoactive substances, such as psilocybin or DMT). However, the latter controversial avenue has become illegal with the notable exception of the peyote-using Native American Church and those originally Amazonian religions using ayahuasca as a sacrament. 

Hominids first became human when they were forced to use their cerebral hemispheres to create answers, formerly supplied by the inner voices of their Superego. They become self-conscious in the process of learning how to introspect. A key element in this transition was the use of a metaphor of something familiar to describe something unknown. This ultimately led to the mental creation of an inner reality model approximation of External Reality, based upon increasingly accurate metaphors. Within this inner reality space, the world could be created and manipulated by stimulus generalization without risk of real damage. Now it has extended to space travel and molecular biology. 


The Features of Self-Consciousness that Emerged in the Limbic Executive Ego

There follows an amalgam, first described by Julian Jaynes and expanded by the present author, of the requirements for the new consciousness of the cerebral cortical hemispheres: 

Spatialization: a visual working space is necessary for conscious awareness. Here, not only is structure spatial, but also time is made to be spatial, as is energy. This permits the construction of a 5D inner reality model of actual 5D External Reality (where the 3D of structure, plus the 4th D of time and the 5th D of free energy can describe any behavior, Morton, 2011). Any conscious thought of a concrete action in a concrete world then becomes spatial. Using our cerebral hemispheres, we created the first inner virtual reality model of External Reality by: 

ModelingAt any moment we can never be conscious of things in their true nature, or even of our total memory of them, but only of abstractive-interpretations we make of them. Which excerpts we make are influenced by our emotions and beliefs. How we abstract others influences the kind of world we feel we are living in. 

The Analog ‘I’We (our self-image, Ego) can act in this virtual Internal Reality space to imagine doing things and assessing their outcomes, without actually doing them in External Reality. Mental acts are analogs of bodily ones. One could also use this space to create ideal forms, or fantasy, or deception. 

The Metaphor ‘Me’ : We also can see ourselves, both in our virtual world and in the external one as a form of meta-consciousness. 

NarrativizationIn self-consciousness we continually see our Ego selves as the main figures in the ongoing stories of our lives. The picture we create of ourselves determines how we act and choose in new situations. We rationalize our behavior by later assigning causes as to why we acted the way we did. Also our interpretations as to why other things behaved the way they did. 

CompatibilizationWe try to fit all new observations into our inner model of reality, expanding it as needed, or remodeling incongruent portions to unify it. 

Thus, self-consciousness is a process, not a thing. It constructs an Internal Reality space containing an ‘I’ that can observe the space and move within it. It acts on any event, abstracts, adapts, narrativizes, and manipulates it. The structure of this inner reality became increasingly more like that of the physical world. In this space of self-consciousness, one could begin to make judgments as to who they are and yet may become. The more accurate one’s inner reality model became through education, experience, and trial and error, the more it became aligned with External Reality, the sole Source abundance, opportunity, and power to provide increasingly personal survival benefits that actually worked. 

This new self-consciousness became the driving engine that converted hominids into humans, creating superior survival, and the consequent population increases since 1000 BC. The arrival of self-consciousness has led to the formation of our modern civilizations, the science-based increase in our life span, and the incredible conquest of space. 

 Yet, the yearning for the hidden God-within still remains today. As we see that longing can now be satisfied, but not easily. 

CHAPTER 2: The Quadrimental Brain 


Why a Multiple Mind Model of Consciousness is Needed? 

A single consciousness model has never been able to account for the complexities of human behavior. Failure to understand, predict, or control behavior has resulted in enormous tragedy and suffering. That is, a single consciousness model has not accounted for the following: identity, volition, awareness, causality, responsibility, introspection, altruism, hypnosis, the unconscious, or spirituality. Furthermore, a single consciousness model cannot account for the production of our many subconscious behaviors. “Yes, Tommy! We only use 10% of our brain. The other 90% uses us!” That hidden 90% is actually the sum of the subconscious activities of our evolutionarily evolved four-layered brain. 

The original BrainCore houses our autonomic nervous system, our musculoskeletal coordination, our drives, and instincts of which we are unconscious from up here in the brain where we now reside in our language cortex. Built upon this Brain Core foundation is the Limbic System: Source of the twelve Primary Emotions, and the sixteen Ego Defenses. The third key layer is the Cerebellum, which is the preconscious Source of developmental programs and developmental arrest repair programs, Conscience, guilt, morality, herd behavior, projection, planning, intuition, wisdom and, unconscious knowing. The activities of all three brain foundations constitute our subconscious minds. Our self-conscious “I” now resides in our cerebral cortex, the fourth element of our Quadrimental Brain. This book provides evidence of the existence of these multiple minds hidden within our remarkable, modular human brain. 


Earlier Multiple Consciousness Models: 

In Greek-Platonic philosophy, the mind usually consisted of four parts: the soul, reason, the competitor, and appetite. In the religions of Judaism, Islam and Christianity, there were often three consciousness elements: Me, the victim of fate; the devil made me do it; and God help me! More recent psychological thought has had up to four consciousness elements. For example, the Harvard Professor, William James (1878) proposed the existence of the material self, the social self, the spiritual self and pure ego. Very early in the 19th century, Sigmund Freud (1929-1923) also felt that there were four mind elements. They were Normal Consciousness, about which everyone knew, and three subconscious entities, which he called the Id, the Ego, and the Superego. Although he did not know the brain elements producing them, this has now become obvious, as described here. 

Surprisingly, most neuroscientists today hold to their childhood belief in a Unitive (Single) Consciousness meme, which asserts we know about and are responsible for everything we do and are. A notable exception was Paul McLean (1990) at the National Institute for Health in the USA who developed The Triune Brain Model, which consisted of three increasingly recent evolutionary layers. They were the reptilian system, the paleo-mammalian (limbic) system, and the neo-mammalian system, as illustrated in Figure 2. 


The Quadrimental Brain Model 

However, McLean’s Triune Brain Model did not accommodate later discoveries of the many non-motor behaviors produced by the hindbrain cerebellum, an obvious major brain structure whose small cells numbered more than the entire rest of the brain. The neuronal activities of the cerebellum were not present in his model. For example, cerebellar auto-stimulation of institutionalized criminals remarkably reversed their murderous rage, turning them into cordial socially appropriate individuals. Further, the site of Primary Memory has been found to be in the cerebellum. It is also required for language syntax generation. Surprisingly, the cerebellum also is activated in faith healing, hypnosis, and during “control psychoses'', and clearly in hallucinosis. 

Therefore, McLean’s Triune Brain has been expanded into the Quadrimental Brain Model. Bruce Morton first described this model before the International Society for Research on Aggression in Parma, Italy, in 1985. The model concept is as follows: The human brain consists of four layers representing stages of increasing sophistication in our evolutionary development to optimize the survival of our constituent cells. (Morton, 1985, 1989). 

Figure 2, McLean’s Triune Brain System 

Figure 3 shows a cartoon of the Quadrimental Brain and Figure 4 further elaborates it. 

Proposals for two Quadrune Brain models appeared and disappeared around this time, one even incorporating the cerebellum as a separate system. 


Layer 1: Reptile Brain Core and Striatum: The Selfish 


The small brain, as it existed in the age of the reptiles had a remarkable ability to promote cellular survival 


Figure 3 


(Start at the bottom and move upward.) 





Cerebral System: Imagines, Describes

Aware of Self-Awareness. Able to Represent Reality either by Imaging or Abstracting of Primary Memory. 

Metamind: Offline thinking; True Language. 

In Humans, Except Young Children. Normal Human Consciousness 




Limbic System: Has Controls 

Aware of Self. Non-Syntactic Language. Executive: Controls External Operations 

Uses Primary Emotions and Ego Defenses to Motivate. Preconscious Ego 



Cerebellar System: Is Knows Knowledge of Time and Space 

Records Primary Memory Track 

Causality, Pattern Generator 

Aware of the Group as Part of Itself. Subconscious Superego 



Striatal-Brain Core System: Does 

Aware of Senses. Has a Same-Different Comparator for Set-Points or Evaluating Competitors. 

Motivated by Pain or Pleasures. Instincts. 

Also in Lower Organisms that have Brains. 

Unconscious, Id 





within the animal not just at the level of cells, but also at the level of tissues, of organs, and that of the entire organism. The abilities required for this remarkable feat are located in the brain core and rise up to include the striatum, equivalent to the inner reptilian layer of McLean’s Triune model shown in Figure 2. They are similar to those of Freud’s Id with unconscious drives, passions, and instincts. Unfortunately, the behaviors of this reptilian, Selfish Brain are often confused with those of Freud’s Ego. Although Freud usually conceived of the Executive Brain as his “Ego”, popular culture treats the ego as if it were the Id, as in “She hurt his ego”. Therefore, Freud’s allegorical terms are best replaced with ones that are more specific. 


Layer 2, Neo-Cerebellum: The Social Brain 

The social brain began to develop separately around this time. It was based upon the primary memory time track in the cerebellum that gave it knowledge of time, causality, and thus morality. The social brain views itself as a part of a larger family group that is more important than itself as an individual. This early manifested itself in the coordinated behavior of large groups of social organisms: the swarming of bees or locusts, the schooling of fish, the flocking of birds, and migration of reindeer, and the trooping of monkeys. The Social Brain was the brain layer that Freud ambiguously called the Superego. This function can now be localized in the cerebellum, especially within the neocerebellum. 

Layer 3, Limbic System: The Executive Brain

The emergent properties at the self-level are quite opposite to those emerging at the group level. Thus, complex judgments are needed to know whether a particular survival situation is better solved by the killing violence of the selfish brain, or by the nonkilling cooperation of the more capable social brain. This led to the evolutionary development of the third brain level of control: that of the Executive Brain Ego

The executive brain emerges from the properties of the “limbic system”, so named by Paul McLean. These are a set of neural tissues intimately wrapped around the self-brain Id core and extending up into the limbic cingulate cortex of the fourth level (the cerebrum). The executive Ego is aware and highly concerned about the survival of both itself and its family. It powerfully controls and motivates the Id with the reward and punishment of the primary social emotions. It also strongly controls the social brain with the many “Ego defenses of the Id”. 

A strong executive Ego continually decides whether to authorize the reptilian brain to produce a selfish response, or whether to ask the social brain to design a synergistic social response (Wan, Cheng, & Tanaka, 2015). Thus, a strong executive confers superior survival to the organism, while a weak executive cannot overrule reptilian selfishness with its inherent suppression of the wisdom of the social brain, leaving it lying unheeded within. 

Layer 4,  Intellectual Brain: The Cerebral Hemispheres

Within the most recently developed fourth brain layer, that of the cerebral cortex, lie the abstractive abilities that produce the Intellect and Imagination of our derivative “cartoon and caption” type of usual consciousness. Here we have access to language, imagery and the awareness of our own self-awareness that forms the basis of contemplative thought: that the universe is self-aware. This is Freud’s fourth and mundane level of consciousness, the only one of which he felt all are aware. He strongly believed that the above described three more ancient and layers operated powerfully outside of normal awareness. 


The Quadrimental Brain, a Wider View: 

Let us now look at functions of these four specialized brain layers again at a little greater depth. Figure 5 shows a cartoon of the Quadrimental Brain centering on cellular survival. 


The Reptile Brain DOES 

Regardless of who controls it, the reptile or selfish brain core Id is the one and only output Source of any and all behavior, both internal and external. This includes directives from higher brain levels or even from hypnotic external sources. Its own cellular homeostatic behaviors include genetically selected drives and instincts, such as conquest and defense of territory by dominance, via fighting and display. It will then use this territory to get food by hunting for, taking, and eating fuel, for shelter 

Figure 5. 



The Reptile Brain receives earlier-similar memory responses from sensory inputs originating in cerebellar primary memory. The primary memory is a record of the sensory experience time track going back to before hatching or birth. The reptile brain records its repetitive routines in striatal habit memory as well as cerebellar primary memory. Important reptile routines include times of waking, excretion, eating, sunning, seeking shade and sleeping. 

The reptile brain also uses brain core striatal memory for same-different data matching and analysis. This enables it to detect deviations from internal homeostatic set points, such as blood glucose, which it instinctively corrects. Same-difference matching also identifies and sizes external objects. From this it decides whether to fight or submit. As a rule, all else being equal, the biggest opponent will win. If your opponent is obviously larger than you are, then why fight only to die? Surrender has thus become an automatic reptilian Id alternative! The leader becomes, by definition, the biggest and best. Others willingly “follow the leader”, as their superior. This important pecking order detail later formed a basis of internal surrender of the behavioral output Reptile Brain DOER to other later brain additions. It also formed a basis of external surrender to Father (Superior, Higher Authority), Teacher, Leader, King, God, God’s priest-healer, other Hypnotists, and with schizophrenics controlled by imaginary aliens. 

Reptile Brain behavioral output is automatic, i.e., produced by the autonomic sympathetic (punished avoidance) and parasympathetic (rewarded approach) 

nervous systems. It has direct control of the entire body, including the tongue and is the ultimate Source of power. If the Reptile Brain is not surrendered to an internal or external Higher Authority, it is programmed to control everything itself. If resisted, it will escalate force up to killing levels of violence. It must be right. It must look better at all costs. It must win. It must dominate and control. This was a matter of life or death. 

The Reptile Brain is the Source of social conflict. A part of it is the brain location of the personal “Devil” in humans. Its antisocial “Laws of the Jungle” are inherently in conflict with society and religion: Its past is forgotten. The future does not exist. This is it, Here, Now! Let’s party! It is the Source of pleasure seeking: It loves “wine, women, and song”. It is the Source of Pain avoidance: this makes it lazy, undisciplined and wasteful. It is the Source of territoriality, and is selfish, greedy, obsessive, and malicious. It is the Source of domination, and is competitive, aggressive, and destructive. It is the Source of violence: it rapes, injures, kills, dismembers, and can be cannibalistic. 


The Social Brain IS 

The goal of the Social Brain (Freud’s Superego) is group-species-life survival optimization. It is directed by the ancient family and herd-oriented elements of the cerebellum, the site of primary memory. As mentioned above, this so-called hindbrain has more cells than the entire rest of the brain, but they are smaller, making it smaller than the cerebrum. As our primary memory, it is continuously forming a linear time track forming an 

experiential multi-sensory record of our status over time. Its primary memory is in the format of very large-sized memories based upon the elegant, repetitive structure of the cerebellum. Our experiential time track is a continuous record reaching from the present to back before our birth. Without memory, current events, the snarl of a wolf for example, are gone forever the instant they happen. With primary memory, they are retrievable and held in Working Memory for analysis and for continuing survival optimizing responses beyond immediate simple flight reflexes. 

The hidden Social Brain is the Source of many important homeostatic behaviors. It uses a cerebellar primary record of events in time and space to determine “the sequence of events”, and from this to recognize causality (cause-cause, or effect-effect). From knowledge of causality come many important things, for example: meaning, learning, selfhood, survival reality, social knowledge, worst and best projections and knowledge of death. The Social Brain is also the site of language syntax: When did who do what to whom, where, and why? Syntax obviously originated from the coordination of both physical behavior for which the cerebellum is well known, and the coordination of ideas: which we call thinking. Drugs of abuse such as alcohol, because they inhibit cerebellar coordination, cause one to become both physically tipsy and mentally silly. 

Knowledge of causality makes clear the advantages of deferred behavior, and supports the self-restraint required. Similarly, the synergistic advantageous cooperative behavior within the group for the greater good of both family and the individual are obvious. Out of the Social Brain’s view of the group as part of its own self, comes unselfish support and altruism. It protects, nurtures, and trains family members. From this comes Conscience and guilt. It organizes and maintains solidarity of the family unit. From this comes ethics, law, order. It has been identified with The God Within, The Holy Spirit, The Source, Our Higher Power, Our Higher Intelligence. With Its pattern generator, it is the Source of insight, intuition, wisdom, inspiration, one’s “True Self”, morality, purity, holiness, truth, faith, religion and species immortality. 


The Inherent Universe-Level Conflict between two Brain Elements: Reptile (pro-individual) vs. Social (pro-group). 

As mentioned earlier, each universe-level has unique emergent laws. The laws at the universe-level of the individual include: “I win. You lose” competition escalating to violence. “Give it to me now or I’ll kill you!” works well against hyenas and snakes. In contrast, there exist the laws at the next higher universe-level of the family including both, “win-win” cooperation, non-violence and, “How can I best help you?” which work so well for loved ones of family. Thus, two conflicts exist between the self and social Brains: When shall I act to optimize survival?; Now or later? (for the reptile brain self, there is only NOW!) and Whose survival shall I optimize? My own or that of my family?; (for the reptile-selfish brain the only answer is mine!). 

The familiar “double standards” of behavior that must inherently result from this conflict include self vs. others: “I am being held to a ‘different-higher’ standard than you are”, and that of family vs. aliens: “It’s not who you are, but who you know”. The conflict between the reptile brain and the Social Brain is a central theme of religion. It is seen in Christian fundamentalism as the “Great Controversy between Christ and Satan”. In Islam, it appears as the Holy War (Major Jihad) between self-will and Allah’s will. 


The Two Opposing Survival Realities: War between Levels; Source of Inner Stress. 

An overlooked, but still functioning mechanism used by the Social Brain Superego to inhibit reptile brain selfish behavior is as follows: The social brain labels pro-species behavior as good, godly, unselfish, and selfless. It rewards good with acceptance (love), happiness, joy. It labels selfish, violent, antisocial behavior and killing as bad, evil, and diabolic. It punishes bad with Conscience, guilt, intense internal Pain, depression resulting from the Pain, stress, and rejection-ostracism resulting from physical violence. 

The important early successful response by reptile brains to stop Social Brain rejection was to confess one’s theft of survival benefits from the other or others, and to restore their stolen survival benefits to them. When restitution was complete, then forgiveness, acceptance and synergy automatically returned, both from those who were harmed. The two then became reunited as family. 

Historically important maladaptive reptile brain responses exist attempting to bypass the social brain’s rejection and guilt. For example: to run away from one’s family (after social mobility was no longer lethal on the glacier), and/or to inhibit separation Pain by short-term antisocial sex, or, more recently, to inhibit Social Brain guilt Pain by drugs of abuse (alcohol, hemp, opium). Due to the inevitable homeostatic development of drug tolerance, intoxicating levels soon become required to block the Pain. The resulting drug tolerance-based drunkenness required to block the Social Brain’s guilt Pain causes vast amounts of family disruption, academic failure, joblessness, social isolation, welfare dependence, poor health, criminal behavior, and kills millions on the highways. The need to stop guilt Pain drives global drug trade, causing personal and government corruption, international crime, as well as damage to human society and the ecosystem. 


The Executive Brain HAS: 

The executive brain Ego optimizes overall cell survival by determining and managing whether the final decision output will come from: 1) the Reptile Brain whose Internal Reality makes selfish demands and wants it all right now; 2) the Social Brain whose survival reality for species survival demands that turn it off the Selfish Brain’s violence in favor of cooperative nonviolent solutions; or the cerebral Intellect brain’s cultural and personal ideas about External Reality

The Executive brain Ego structure is the limbic system, including the thalamus and cingulate cortex. Evolutionarily, the executive brain was the first of the quadrimental brain layers to manifest the fetal/maternal programs, including curiosity, and juvenile rehearsal-play, as compared to the usually suppressive, humorless reptilian brain’s antisocial drives. 

The Executive Ego has two powerful sets of tools at its disposal to enforce its decisions. First, it can utilize the rewarding positive poles of emotions and drives (Table 1) to motivate the brain system called upon to act as requested, i.e., the famous “Carrot”. Or it can use their negative extremes to bring about Painful punished compliance, using the infamous “Stick”. Second, if it fails to accomplish its goals, it has an arsenal of the classical Ego defenses of the IdTable 2, available for use to avoid taking responsibility for its failure. 

When the executive ego feels safe, it motivates action by use of the Hexadyad Primary Emotions. Table 1 is a composite positive and negative binary expansion of the six pairs of primary emotions. As may be seen, in this model there are several perspectives of emotions available, ranging from that of cellular homeostasis, to descriptions of mood and personality, to extreme descriptors that we have applied to the concepts of God and Satan. 

Placed at the center of Table 1 are the six primary emotion pairs: They are: 

1. certainty vs. confusion, 2. confidence vs. fear, 3. pleasure vs disgust, 4. gratitude vs. anger, 5. elation vs. grief, and 6. satisfaction vs. desire. 




(Since primary emotions are binary, start at the midline of page and work up and down) 




 To self: At cause Tells the truth Accepts Gives of Joyful At peace 


 +PERSONALITY: Knowing Secure Accepting Supportive Enthusiastic Peaceful 


 +BIOLOGICAL Properties Safe to Resource Ally +Reinforce Free to 

 STATIS: known act available found mental act 



+LIMBIC I know I am I accept I am I win I have 

 CONCLUSION: stronger helped 




LIMBIC I don’t I am I reject I am I Lose I lack 

CONCLUSION: know weaker harmed 


 BIOLOGICAL Properties Time to Source of Competitor Negative Must get 

 STATUS known escape harm/waste identified reinforcer supplies 




To self: Lies to Afraid of Suicidal Accident Hopeless Self and     the truth Prone, Ill drug abuse 







Rising upward or falling downward from these core responses are the limbic system ego’s conclusions derived from them. Expanding further we come to their motivational value, then their survival (biological) significance. If the same emotion is prolonged for a few hours or days, the resulting moods are listed. If prolonged for weeks or years, they become part of personality. The personal meanings of these binary emotions to self and others are listed next to the last, followed by familiar spiritual conceptual extremes. 

The Hexadyad Primary Emotions Model has found support in the work of Ekman (2006) who from cross cultural research found that all around the world, humans responded in the same manner to the same emotional stimuli. These persons could also accurately identify the emotion experienced from the face of others responding to the same stimuli. His list of universal human emotions included five of the six Hexadyad negative emotions (surprise, fear, disgust, anger, sadness). There was one generalized positive emotion, (happiness). Possibly the latter outcome was because the experiencing of all six positive emotions results in the same smile upon one’s face. 

In the 1990s Ekman expanded his emotions to those not encoded by facial expression. Some of his non facial emotions included the missing positive pole to primary emotion pairs, contentment (satisfaction), relief (confidence), pride in achievement, excitement, and amusement (elation). Others (guilt, embarrassment, and shame) were complex social emotions composed of more than one primary emotion. 

Table 2: Ego Defenses of the Reptilian Id: The Sixteen Lies 



  1. Acting out: expression of an impulse in spite of its negative consequences. 
  2. Compensation: development of another characteristic to offset a deficiency. 
  3. Denial: declaring that an anxiety provoking stimulus doesn’t exist. 
  4. Displacement: taking out impulses on a less threatening target. 
  5. Intellectualization: avoiding emotional impact by focusing on details. 
  6. Passive-Aggressive Behavior: avoiding aggression by passivity. 
  7. Projection: placing one’s unacceptable impulses upon someone else. 
  8. Rationalization: supplying a logical reason in place of the real one. 
  9. Reaction Formation: replacing a real belief with one causing less anxiety. 
  10. Regression: returning to a previous stage of development. 
  11. Repression: loss of access to memories of past trauma. 
  12. Resistance: defense against conscious awareness of unconscious desires. 
  13. Somatization: channeling conflict onto one’s body: obesity, allergies, etc. 
  14. Sublimation: acting out unacceptable impulses in a socially acceptable way. 
  15. Suppression: pushing something that causes anxiety out of consciousness. 
  16. Undoing: obsessive repetition of ritualistic act as if to ally guilt from an event.


When the executive is unsuccessful in suppressing the reptile brain, it uses the sixteen Ego Defenses of the Id (Table 2) to justify its use of the Reptile Brain to produce antisocial behavior. Clearly, each of these defenses is an after-the-fact lie, as exemplified with the use of denial or of projection onto others. We see these in use all the time by people seeking to avoid responsibility for their acts or failure to act. The sixteen classic defenses listed here are probably not exhaustive. In general, they provide proof that our Id would rather win, be right and dominate, and that it would rather lie through its teeth than lose, be wrong or be dominated. Thus, the executive is equipped with a genetic arsenal of sophisticated deceptions. Furthermore, it does not see them as lies, but as the “gospel” truth and often is willing to fight to be right about them. How interesting that we have such an elaborate set of weapons to use against non-family “aliens” (gooks, krauts, etc.). 

The Executive-Ego is also profoundly afraid of dying and suppresses access to memories of past threats of death trauma by mental blockades. Even when off-line, during REM sleep or when injured or drugged, it camouflages uncontrolled breakthroughs of raw memories of personal trauma. These instead are disguised as dreams, nightmares, or waking hallucinations. The Executive can be selectively inhibited and weakened to the point of collapse by both certain types of meditation, and by ingestion of drugs that specifically activate the serotonin 5-HT2a stress receptor, all of which are hallucinogens like LSD. 

These receptors have been found on inhibitory interneurons to cause an overall inhibition of the cingulate cortex (Carhart-Harris, Eritzoe, Williams et al., 2012), here proposed to be the site of Freud’s Ego. Under these circumstances of so-called “Ego (Id) death”, visions of transcendental figures and events can be produced. Anciently, these altered state experiences likely provided the irrational foundations of our current religions (Hancock, 2007). 

The Executive can also be caused to give over its control to a higher outer authority, for example as 1) in certain practices of religion (including human suicide bombers, or WWII Kamikaze pilots), or 2) in child-like inductive learning (from the most authoritative parental or scientific Source) or 3) in hypnosis (Faith Healing, Death Curses, Mass Hysteria). 



Executive Properties as Self, Supervisor, Ego, Will and Controller of Volition: 

The Executive Ego Will seeks the solution of ongoing survival problems using the above primary emotions as motivators. It has been quantitatively studied in mammals and birds. It is the Source of judgment and decision. This includes attention, causal action, anticipation, expectation of outcome (anxiety or excitement), detection and correction of errors and evaluation of final effects. It learns from experience and takes pre-conscious action based upon its emotional evaluation of relative survival values, likelihoods and profitability. It calculates profitability in terms of survival maximization. This requires a predatory strategy based upon the maximum intake of energy for the least expenditure of effort in a random and unpredictable possibilities of profitability is a core issue. That is, what the cost/benefit ratio will be of each of the alternatives available. This estimate is based upon the survival value of the goal, the needed direction of effort and the type of action recognized. 

Ultimately the Executive Ego delegates authority: Should “I” use my competitive Reptile Brain at the universe level of individual? Or should I use my cooperative Social Brain at the next higher universe level, that of the group? Also what importance should be given to what my conscious cerebral Imagination sees or what my Intellect reports? These sophisticated decisions are at the center of our preconscious Executive’s call to action. 



The brain of higher mammals has relatively recently evolved a potent abstract reasoning accessory in the cerebral cortex. This abstracting accessory, called the Intellect, serves the just described reptile-social-executive brain “Triad” to optimize cellular homeostasis with increased sophistication. The more ancient and powerful triad members are each self-aware, but operate outside the awareness of the Intellect, which is located in the asymmetric right and left cerebral hemispheres. In humans, Intellect matures late and takes over consciousness by about 3 years of age when true language becomes operational. 

Working memory is a basic element essential to the Intellect: Working memory retrieves reverberating facsimiles of cerebellar primary memory (social brain), and striatal habit memory (reptile brain) via the thalamus (part of the executive brain). Working memory holds these fax copies for manipulation on a prefrontal cortex viewing screen. The Intellect then copies (via hippocampus) these faxes of vast and unwieldy cerebellar primary memory into two different compressed cerebral memory formats, each small enough to be manipulated in time and space off-line. 

One of these, usually in the right hemisphere (see next chapter), produces visual cartoon abstracts, something that children find inherently attractive. These are the concrete images of inner reality. In the other memory abstraction, produced by the left hemisphere, consists of compressed memory captions: These are the abstract symbols of language. The Intellect uses these handy new cartoon – caption “funny book” memories to facilitate thinking of new ideas off-line. This enables it for the first time to conceptualize, plan, safely rehearse, adapt, to produce an improved plan, without having to expose itself to the dangers of trial and error in External Reality. It can project data in time and space to predict the worst and best possible outcomes. These abstracting compressing skills formed the foundational Source of speech, writing, mathematics, logic and civilization. Further, the Intellect can be aware of its own self-awareness and thus reach the organizational level of Metamind. 

There are advantages of having a consciousness operating at the Intellectual-Imagination level. Not only can it form new survival-optimizing ideas off-line, while the older brain “Triad” are routinely working. But its existence also avoids second-by-second suffering (of Buddhism) from the continuous operation of the powerful punish-reward emotional motivators operating in the more ancient lower brain triad. This is because these seem to operate mainly subconsciously outside of its awareness. 

However, there are two critical disadvantages to operating from a consciousness only aware at the Intellectual-Imagination level. First: such a narrow consciousness assumes that its own volition alone produces all its behavior, until it learns otherwise, which is rarely, if ever. The cartoon in Figure 6 illustrates this. Second, the Intellect cannot retrieve and upgrade harmful earlier cerebellar or striatal memories of childhood trauma or error that were formed in the larger, more cumbersome primary memory format before the age of 3, at which time it first began forming retrievable records in the cerebral cartoon-caption format of the Intellect

Clearly, the Quadrimental Brain Model, as illustrated in Figure 5, is a more accurate approximation of the human mind than that of the Unitive Model. However, as might be expected, the mind of humans is even more complex than four layers. This is due to the bilateral nature of vertebrate form incorporated into our human structure. Due to evolution, rather than one sided simply being a mirror image of the other, the two sides of each of the four vertical layers of brain evolution have developed a different specialized function. This has forced an expansion of the Quadrimental Brain Model into the DQM, with its Society of Seven, described in the next chapters. However, once working at that level of understanding, we will be equipped to understand what human thought all is about. 


Idego, and superego are the three parts of the psychic apparatus defined in Sigmund Freud's structural model of the psyche; they are the three theoretical constructs in terms of whose activity and interaction our mental life is described. According to this model of the psyche, the Id is the set of uncoordinated instinctual trends; the super-ego plays the critical and moralizing role; and the ego is the organized, realistic part that mediates between the desires of the Id and the super-ego. The super-ego can stop one from doing certain things that one's Id may want to do.” (Wikipedia, 2017) 


Proposed neuroanatomical sources and synonyms for 

Freud’s Terms for the unconscious that are used in this book: 


Id: Brain core,  

 Negative Id: Dragon, Reptile Brain, Self-brain, Dominator,  Devil, Demon 

 Positive Id:, Dog Brain, Servant Brain, Best Friend 


Ego: Cingulate CortexExecutive, Supervisor, Caretaker  

SuperegoCerebellumSocial Brain, Source, Higher Power, Inner Wisdom, Holy Spirit, God-Within As to normal consciousness which he said was familiar to all, 

IntellectLeft Hemisphere Cerebrum 

ImaginationRight Hemisphere Cerebrum 


Figure 5: Pattern on Professor Morton’s old Reyn’s Hawaiian Shirt 

Figure 5 legend: A Farmer with a straw between his teeth is riding backwards on a fat pig. He reports upon and rationalizes all that happens, believing himself to be in charge. The thoughts of the farmer represent what occurs in human LH unitive consciousness. Obviously, the pig has a mind of its own, whose operation is almost completely out of the farmer’s awareness. 

CHAPTER 3: Bilateral Expansion to the DQM 



Introduction: The Need to Advance to a DQM 

The entire vertebrate central nervous system is bilateral. That is, all its structural elements are paired on either side of the midline, for example the two cerebral hemispheres. The sole exception is that there is only a single central pineal gland, an endocrine organ. This exception led the French philosopher Descartes (1637) mistakenly to declare the pineal gland to be the seat of the soul. Awareness of sidedness in brain function appears to be as old as written history. For example, Diocles of Carystus in the 4th century BC wrote: “There are two brains in the head, one which gives understanding, and another which provides sense-perception. That is to say, the one which is lying on the right side is the one that perceives: with the left one, however, we understand” (Lockhorst 1985). 

Although Diocles may have been the first to write about brain laterality, Marc Dax (1865) was the first on record in the modern era to note a difference in function between the cerebral hemispheres. In 1836, he reported victims of stroke or other injury to the left hemisphere (LH), but not the right hemisphere (RH) could not speak. This hemispheric asymmetry for language was also thought to be tied to contra-lateral hand preference (Broca 1863). Among those 90% of humans who are right-handed (Coren, 1992), language is located in the LH in over 95% of them (Smith and Moscovitch, 1979). Of the remaining about 10% of left-handed individuals, some 60% of these also have language in their left cerebrum (Levy and Reid, 1976). Thus, the LH houses language ability in at least 9 out of 10 humans. 

Nearly a century passed before reports of any further manifestations of hemispheric laterality. Then, a large study by Weisenberg and McBride (1935) demonstrated a RH superiority for visuospatial skills. During that century, the laterality term, “dominant hemisphere”, became irreversibly tied to the language-processing hemisphere, usually the LH, because of its association with the brain areas required for speech and dominant handedness. This forced the creation of second terms not using the word dominance, such as “hemispheric laterality” or “cerebral asymmetry”, to describe the many, more recently discovered non-language differences in cerebral structure and function, most notably found in “split-brain” subjects. These individuals had been produced by treatment for intractable epilepsy by severing their corpus callosum, the only cerebral connection between the hemispheres, thus limiting the spread of seizures from one side to the other (Sperry, 1982; Gazzaniga, Bogen & Sperry, 1962; Gazzaniga, 2000). 

Based upon the surprisingly different responses obtained by the interrogation of each of these disconnected hemispheres of split-brain subjects (Gazzaniga, et al., 1962; Geschwind, Iacoboni, Mega, Zidel, Cloughesy, & Zaidel, 1995; Gazzaniga, 2000), investigators proposed that the right and left cerebral hemispheres are characterized by in-built. 

qualitatively different and seemingly mutually antagonistic modes of data processing, necessarily separated from interference by the major longitudinal fissure of the brain (Levy, 1969; Sperry, 1982). It is as if they each use opposite approach orientations to analyze what is going on. As will become obvious, this turns out to be very valuable for the organism’s survival as a whole. 

In this model, the left hemisphere is specialized in top-down, deductive, cognitive dissection of local detail, while the right hemisphere orientation is a bottom-up, inductive, perceptual synthesis of global structure (Sperry, 1982; Gazzaniga, 2000). Known laterality differences between them reinforce this context. That is, there are striking differences in input to each hemisphere, differences in internal neuronal-columnar architecture, and differences in hemispheric output (Kosslyn, Koenig, Barrett, Cave, Tang, & Gabrieli, 1989; Kosslyn, Chabris, Marsolek, & Koenig, 1992; Hutsler & Galuske, 2003; Jager & Postma, 2003; Stephan, Fink and Marshall, 2006). 

Supporting the above view of opposite processing modes between the cerebral hemispheres is a large body of evidence, only briefly summarized here, that the left cerebral hemisphere in most right-handed individuals manifests facilities for language (Broca, 1863), has an orientation for local detail (Robertson & Lamb, 1991), has object abstraction-identification abilities (Kosslyn) (1987) and appears to possess a hypothesis-generating, event “interpreter” (Wolford, et al, 2000, Gazzaniga, 1989, 2000). In contrast, the right hemisphere excels in global analysis (Robertson & Lamb, 1991; Magun, et al., 1994), object localization (Kosslyn, et al., 1989), facial recognition (Milner, 1968) and spatial construction (Sperry, 1968). 

It is of interest that within this huge group of right-handed, LH-dominant speakers, the existence of two major human sub-populations has repeatedly been inferred, whose characteristic thinking and behavior styles differ in a manner that appears to mirror the properties of the asymmetric hemispheres. That is, in some right-handed, LH-languaged individuals, left hemisphere traits were proposed to be ascendant, producing a “left brain-oriented” thinking and behavioral style (Springer and Deutch; 1998; Fink, Halligan, Marschall, Frith, Frackowiak, & Dolan, 1996). Such left brain-oriented persons are top-down, important detail, deductive “Splitters' '. Yet, in other right-handed, LH-languaged persons, right hemisphere traits are thought to be more prominent, resulting in a contrasting “Right brain”-oriented style (Davidson and Hugdahl, 1995; Shiffer, 1996), currently viewed as bottom-up, big picture, inductive “Lumpers”. 

Thus, original permanent assignment of the term “hemispheric dominance” to language laterality ultimately forced the creation of yet a third laterality term, “Hemisphericity” (Bogen, 1969; Bogen, DeZure, Tenhouten, and Marsh, 1969). This was required in order to describe this third laterality phenomenon: the seemingly binary differences in left and right brain thinking and behavioral style within individuals of both the same language dominance and non-language subsystem asymmetries. Unfortunately, hemisphericity was based upon an incorrect initial definition: that of each person’s unique point on a gradient between right and left-brain extremes. After years of conflict, and hundreds of publications, this misconception caused such problems that the actual existence of hemisphericity was placed in doubt (Beaumont, Young & McManus, 1984). 

As will be seen, the observer of the executive ego can only be unilateral. That is, it can be on only one side of the brain. This is consistent with the logic that within any institution, there can be only one “bottom line” authority. This also reduces the number of separate consciousness elements from eight to The Society of Seven (next 


Recently, redefinition of hemisphericity depending upon which side of the brain the unilateral Executive Observer was inherently and irreversibly embedded has restored credibility of hemisphericity, but in a binary form. This is the more robust, either right or left brain-oriented phenomenon, under the new name of “Hemisity” (Morton, 2001, 2001, 2003 abcd; Morton and Rafto, 2006, 2010). Hemisity was a foundational element leading to the discovery of the Dyadic Evolution and Familial Polarity Morton, 2011). 

Asymmetries and functional differences also exist in laterality between sides of the two lower layers of the quadrimental brain as well. In both the cerebellar social brain and the reptilian self-brain, the behavior of one side focuses more on the individual survival and the other upon the survival of the family group. 

Six Postulates Creating the DQM: 

The above essential background elements of 1) bilaterality of the entire brain, 2) asymmetric inputs to the cerebral hemispheres, 3) contrastingly different data processing orientations of the asymmetric hemispheres, and 4) differing behavioral outputs of the asymmetric hemispheres, and 5) the Quadrimental Brain were combined with other evolutionary and neuroscience information to create the DQM of behavioral laterality developed next. 

In Figure 7, the still valid Quadrimental Brain Model of Figure 5 in Chapter 2 and the lateralized DQM contexts are compared using grey tone coding. The cartoon of the structure of the human bilateral brain and its major anatomical interconnections only coincidentally resembles that of a human head. Obvious are the two cerebral hemispheres of the Intellectual Brain are on top and the bilateral cerebellar Social Brain elements on either side. The unilateral limbic system Executive Brain is within the surrounding cerebral hemispheres. The bilateral Reptile Brain stem and striatum of the Reptile Brain are beneath. These Id-like sources mediate that final behavioral output to the spinal column. The corpus callosum, the major bridge between the cerebral hemispheres, is depicted. So are the corticotropin releasing factor (CRF) anxiety connections between the paired emotion generating amygdalae, and the norepinephrine fear pathways of the locus coeruleus pair. Counterbalancing these punishment pathways delete norepinephrine fear pathways of the locus coeruleus pair. 


Figure 7. Comparison of the Quadrimental Brain with the Dual Quadbrain Laterality Expansion


Counterbalancing these punishment pathways delete are the rewarding pathways add of the pleasure neurotransmitter, dopamine. We will utilize these six postulates as a device to fill in the detailed functions of the Dual Quadbrain elements. 



DQM Postulate 1: Left side Self-Survival Orientation vs. Right side Group-Survival Orientation Form a Bilateral Functional Axis for the Entire 


In the DQM, it is postulated that the quadrimental elements of the left half of the brain are dedicated primarily to self-survival and self-sufficiency, either when alone or in the presence of competition against other species. In contrast, the right-side elements of the brain are devoted to group, herd, and species survival and cooperative social interaction (Henry and Wang, 1998). Each side of the brain is alternatively activated or suppressed as appropriate to the social environment and directed by the single unilateral Executive Ego


DQM Postulate 2: The Bottom-Up and Top-Down Processing of the Two Cerebral 

Hemispheres are Functionally Opposite and Require Physical Separation 

The opposite orientation of the two more recently arrived powerful data abstracting units within the Intellectual System that produce our usual cartoon (right hemisphere) and caption (left hemisphere) based consciousness is shown in Figure 8. In brief, the left cerebral hemisphere 

Figure 8, Dual Quadbrain Intellect 


sees differences between things, uses top-down, deductive reasoning from the general to the particular to dissect the next lower-universe level and thus is a “Splitter”. In contrast, the right hemisphere sees commonalities within things, uses inductive reasoning to go from the particular (individual) instances to the general (group). The two hemispheres must remain separate because the two opposite processes performed by the hemispheres are incompatible. However, the two-exchange information: via the corpus callosum, and the deeper anterior and posterior commissure-like cables. 

Because of their differences, each cerebrum performs mutually exclusive, survival-maximizing data processing operations. In the right brain, incoming data (for example, an approaching white poodle) is inductively compared (with the assistance of the striatal matching system) with earlier-similar memory data of a white pit bull terrier to see whether the two data sets might be similar and related. It is of great survival value to know rapidly if both sets of data are related. If so, earlier-similar outcome memories can next be scanned in terms of past survival harm or benefit. Then avoidance or approach behavior initiates and coordinates increasing the survival benefit of the present situation. 

In exclusive contrast, with the left-brain, the incoming data (the poodle) is deductively compared with earlier similar memory data of the pit bull to see how the two data sets are different and unrelated. The rapid detection of differences is also of great survival value, for example, noting the critical difference between the playful poodle from the past, and the present rapidly approaching pit bull, foaming at the mouth. 

The presence of the global type of wiring motif of the right hemisphere compared to the local type of architecture of the left hemisphere supports necessary segregation of two incompatible brain processes into separate top down and bottom-up data analysis systems (Kosslyn, 1987; Van Kleek, 1989; Lamb, et. al., 1990; Kosslyn, et. al., 1992; Fink, et. al., 1996). The eye input assignments given the two hemispheres where the more visual-global 

RH attends to the entire spatial-visual field, while the left attends only to the right foreground further reinforces this separation. This results in left hemi-neglect upon right hemisphere stroke or other injury, leading to drawings of clocks with numbers only on the right side. The localized language centers in the LH also emphasize such by making this hemisphere the more auditory-speech oriented of the two. The cerebral asymmetries caused by the left local vs. a right distributed wiring organization, lead to detectable laterality differences in how the corresponding vertical columns themselves are organized and interconnected in general. 

Local vs. global structural and functional hemispheric differences prompt the speculation that the content orientation of the LH facilitates the detection of differences (“Splitter”) in a top-down, deductive, analytical, intelligent manner. In contrast, the concept-context orientation of the RH assists in the detection of global similarities (“Lumper”) in a bottom-up, inductive, intuitive, at times metaphorical way (Bottini, Corcoran, Sterzi, Paulesu, Schenone, Scarpa, Frackowiak, and Firth, 1994). Thus, the orientation of the RH is for visual-concrete images where “a picture is worth a thousand words” contrasts with that of the LH toward abstractions, where “a word is worth a thousand pictures”. 

To have two such high speed specialized data analysis systems on-board and intercommunicating with the Executive Ego has enabled mammals, especially humans, to be highly successful during the intense, ongoing process of survival. The contrasting processing motifs of the two cerebra show behavioral output differences that influence the social behavioral orientation of each side of the dual brain resulting in hemisity. 



DQM Postulate 3: The Right Side of the Limbic System is the Source of The Social Emotions, while from the Left Side come the Ego Defenses of the Id

As presented in Figure 9, elements of the motivational systems of the brain, including the Hexadyadic Primary Emotions of Chapter 2, provide powerful internal motivation of social behavior via punishment and reward (“carrot and stick”, Figure 10). The primary emotions have here been arbitrarily localized in the right limbic system, while the sixteen Ego defenses of the Id (“that pack of lies' '), presented in Chapter 2, have been placed in the left side of the limbic system. 

Although controversial, more evidence supports 

Figure 9. The Unilateral Executive Ego 


Figure 10. 

positive emotions as a right brain phenomenon, with the left brain showing negative emotions or emotional avoidance. This might provide a basis for interpreting the effects of the separate viewing by each side of the brain of video scenes of sex or violence in comparison to viewing emotionally neutral video scenes (Wittling, 1990; Wittling and Pfluger, 1990). No changes in mood, blood pressure, or salivary cortisol occurred when only the viewer’s LH was allowed to see this strongly evocative material. 


However, when only the RH was allowed to watch the sex or violence videos, there were large changes in mood and significant increases in blood pressure and in salivary cortisol when compared to viewing of neutral scenes (Wittling and Roschmann, 1993). This is consistent with the report of prominent alterations of EEG signals on the right side during sexual orgasm (Cohen, Rosen, Goldstein, 1976). 



DQM Postulate 4. The Brain can have only one Executive Observer. Depending on which Side it is Inherently Located, the Individual will show the either Right or Left Brain-Oriented Behavior and Thinking Styles of Hemisity. 

Beyond left cerebral hemisphere language dominance for about 90% of humans, and the right hemisphere non-language, spatial, temporal skill asymmetries and literalities, the existence of a unilateral executive system observer has resulted in yet another either-or phenomenon called “Hemisity”. This concept is unlike the earlier, now moribund idea, called hemisphericity, where someone’s personality was supposedly located somewhere on a gradient between left and right brain orientation extremes. Rather, depending on which hemisphere the unilateral executive is inherently and irreversibly embedded, either the left or right brain thinking and behavioral orientation of hemisity results. The origin of an individual’s hemisity subtype, either right or left brain-oriented, appears to be genetically determined before birth (Crowell, Jones, Kapuniai, and Nakagawa, 1973; Wada, 1977). 

What does that mean in terms of individual hemisity behaviors? This will be the topic of Chapter 5. 



DQM Postulate 5: Superego-like Positive Social Behaviors vs. Sadomasochistic Neurotic-Psychotic Orientations are Among the NonMotor Functions Contributed by the Paired Neocerebellum. 

The DQM proposes the cerebellum as the site of an individual’s vast store of experiential primary memory. This concept has considerable experimental support (Desmond, Gabrieli, Wagner, et al. 1997; Schreurs, Gusev, Tomsic, et al. 1998; Bracha, Zhao, Wunderlich, et al. 1997; Kleim, Vij, Ballard, & Greenough, 1997). Recording and retrieval to cerebral consciousness of parts of this primary lifetime cerebellar database somehow requires the participation of the hippocampus (Bontempi, Laurent-Demir, Destrade and Jaffard, 1999; Squire, Ojeman, Miezin, Petersen Videen, and Raichle, 1992; Teng and Squire, 1999). 

Superego-like higher intelligence, constructive ide

ology, and derivative religiosity are among the non-motor functions (Schmahmann, 1991) of the more recently evolving neocerebellum (Leiner, Leiner, and Dow, 1991). Due to crossed cerebellar diaschisis, in this paired brain element some functions are contralateral (opposite in sides) to those of the cerebrum (Barker, Yoshii, Loewenstein, Chang, Apicella, Pascal, Boothe, Ginsberg and Duara 

(1991). However, for the sake of simplicity, this is ignored here (as were other possible limbic or brain core ipsilateral vs. contralateral crossover distributions) 

These Superego-Divine like properties are opposed to those of the Thanatos-like Sadomasochistic, Neurotic-Psychotic Reactive Mind with its diabolic destructive death-wish, derivative suicide, superstition, human sacrifice, and cannibalism. The “unexperienced” trauma to which the individual has been subjected without integration in early childhood, or in adulthood cases of PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder), forms the basis for the content in the Reactive Mind-Pain Body . This trauma primarily includes that of developmental arrests and fixations, and the ineffective activation of the xDARP, the topic of Chapter 5 and 6. 

Figure 11. summarizes the asymmetries of the opposed neocerebellum producing the opposite survival behavioral logics of the Superego and Thanatos



Contrasts between the Two Cerebellar Elements: Social Brain Source vs. the Pain Body-Reactive Mind 

Making the now unavoidable assumption that all human behavior is brain-originated, what can be said Figure 11. The Dual Quadbrain 

 Double Social Brain: 


about the anatomical Source of human behavior of the type that has been called bad, evil, sinful, hateful or diabolical? This includes nonsexual rape, sadistic torture, ritual murder, mutilation, necrophilia, cult human sacrifice and vengeful cannibalism. 

People tend to deny that humans really have the potential for such society-rending behavior, and thus avoid having to think about it except perhaps under the protective sanctions of the entertainment media. Perhaps, because once fostered, such behavior seems so frighteningly close to the surface, this denial is facilitated. Individual behavior that destroys the survival of one’s own species underlies all definitions of bad, wrong, sinful, evil (from the devil) or diabolic. This makes one’s species-centric point of-view a highly critical issue. For example: is roasting and eating a chicken or pig a necessity and a hereditary right? How about the same consideration for chimpanzee “bushmeat” parts? Or, on the other hand, should this murder, mutilation and cannibalism of sentient beings more than justify the violence of the animal rights movement on behalf of domestic rodents? 

In contrast, there must be an anatomical brain Source for those human behaviors we call godly, good, righteous, kind, loving, holy or divine. Such acts include generosity, benevolence, compassion, mercy, humility, nonkilling and altruism. The latter includes self-sacrifice up to and including the point of willingness to die for another, others, or even to do so for a valued religious or humanitarian cause. Social behavior dedicated to enhancing the survival of one’s own species underlies all definitions of good and godliness. Again, the critical issue is the individual’s definition of who the family is. Thus, the age-old problem: is self-sacrifice appropriate on behalf of one’s offspring during calamity, in family feuds, or in struggles against pagans, infidels, confederates, Nazis, Vietnamese, or Somali pirates? 

In the DQM of behavioral laterality, the above-defined traits of good and evil are included among the subconsciously generated non-motor behaviors of the neocerebellum and integrated by the cerebellar vermis. The basis for this assignment comes from primate and human cerebellar lesion and implant research (Reiman, Raichle, Robins, Mintun, Fusselman, Fox, Price and Hackman, 1989; Ricklan, Cullinan, and Cooper, 1977; Heath, 1977; Heath, Llewellyn and Rouchell, 1980; Heath, Rouchell, Llewellyn, and Walker, 1981). There, use of self-stimulus with electrode implants in the cerebellar vermis transformed insane killers into the most benevolent and sociable of persons. However, temporary failure of cerebellar self-stimulation equipment, quickly released the convict with a broken brain back into a state of agitated homicide, killing his nurse with a pair of scissors. 



DQM Postulate 6: Separable Id-like Dominatingly Selfish vs. Surrendered Selfless Behavioral Elements are on Either Side of the Brain Core 

An evolutionarily ancient, Id-like, dominating, self-survival element within the left side of the brain stem core is associated with sympathetic nervous system based punished avoidance via flight and fight. It is convenient to call it the Dominator or Dragon Brain. 

In critical contrast, paired on the right side of the brain core, is the Id-like protective, productive element, here called the Servant Brain. It predominates when the Reptile Brain has “met its match” and has surrendered to a larger reptile, or, importantly, to a more powerful higher power, either within the brain, or surrendered to an external consciousness. The Servant Brain’s behavior is altruistic, cooperative, species survival-oriented, tied to the parasympathetic nervous system’s rewarded approach, feeding, rest, repair, and reproduction. Figure 12 summarizes the asymmetries of the left and right lower brain elements producing these contrasting punished and rewarded Id-like behaviors. 

For example: it is logical that the right brain core, through its search for similarity and relatedness would tend to perceive commonality, thus family and community that is implicit in species preservation (Henry and Wang, 1998). These would be complimented by right Id-associated cooperative social behaviors, humor, constructive support, as well as promoting Social Brain-religiosity behaviors. In contrast, the left-brain, while searching for differences, would tend to see non-family and non-related alien strangeness, together with the associated antisocial responses of anger, guilt-free Conscience, and self-preservation. This could be tied to a competitive coronary type-A behavior pattern (Henry and Wang, 1998) and combativeness. 

Thus, left brain-oriented individuals without adequate socialization should show more self-survival (win-lose) orientation than the group-survival (win-win) orientation of their right brain associates, with higher mortality. 

 Figure 6, Dual Quadbrain Reptile Brain Partners: 


The left side Reptilian Brain with its selfish control mode produces the rude antisocial behaviors of, “I want it now!” (there is no past or future). “If you don’t give it to me right away, I will damn well force you to, or die trying”. On the other side of the brain, the surrendered, servile, altruistic Servant Brain provides, polite, “How may I serve you?”, “Your wish is my command!” and applies generous, cooperative, collaborative, disciplined, powerful assistance, like a hard-working sled-dog to whomever internal or external higher power it has given over its control. 

Clearly, the DQM of behavioral laterality is only an organizational metaphor, a cartoon simplification of the real. At some level it must break down as inadequate to represent the actual complexity of the brain and behavior, finally demanding the brain itself as the ultimate reality. One of the first levels upon which this model might be found wrong is that of the relative sidedness of subcortical elements. That is, the existence of both ipsilateral and contralateral tracts between the cortex and the cerebellum, limbic system and brain core guarantee a brain laterality that is more complex than this model. 

Yet, the overall clarification of behavioral motivation, brought by the context of a self vs. species brain duality, may be a critical step required to facilitate the ultimate lateral distribution of the important anatomical details. Furthermore, the logical neuroanatomical localization within this evolutionary model of Freud’s theoretical 



constructs of the IdEgoSuperego and Thanatos provides an integration of human behavior which hopefully will stimulate the discovery of ever more accurate information about locations of these important behavior-generating motifs. 

With this introduction to the Society of Seven defined by the DQM, we are now in the position to ask, “Who AM I? Who is in control? and Why?” in our next chapter. 


CHAPTER 4: Modular Consciousness: Our Brain’s Society of Seven 



Getting Acquainted with the Consciousness Elements of the Brain’s Society of Seven. 

The creation of the DQM of Consciousness to replace the inadequate Unitive Model of Mind gives us the tools to begin a rational approach to understanding human behavior. The background development of the four levels of the Quadrimental Brain Model in Chapter 2 facilitated the introduction of their four bilateral aspects in the DQM in Chapter 3.We are now prepared to meet and develop a working relationship with each of the members of the DQM’s Society of Seven, assembled in Figure 13, and their associated seven unique realities that alert us to their highly dynamic individual presence upon our throne of control, our cockpit seat of power. 

One might think that the upper two members really need no introduction, because one is already consciously aware of them as part of who we think we are. However, getting better acquainted with them is well worth the effort. Although they may be of either gender, they will be referred to in the masculine singular. 


Figure 1: DQM of Human Consciousness 

First, say hello to the right brain Dr. Imagination. He brilliantly produces succinct visions of the best and worst options available to you right now under your specific circumstances: from your heart’s desires to your worst nightmares. His sole purpose is to provide, if you will only take the time to look, what are your best immediate opportunities as well as what are your best long-term choices to optimize your survival and/or that of your family. He also provides you warnings of harmful things, actions, situations or contexts to avoid. The reality orientation of Dr. Imagination is that of self-conscious External Reality unless he is taken over by another more powerful member of the Society of Seven. 



Next, greet the left-brain Mr. Reporter. Talk about the production of sounds and words to describe the visions of Dr. Imagination: this is what the language brain Reporter does best! From the simplest to the most abstract, Mr. Reporter strives always to have the right words or symbols available for you to think or say. The millions of words in your primary memory that it has already heard or read are available for you to draw upon. Mr. Reporter also knows well the language and rules of numbers and can grasp the complex concepts within each context. Mr. Reporter’s mind is occupied with our ever-expanding Internal Reality model of External Reality. That includes self-consciousness: its consciousness of itself and its own thoughts. 

It is very easy to mistakenly identify oneself with Dr. Imagination or Mr. Reporter because the way they think constitutes our usual consciousness. However, once we take a transformational step in our maturation to discover who we really are, we will be delighted to see that they are actually our loyal indispensable consultants: Intellectual, articulate and imaginative. 



Although you may not know him or her very well, your Executive EgoSource of will power, is your special person. Like a foreman or contractor, you have placed him in charge of the intimate details required to maintain and successfully run your living estate. The reality of the Executive Ego is Survival Reality. He is really smart and has repeatedly been shown to make subconscious survival-optimizing decisions a second or more before your Intellect and Language consultants even become aware of them (Libet,1983). These “bottom-line”, “the buck stops here” decisions of your Executive Ego, make a second-by-second difference between your life or death. 

If your Executive Ego is on the left side of your brain, he is more intimately associated with Mr. Reporter and its abstract reasoning. Yet, your Executive also has information transfer lines across the corpus callosum connecting with Dr. Imagination on the other side of the brain as well. In contrast, if your Executive is on the right side of your right brain, he works hand in hand with Dr. Imagination, but keeps close tabs on Mr. Reporter via other lines back across the corpus callosum. 

Your Executive Ego is a Society of Seven member of great feelings, especially fear of death and joy of life, and uses these to motivate its subcontractors by use of rewarding (attracting) or punishing (causing avoidance) primary or derivative emotions (Chapter 2). If your Executive is in good shape, he can overpower any opposition among his subcontractors. However, if your Executive is injured, weak or sickly, he cannot always force his Id or Superego to follow his orders or to keep them from becoming unruly or rebellious. This is especially true of the more destructive left side members of both the Reptile Brain core and the cerebellar (anti) Social Brain. 


The Bilateral Brain Core Reptilian Id 

Freud’s Reptilian Id is also split bilaterally and resides on both sides of the brain core. As the first brain level to evolve, it is the only paired brain element who actually has direct access to all the levers, wheels, switches and dials that control life. The Id literally keeps all your cells alive every second of every day. It takes this job very seriously and will fight any outside cellular homeostasis stressor to the death. It is completely in charge of our survival at each universe level, from the molecular through subcellular, cellular, tissue, organ, up to and including that of the living human being. As we will see, all other behavioral sources must work through the Id to change our behavior. 

The left side of the brain core is specialized in competition: defending us and winning battles against non-family enemies using the strategy of “Win-Lose”. We call it the Dominator-brain, or other synonyms, such as Dragon-brain, Wolf-brain, or Negative Id. On the right side of the brain core, the friendly, faithful dog-like Servant Brain, or Positive Id is specialized in cooperation, utilizing the emergent property advantages of the “Win-Win'' strategy as a committed member of the family team. With this in mind, let’s meet each of these two brain core Id partners. These bilateral Id elements will be described next. 


4. Mr. DominatorId of the LEFT-BRAIN Core 

Occupying the left side of the Id, salute Mr. Dominator. He uses your body very skillfully and successfully to protect you against alien competitors, such as rats, snakes, and hyenas. Did I mention thieves, rapists, and assassins? Although the Mr. Dominator can be male or female, as you can see, it is quite an impressive physical specimen. He is the force that powerfully protects us from our enemies and accomplishes all of your behavioral desires. 

However, he is dreadfully inept at working within groups of humans. He is generally rude, nasty and upset. He must always be right, win, dominate and control everybody, and will fight viciously to do so. He will only give in and surrender to a winner who is bigger or more powerful than he is. He is totally inept at knowing how to optimize the survival of groups at the next higher universe level, because he only knows the self-laws of the one-on-one competition level, such as on monkey island where “shit runs downhill”. In addition, as we have seen these laws are totally the opposite and harmful for optimizing the survival of the group and society. 

If your Executive Ego fails to prevent Mr. Dominator from becoming upset, taking over, and thus from doing antisocial harm, the Executive tries to avoid responsibility for his or her failure to control him. He does so, by making excuses for Mr. Dominator’s bad behavior, using some of the 16 Ego Defenses of the Id (Chapter 2), such as denial or projection, all of which are lies. When you hear such rationalizations coming out of your mouth, you need to recognize that your Executive Ego is becoming too weak to prevent your Mr. Dominator from taking over your throne and doing antisocial harm. Then, you need quickly to go about finding ways to strengthen him or her. The Executive Ego can best go offline and rest during REM sleep or during certain types of therapy. 

As mentioned above, it takes a tough Executive Ego to handle a raging Mr. Dominator. However, a strong Executive, by use of his powerful emotions, can calm and replace Mr. Dominator with the other side of the brain core, Mr. Servant, as the willing doer of his commands (see below). 


5. My Faithful Servant, Trusted Friend of the Brain Core on the Right 

Anciently and still today, when Mr. Dominator meets someone he recognizes to be more powerful, he refuses to fight and be killed by that more powerful entity. Instead, he makes strong obeisance-submission signals and surrenders. By doing so he is in essence saying that rather than die, he is willing to give you anything and everything he has, even including the surrender of all his or her money, property, spouse, and kids. In exchange for being allowed to live, he is promising to work loyally for your Executive Ego, even to give his or her life to defend and protect you, nothing held back. Now that’s real surrender! 

Anciently, at the reptilian stage of evolution, this was literally the case. All who did not surrender to and support the leader were violently exterminated. As Quadrimental Brain layers were added, this surrender to external higher powers was extended to the internally more powerful Executive Ego, who itself could defer to higher members of the Society of Seven,, or gain to more powerful external forces, i.e., to dominant persons, or institutions. Under these circumstances, the imbalance of power is so great in Mr. Dominator’s mind that his only choice is to surrender or die. 

By surrendering, he transforms into a trusting, reliable Servant. This transformation is so complete, that he takes on a new personality, like that of a once snarling wolf turned into a lover-dog, man’s best friend. If you treat that dog right, he will do anything for your love and acceptance. Meet your dog-like Servant Brain. As your former internal enemy, he has surrendered to become your best friend. Without hesitation, he will delightedly do anything you ask, or die trying. Clearly, it becomes very unwise to kill someone who, when 

surrendered to your Executive Ego, becomes such a loyal, empathetic, committed and valuable ally, side-kick. 



What is Good? What is Bad? It Depends Upon Which Universe Level is Involved 

In this chapter we bring clarity to the eternal battle waging within each of us: that of “Good” vs. “Evil.” Again we are drawn to the bilateral nature of the brain, one side devoted to our own self-survival, the other to survival of our family and species. At the foundation of this conflict are the ever-present structural levels of the universe, treated more extensively in my book “Neuroreality”. That is, elements in each lower level, when combined create the next higher level. For example, a combination of cells at the cellular level creates the tissue level. A combination of tissues creates the organ level. A combination of organs creates the organism level. And a combination of organisms creates a family, society, or species level. 

A key fact is that the laws that are required for life and “good” for the occupants of a specific level, are totally inappropriate (“evil”) to the unique requirements for life of those at the next higher or lower level. And the laws that are unique and work for that next higher level, do not work and thus harm the level above (or below) that. For example cells need to be in an environment of controlled pH and ionic strength or they will rupture. In contrast, tissues are tolerant to pH and ionic strength, but need to be protected from shear forces or they will be disintegrated. Organs don’t need narrow pH, ionic, or shear protection, but require oxygenated blood or they will fail. Organisms have their own blood supply, but need food and shelter 


or they will die. Families, societies, or species require reproduction and protection from injury or they will become extinct. 

What is remarkable about the brain is that it supplies optimal environments for each of our body's many universe layers, from that of the subcellular to that of the family, society, and species. However, these brains many operations occur outside of our awareness, except at the level of our self and that of our social relations. What is unrecognized is that the laws that are required for our self-survival in the jungle, are totally opposite to those we need to survive well with others. That is, it is often correct to fight, maim, and kill snakes and hyenas in order not to be eaten. However at the level of family and society, these are called antisocial behaviors and punished by isolation, ostracism, incarceration, or execution as totally inappropriate. In contrast, behaviors appropriate for our interaction with children and mates, such as “Here, let me help you”, “I can wait for my share until you have yours,” would result in sheer death in the jungle. 

One side of our brain core Id is highly specialized to deal with self-survival by tooth and claw. I call it the “Dominator-brain” among other things. It is the Source of violence. It plays by the antisocial laws of “Win-Lose”. The other side, “Servant-Brain” ,our ever-loving, faithful friend, is equally devoted to our group’s survival by the “Golden rule: Do unto others what you would have them to do to you” or its reciprocal negative statement “Don’t do unto others what you would not like them to do to you.” Those need to be recognized as “Win-Win or No Deal” principles appropriate for living at peace and acceptance of others. 

When well and strong, our Executive Ego 




Figure 14 

objectively decides which brain side to assign to which project. Shall it be the Dominator-brain that deals with our enemies or the Servant-brain, to help our friends. When our Executive Ego becomes ill and weak, it is overpowered by the Dominator-brain and we become very unfriendly and antisocial, even violent. 



Competition vs. Cooperation: With who and when? Figure 14 illustrates the two opposite behavioral motifs this Society of Seven team can produce. That is, if the Executive Ego judges that individual competitive behavior is called for, the Dominator-brain becomes activated. If, in contrast it judges that social behavior is the more appropriate response, then empathic Servant-brain behavior emerges. On the left of the figure, the Executive has invoked an emergency survival response by activating the selfish Dominator-brain into action. This results in instinct driven combative violent behavior with a potential of escalation to killing force. This essentially decorticate behavior occurs when we become really upset. It is the unplanned, untrained, instinctual and animal-like destructive rage response whose effectiveness has been honed by eons of survival of the fittest by tooth and claw. 

In remarkable contrast, if the Executive concludes that social issues require solving, it strongly inhibits the Dominator-brain and instead activates the unselfish Servant-brain to produce a completely different set of behaviors that are cooperative, honest, peaceful, constructive and responsible: absolutely nonviolent. 

Because our Executive often does not have the answers for what to do next to optimize survival, it can defer to external sources of greater information or greater protection. In the center of Figure 14 lists some External Authorities to whom the Executive can give over our control. In the first category, it seeks more information. In doing so, it will draw upon many outside authorities. It does this first by rote memorization of other’s ideas, often uncritically incorporating their viewpoints as “the truth”. The more established and thus trusted an authority is, the more likely our Executive will have faith in them and assimilate their truth as our own. If our external sources are good, we can benefit from this. However, not all external sources are trustworthy. 

Some people are so habituated to surrendering to an external authority Source that they never really develop their own abilities to think for themselves beyond their own childhood beliefs. Unfortunately for them, the Inner Reality or Cultural Memes delivered by many external Controllers is far from the truth of External Reality. The Executive Ego of such a gullible person has become too lazy, or too overwhelmed, to accept facts staring them in the face. In laboratory experiments, many people prefer to believe the grossly deviant answers of an unknowingly supplied erroneous pocket calculator, then the obvious facts. Many people would rather hypnotically trust without question an ignorant, minimum-wage clerk’s opinion in a shopping mall, than think for themselves. Sadly, this unwillingness to think for themselves extends into many social areas of importance including which authority we should believe. 

If there is an external controller that is more powerful than we are, who can also supply us with protection that makes things safer, the Executive’s judgment problem compounds itself. Does it trust the laws of our land and those enforcing them as working for our best interests? 

We all know how either very good or how incredibly bad that can be. Similarly, does our Executive believe in our religious leaders, support their building and other projects with our funds, and trust our children and youth with them? Alternatively, might there be a number of hidden conflicts of interests that can drain, harm, or even kill us. Whom do you trust? It also appears that in the area of answers to the Big Questions, Our Servant brain, with its Cultural Reality is the most gullible to these abstract issues and must be alerted to rely upon our Executive Ego’s informed judgments assisted by our cortical Intellects. 

It is of great interest that our Executive has been shown to trust questionable external controllers and take great risks in order to obtain potentially great, but very im-probable rewards. This is both good and bad, and again requires intelligent judgment calls. How is the potential thrill of hitting the jackpot in a casino different than winning in the stock market? Again, intelligence, education and information are required. Some of our Executive Egos would even entrust, and often lose, our life’s savings under the direction of a confident, but highly conflicted stockbroker, one perhaps referred by a trusted friend, rather than doing the required homework and taking personal responsibility. 

Many of our Executive Egos are so starved for pleasure and relief from subconscious stress that they will give over our control to a popular drug and completely abdicate responsibility for their intoxicated behavior. We also crave love and approval as true symbols of a high survival state. In usually futile attempts to gain these, we go to great lengths to invest in the latest entertainment or stylish fads, not recognizing that this behavior is about as likely to increase our survival, as winning a lottery would. We keep throwing bad money after good in investing in fine wines, fashionable clothes and jewelry, Broadway plays, elaborate home theaters, thrill toys, exotic vacations, blindly trusting these external controllers will give us the happiness and love we blindly seek. Parenthetically, with the DQM one can approach these addictions directly. 

Further, the Executive Ego of most anybody will collapse in the presence of the overwhelming force of harm or evil. Panic activation of our reptilian “surrender or die” programs can overpower even the most intelligent of people. The fear inculcated by the personal threat of death by the Nazi and Communist Parties turned those wonderfully brilliant and developed German and Russian peoples into decorticate, servile slaves who would rather follow orders and kill, than responsibly resist at the cost of being killed themselves. Because of their terror, they were totally surrendered to, and fully supported demands of their ruthless external controllers. It is now nearly 80 years after the Second World War in Europe. Let us never forget the 6 million Jews, 20 million Russians, 10 million Christians and 1,900 Catholic priests who were murdered, massacred, raped, burned, starved and humiliated while the terrified German and Russian peoples looked the other way! Tragically, both historically and prehistorically many similar regimes of terror have left their bloody scars around the world over the ages. 

Most humans suffer from violence and sincerely wish to do something about it. Here is where one’s philosophy or religion can result in misguided righteous self-sacrifice to kill the alien non-believer. If one believes erroneous spiritual answers to The Big Questions that declare this present bitter life is only a dream; and that our true goal and reward is immortality in the hereafter, then, as we see, many people will drop all personal responsibility, willingly becoming suicidal instruments of death. Unfortunately, their genuine desires for the greater good of mankind have allowed them to convert themselves into mindless externally controlled robots of death instead, bringing even greater harm to humanity. A more accurate understanding of External Reality and the answers to the Big Questions would have directed their desire to be of service into much more beneficial non-violent paths. 


6. Mr. Sadomasochist, the Pain Body of the Dark Side of our Cerebellum 

Next, I will introduce you to the most unrecognized, but powerfully disruptive and internally stressful member of our brain’s Society of Seven. Mr. Sadomasochist was first called the Reactive Mind (Hubbard, 1950). As we will see, it is also synonymous with Tolle’s (2005) Pain Body, and with the Morton’s (2011) xDARP, described in later chapters of this book. As the perfect victim, rejecting the way the universe works, he will neither acknowledge your existence nor extend you a hand in friendship. 

Zero empathy! 

The size and activity of Mr. Sadomasochist depends upon the degree of one’s exposure to physical trauma and developmental thwarting circumstances much earlier in our life. Although most of this occurred during our first three years, some occurred later, especially during adolescence and war. For those fortunate to have experienced little developmental trauma, Mr. Sadomasochist can be very small and asleep most of the time. 

However, for many of us who have been significantly arrested developmentally, it can be huge, cyclically rebellious, and very disruptive to home and family. This is especially true if during your very early years, you were caused to feel the Pain inherent in being blocked from doing what we needed to do in order to complete your development. Then, in adulthood Mr. Sadomasochist can awaken ravenously hungry and must feed. He thrives upon a diet of Pain of all types, especially on the psychological Pain it recreates by subconsciously age regressing to traumatic incidents of loss of control in the past. 

After a day or two of feeding by stirring up such Pain and creating such a crisis that we again feel like we might die, Mr. Sadomasochist finally becomes sated and goes back to sleep for a little while. However, soon it awakens, famished and in need of more Pain. The brain-based Mr. Sadomasochist is the origin of the theme appearing so many times in literature, and in our lives such as the oscillating replacement of cooperative Dr. Jekyll by the murderous Mr. Hyde. Other examples are Christ vs. Satan Good vs. Evil, or more practically speaking, by cyclically converting an angelic wife into a demon, thus repeatedly transforming heaven into hell. 

The dangerous thing about Mr. Sadomasochist is that by taking over Dr. Intellect and Mr. Reporter he or she ironically tricks our Executive Ego into erroneously thinking that our Pain Body is exactly who we are. This is me! When so fooled, we will not, cannot do anything other than act out its twisted lies of past rejection in a cycle of endless struggle for control of our dearest important others. In fact, not to do so would seem to be denying the very essence of who we are. 

Our “important-others' ', the targets of Mr. Sadomasochist rejecting lies, take this seriously and fight back against his or her cyclic attacks. Then, Mr. Sadomasochist creates and feeds on the intense Pain from the resulting unremitting rejection of our dearest friends and relatives. After each Pain Body feeding frenzy, we feel more damaged personally, and are remorseful that we have degraded and damaged those closest to us. And, as we inevitably continue to participate in its cyclic feeding frenzies, while unable to understand or resist it, some of us can end up hurting and ultimately driving away all those whom we love the most, committing crimes of passion, and ultimately having a nervous breakdown outside or within a prison or hospital. 

The existence of this seemingly death oriented(Freud’s thanatos), diabolical member of our brain’s Society of Seven has driven many to drink, drugs and suicide. Mr. Sadomasochist’s reality is Reactive Reality. Sometimes, after “bottoming out”, our Executive Ego surrenders control into the arms of our “God” (Within), our Higher Power, our all-wise Source, (the seventh member of our Society of Seven), seeking protection and redemption from Mr. Sadomasochist’s demonic and corrupting power. This results in conversion and transformation of the individual beyond something he or she would have ever been the topic of later chapters in this book. 

It is ironic that the biological existence of our Mr. Sadomasochist is the result of a recent evolutionary mistake, which we will unravel in the next chapters. An unmutated Developmental Arrest Repair Program (DARP) once served our psychosocial development in the finest of ways. Now, it is broken and has become the primary Source of the neuroses and psychoses that are driving the world mad. 


7. The Social Brain SOURCE, the Life-giving Side of the Cerebellum 

How can one be introduced to one’s hidden, most amazing Source, one’s God Within? Most of us are completely unaware of the existence within us of this most developed and subtle member of our brain’s Society of Seven. Rarely in our lifetime do we even catch faint glimmers of the awe of IT. Yet, IT reigns over the vast trillions of cells that hold our Primary Memory within the cerebellum. To those sensitive individuals whose Executive is located on the left side of their brain, the thought of meeting their God Within can be terrifying. Indeed, as the Source of guilt Pain as administered as punishment for the evil of harming the survival of others, it can indeed be overwhelming. Yet in contrast, for those intense people, whose Executive is on the right, are for some yet unknown reason less threatened by strong emotion. They often actually seek to find and know God with some success. Interestingly, each of the eight world religions was founded by one of these right brainers (Chapter 10). 

Now, the ancient route to the discovery of one’s Social Brain Source has become clear and traversable by individuals of both hemisities. This is a transformative journey, because once you meet your Source, you can but only throw yourself on the ground before It's perfection and purity and begin to clean up your life in response. Then, you too will joyfully surrender to that Higher Power, God-Within, Holy Spirit, who has your purpose, your plan and the power to achieve it. You are never the same again because by having your eyes opened to Its existence you will have become irreversibly transformed, (the “saved” of certain religions.) Then, you know who you are and why you are here. Yet, our Social Brain Source is not supernatural in any way. It is our genetic inheritance. 

It produces Empathic Reality and has the non-supernatural answers to our global problems and can, by turning off the xDARP, bring peace, harmony, and fulfillment in our lives here on earth and naturally lead us to the stars of our future. 

In review, Table 1 lists the seven members of the Society of Seven who together produce our behavior. 


Three Kinds of Pain: Physical, Psychological, and Guilt 

The attempt to avoid physical Pain by the Dominator Id is in stark contrast to our left cerebellar Mr. Sadomasochist’s mental age-regression to Painful earlier periods of failure in an attempt to gain control of a developmental process, or to our right cerebellar Source’s deliberate production of guilt Pain. Fortunately for humanity, there are higher internal powers among each person’s Society of Seven, who normally can conquer and convert the selfish Mr. Dominator into our own willing selfless Mr. Servant, the one who does all the actual work. However, there are also many often-unrecognized external powers outside of us, who also can attempt to demand our surrender and to claim our loyalty. Because of this, our Reporter


Society of Seven 


Type of Reality 

Brain Element 

1. Imagination

External Reality 

Right Hemisphere Concrete Visualizer 

2. Reporter 

Internal Reality 

Left Hemisphere Abstract Reasoner 

3. Executive Ego

Survival Reality 

Unilateral Limbic Executive 

4. Dominator

Dream Reality 

Left Striatum Reptile Brain 

5. Servant 

Cultural Meme Reality 

Right Striatum Reptile Brain 

6. Sadomasochist

xDARP Reality 

Left Cerebellum Thanatos 

7. Source-Purity Conscience

Empathic Reality

Right Cerebellum Dominator


an Imaginer must be well educated to tell our Caretaker to whom he should or should not give over our control? 


Quadrimental Brain Balance 

Clearly, the recognition of the DQM’s value in understanding human behavior opens many crucial new doors. The present lengthy discussion only begins to scratch the surface. When the Dual Quadbrain is aligned, as in Table 2, cooperative, conservative, nonkilling, highly able behavior appears. When the Dual Quadbrain misaligns, it becomes the Source of antisocial behavior leading to conflict, aggression, and killing.

Table 2, Bottom-up, Top-Down Brain Hierarchy of Behavioral Control:

A.  The Reptilian Brain is the sole producer of ALL behavior of the   organism, be it via:

  1. The Cooperative Servant Brain.
    1. Except in an “Emergency” when it's instinctive Dominator Brain behavior takes over.
      1. The weaker Ego is the lesser the degree of danger that constitutes an Emergency.
  2. The competitive Dominator Brain in an Emergency.
  3. The xDARP-Pain Body, if it is for long in the presence of a loving (safe) friend or mate.
    1. As directed by the xDARP Pain Body by transference, seeking to complete arrested psychosocial developmental control from the past (infancy, childhood).
      1. Through transference, age regression, and reactivation of an ancient struggle. (see later in this book).

B.    If alone and no Emergency has been perceived, the Servant Brain defers its control to the Executive Ego


C.    The Executive judges and decides whether to direct the Servant Brain itself or to assign responsibility for its control to one of four higher options:

  1. To the Imagination of the right cerebral hemisphere: projects Worst-Best possible outcomes.
    1. Autosuggestion is available here, via imagery and strong commands.
  2. To the Intellect of the left cerebral hemisphere: Source of abstract reasoning, mathematics and language.
    1. If the Executive Ego is weak: the product is subjective rationalizing thought.
    2. If the Executive Ego is strong: the product is pure objective logic.
  3.   To the wisdom and insight of the Social Brain Source.
    1. via meditation and prayer for guidance from our God-Within, Higher Power.
  4.  To an External Authority: Parent, Teacher, Chief, Laws, King, Priest, “God”.
    1. This is the basis of Hypnosis: Assumptive learning from “Authorities”
    2. Faith Healing and Death Curses.

D.   The Reptile Brain then obeys this external “Higher Power”


If alcohol and drugs are used to block cerebellar Conscience and guilt Pain, then many other of our Social Brain’s skills will also be blocked, resulting in competitive, violent, short-sighted behavior, multiple breakdowns, and failure. Thus, as may be seen, brain system balance is logical and is knowable. Nobody expected understanding and predicting human behavior to be relatively simple. However, it now no longer is a mystery. In addition to the above dynamics, behavioral output can also be altered by the already well-known factors of Table 3. 


So, What’s the Answer?: Who Am I? Who is in Control of My Behavior? 

It is liberating to know that who I am turns out to be whichever element of my brain’s Society of Seven (or those Exterior Controllers) that is dominant, ascendant and on the throne of my control cockpit at the present moment. I am that! At first, these seven states and their associated unique realities all seem the same to me. Thus, I am my rage, I am my compassion, I am my beliefs, or I “I bow to my God-Within Who I AM”. As I increased in maturity, I began to recognize that I have some control as to whom I place on the throne to be who I am. Although my automatic thoughts and feelings may be strong, I do not have to be them. This is liberating because, unobstructed, those very thoughts and feelings can place my Dominator Brain or Sadomasochistic Brain in control of me right now. Then I will have to take the later negative consequences of “my” emergent antisocial rejecting, “killing” behavior and the consequent harm I am doing to you now by allowing my Dominator brain to rule, reject you and struggle with you as my enemy. Instead, I have a brief period of a choice. By declaration, I can prevent Mr. Dominator from gaining control of me, and rather elevate my Social Brain Source to the throne. I then become it, with very different emergent behavior towards you: that of acceptance and “nonkilling” synergy. 

Table 3,  Additional Factors Determining Which Brain Element is in Control 

  1. Genetics and/or Development, such as that producing Affective Illnesses, Alzheimer’s Disease, Huntington’s Disease, dyslexia, autism, or altered sexual identity. 
  2. Nonlethal Brain Injuries, such as infection, trauma, stroke, tumor, surgery, schizophrenia, and Parkinson’s Disease. 
  3. Psychoactive Drugs and/or Magnetic Probes – Alcohol and other Painkilling drugs of abuse, and by LSD and other hallucinogens. 
  4. Cellular Homeostatic Stress, such as loss of control of access to air, water, fuel, sleep, rest, shelter, job, family members or support, blood glucose, tryptophan depletion, etc. 
  5. Cultural Memes associated with Suggestion and Hysteria: Media-based or personal rumors, war, famine, faith healing, hypnosis, spirit possession, death curses, or riots

 To accept another just as they are, and just as they are and exactly as they are not” has been an edifying definition of love. This is the acceptance and understanding we desperately seek from our mates, family, friends, and religion. This deep craving is manifest in the quality we project onto at least one of our many manufactured gods: our belief that the son of God hates the sin but loves the sinner, that God made me, that he wants me, that He knows my every strength and weakness, and loves even me. 

By awareness and practice, I can lengthen that original microsecond that I have before my upset Dominator takes over and kills, giving me increasing opportunity to replace it with my totally responsible Source, and not get upset. As will be described in later chapters, we can become increasingly conscious of our power of choice as to who we are, by the means of the one whom we place in charge. As a result, reptilian upsets with life that now may be breaking through hourly to defeat us, can be so weakened that they only occur daily, then only weekly, only monthly, yearly, then not at all. Many people have accomplished this. It is the beginning of happiness. 

Recent fMRI reports have noted high cerebellar activity during control of behavior by “another”, that of an external controlling entity.  Recipients of faith healing comment on feelings of “heat” at the base of their skull (cerebellar Source).  Does surrender to one’s higher power activate the cerebellar Social Brain, one’s God Within, to come to the fore?! If so, specifically, how can this be done? To be continued later…

Some Concepts of Chapter 4:

  1. There is a control-module “Throne” in our mind, which can be occupied moment by moment by whichever member of the Society of Seven separate consciousness systems of the Dual Quadbrain is most dominant.
  2. Regardless of which member of the Society of Seven is in power, at first it all seems to be the same as me.  Through education, training and practice, I can increasingly recognize and influence which entity presently retains control over my mind and behavior, thus, to best optimize my survival and that of my family.
  3. The conscious entities that can occupy my mind include the following: 
    1. Imagination  (R-Cerebrum Concrete Visualizer), 

summarizing images. Reads External Reality

  1. Reporter (L-Cerebrum Abstract Reasoner) produces summarizing descriptions. Compiles our unique Internal Reality
  2. Unilateral Limbic Executive Ego, if stronger than the Reptilian Dominator, it will choose who is to be in charge. It creates and follows Survival Reality: the key choice is between Self survival vs. Group survival. 
  3. Dominator (L-Striatal Reptile Brain) Source of defensive or aggressive killing. Can create Dream Reality. 
  4. Servant (R-Striatal reptile brain) servile, sole Source of any behavioral output or accomplishment. Knows Cultural Meme Reality. 
  5. Sadomasochistic Pain Body-Reactive Mind (L-Cerebellar Antisocial Brain) origin of “Satanic” insanity. Lives in xDARP Reality 
  6. Social Brain SOURCE (R-Cerebellar-Prosocial Brain), my God-Within: Source of Empathic Reality. 
  7. External Controllers (More powerful persons, institutions, or beliefs), to whom my Caretaker out of wisdom, ignorance, or weakness may defer control of my Throne. 
  1.  The properties of Society of Seven consciousness elements from the Dual Quadbrain Model show a remarkable similarity to the ancient seven chakras of Hinduism and Buddhism. Surprising new insights regarding the Society of Seven: the seven ancient chakras of Hinduism and Buddhism fit the Dual Quadbrain Model.
  1. The Crown Chakra (Sahasrara): Source
  2. The Brow Chakra (Ajna): Imagination 
  3. The Throat Chakra (Vishuddha): Reporter 
  4. The Heart Chakra (Anahata):Caretaker
  5. The Solar Plexus Chakra (Manipura): Servant
  6. The Sacral Chakra (Swadhisthana):Crocodile
  7. The Root Chakra (Muladhara): Pain Body


CHAPTER NR-4:  The Mathematical Processes of Induction and Deduction

Can Only be Used Within the Same Universe Level 

For centuries, confusion has arisen from inappropriate attempts to use deduction and induction across universe levels, instead of within them.  Induction is bottom-up in orientation and may be defined as going from many individual cases to begin to see the pattern of a new general principle arising.  In contrast, deduction is top down in view, as defined as recognizing that a specific case is an example of an already known general principle.

As seen in Figure 2, the use of the logical operations of induction and deduction are limited to transformations within a given, single universe level, i.e., moving from the particular to the general, or vice versa in structures or activities within only that level.  The same restriction applies to mathematics: it is functional on any single universe level, but apparently cannot function in moving between universe levels.  This is vividly demonstrated in the failure of many eminent physicists to develop a functional “Equation for Everything” (Lindley, 2001) after trying for over a century.  Possibly these misunderstandings have occurred because the Teacher concept of infinite universe structural levels, each with unique types and properties is not widespread.

The Non-Mathematical but Logical Processes of Synthesis and Dissection are Required in order to Move Between Universe Levels due to their Different Emergent Properties.

Also made visible in Figure 2, the process of moving up or down universe levels requires different types of logical operations than those used in moving within levels, namely that of synthesis and dissection.  Creating and assembling a higher-level structure from component parts of the universe level beneath is the process of building, construction, or creation, here called synthesis.  The life processes, such as cell division and multicellular growth often show automatic self-assembly (synthesis) over several universe levels.  Disassembling a structure into its component parts is the process of dissection, one at which auto mechanics or surgeons excel.  If dissection is not reversible, it is butchery or destruction.  Often, the process of discovery requires the use of all four of these unique reasoning processes.  Yet, presently in many areas of science, only deductive reasoning is valued as appropriate.  Inspection of the bottom half of Figure 2 will bring into focus the necessary but often unrecognized steps required before deduction finally can be used in the act of recognizing any new object as an Instead, we would happily place their well-being before our own, share our food with them, protect them from harm, endure periods of self-denial and sacrifice for the perhaps deferred gratification of seeing them grow, learn, thrive, and reproduce. We treat them how we would want to be treated and do nothing to harm him or her that we would not want someone else to do to us (adjusting appropriately for differences in age, gender, and skill level).  Now that’s a paradigm shift!

What becomes clear is that we actually are talking about paradigm shifts in this chapter. The usual concept of paradigm shifts are that of context shifts, for example when we talk about "stocks and bonds'', the question is, are we referring to investment activities on Wall St. or forms of punishment used by the Pilgrims? One cannot warp one context into the other.  They cannot be interconverted. Other classic illustrations of paradigm shifts include Kuhn's illustration of a figure that could be seen as an example of a more general theme. Actually, the use of hypothesis testing is appropriate only after final conceptualization of a general model has occurred. Yet, many manuscripts submitted to scientific journals, describing innovative observations, insights, conceptions, or models, are rejected today if they are not designed to test a narrow hypothesis by “falsification”, i.e., could a different process produce similar results, thus making false the presently proposed hypothesis? Ironically, the dualist, Popper (1934) made the falsification procedure excessively popular.


It is commonly overlooked that a previous (often unrecognized) conceptual idea or hunch is required by a process called Abduction, before it is possible to generate a model by Induction, much less before Deduction can be used to produce a hypothesis. Furthermore, it is often unappreciated that a preceding, conceptual model cannot be falsified (as in, if it’s not red, then it is not a car). An abducted, inductive model can only be overthrown by the discovery of a more accurate approximation of External Reality that fits the data better (and also generates better hypotheses). Ironically, in this way, scientific conceptual models are like those underlying religio-cultural beliefs. Falsification does them no harm. Only the appearance of more powerful (more useful, i.e., more survival enhancing) models can dismantle and replace them.


Common Cognitive Disorders 

A partial list from RL Leahy, SJF Holland, and LK McGinn’s Treatment Plans and Interventions for Depression and Anxiety Disorders (2012). 


  1. Mind reading: You assume you know what people think without having sufficient evidence for their thoughts, often unknowingly projecting your own thoughts instead. 
  2. Fortune-telling: You predict the future negatively. 
  3. Catastrophizing: You believe that what has or will happen will be so awful that you won’t be able to stand it. 
  4. Labeling: You assign global negative traits to yourself or others. 
  5. Discounting positives: You claim that the positive things you or others do are trivial. They don’t count. 
  6. Negative filtering: You focus almost exclusively on the negatives and seldom notice the positives. 
  7. Overgeneralizing: You perceive a global pattern of negatives on the basis of a single incident. 
  8. Dichotomous thinking: You view events or people in all-or-nothing terms. “If I think you have insulted me, then you are evil and my enemy.” 
  9. Blaming: You focus on the other person as the Source of your negative feelings. 
  10. Emotional reasoning: You let your negative feelings guide your interpretation of reality. 
  11. Inability to disconfirm: You reject any evidence or arguments that might contradict your negative thoughts.



Alexander, G.E., DeLong, M.R., & Strick P L. (1986). Parallel organization of functionally segregated circuits linking basal ganglia and cortex. Annual Reviews of Neuroscience, 9, 357381. 

Ackerman, H., Graber, S., Hertrich, L., & Daum, I., (1999). Cerebellar contributions to the perception of temporal cues within the speech and non-speech domain. Brain and Language, 67, 228-241. 

Anderson, C.M., Maas, L.C., Frederick, B.D., Bendor, J.T., Spence, T.J., Livne, F., Lukas, S.E., Fischman, A.J., Madras, M.K., Renshaw, P.F.,& Kaufman, M.J. (2006). Cerebellar vermis involvement in cocaine-related behaviors. Neuropsychopharmacology, 31, 1318-1326. 

Anderson, C.M., Teicher, T.H., Polcari, A., Renshaw, P.F. (2002). Abnormal T2 relaxation time in the cerebellar vermis of adults sexually abused in childhood: potential role of the vermis in stress-enhanced risk for drug abuse. Psychoneuroendocrinology 27, 231-244. 

Andreasen, N.C., O’Leary, D.S. (2003). Visualizing how one brain understands another: A PET study of theory of mind. American Journal of Psychiatry 160, 1954-1964. 

Arango, V., Ernsberger, P., Marzuk, P.M., Chen, J.S., Tierney, H., Stanley, M., Reis, D.J., & 

Mann. J.J. (1990). Autoradiographic demonstration of increased serotonin 5-HTand beta 

-adrenergic receptor binding sites in the brain of suicide victims. Archives of General Psychiatry, 47, 1038-1047. 

Arató, M., Bánki, C.M., Bissette, G., Nemeroff, C.B. (1989). Elevated CSF CRF in suicide victims. Biological Psychiatry, 25, 355-359. 

Atren, D.M., Ungerstedt, U., Ljungberg, T. (1977) Specific inhibition of hypothalamic self-stimulation by selective reuptake blockade of either 5-hydroxytryptamine or noradrenaline. Psychopharmacology (Berlin), 29, 177-180. 

Balkan, P. & Strayer, F.F. (1973). On reliability of conjugate lateral eye movements. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 36, 429-430. 

Ball, G.G., Micco, D.J. & Berentson, G.G. (1974). Cerebellar stimulation in the rat: complex stimulation-bound oral behaviors and self-stimulation. Physiology and Behavior, 13, 123127. 

Barker, W. W., Yoshii, F., Loewenstein, D.A., Chang, J.Y., Apicella, A., Pascal, S., Boothe, 

T.E., Ginsberg, M. D., & Duara, R. (1991). Cerebrocerebellar relationship during behavioral activation: a PET study. Journal of Cerebral Blood flow and Metabolism, 11, 48-54. 

Bastian, M.L., Sponberg, A.C., Suomi, S.J., & Higley, J.D. (2003). Long-term effects of infant rearing conditions on the acquisition of dominance rank in juvenile and adult rehesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Developmental Psychobiology, 42, 44-51. 

Beaumont, G, Young, A, & McManus, I.C. (1984). Hemisphericity: A critical review. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 1, 191-212. 

Behrens, T.E.J., Hunt, L.T., Woo, M.W., Woolrich, M.W. & Rushworth, M.F.S. (2008). 

Associative learning and social value. Nature, 456, 245-249. 

Bingham, B., McFadden, K, Zhang, X., Bhatnagar, S., Beck, S. & Valentino, R. (2011). Early adolescence as a critical window during which social stress distinctly alters behavior and brain norepinephrine activity. Neuropsychopharmacology, 36, 896-909. 

Blackburn, J.R.& Szumlinski, K.K. (1997). Ibogaine effects on sweet preference and amphetamine induced locomotion: implications for drug addiction. Behavioral and Brain Research, 89, 99-106. 

Bogen, J. E., (1969). The other side of the brain II. An appositional mind. Bulletin of the Los Angeles Neurological Society, 34, 135-162. 

Bogen, J. E., DeZure, R., Ten Houten, W. D., & Marsh, J. F., (1972). The other side of the brain. 

IV. The A/P ratio. Bulletin of the Los Angeles Neurological Society 37, 49-61. 

Bonelli, R. M. &Cummings, J. L. (2007). Frontal-subcortical circuitry and behavior. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 9, 141-151. 



Bontempi, B., Larent-Demir, C., Destrade, C., & Jaffard, R. (1999). Time-dependent reorganization of brain circuitry underlying long-term memory storage. Nature, 400, 671-675. 

Bottini, G., Corcoran, R., Sterzi, R., Paulesu, E., Schenone, P., Scarpa, P., Frackowiak, R. S. J., & Firth, C. D. (1994). Role of the right hemisphere in the interpretation of figurative aspects of language: a positron emission tomography activation study. Brain, 117, 1241-1253. 

Bovin G (1995). Alcohol-bad for the brain? Tdsskr. Nor Laegeforen, 115, 1079-1083. 

Bracha, V., Zhao, L., Wunderlich, D.A., Morrissy, S.J., & Bloedel, J. R. (1997). Patients with cerebellar lesions cannot acquire but are able to retain conditioned eyeblink reflexes. Brain, 120, 1401-1413. 

Bradshaw, J. L. & Nettleton, N. C. (1981). The nature of hemispheric specialization in man. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4, 51-91. 

Broca, P. (1863). Localisations des fonctions cérébrales. Siège de la faculté du langage articulé. Bulletin de la Société d' Anthropologie, 4, 200-208. 

Carhart-Harris, R.L. (2013). Psychedelic drugs, magical thinking, and psychosis. Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 84, doi; 10.1136/jnnp-2013-306103.17. 

Carhart-Harris, R.L., Erritzoe, D., Williams, T., Stone, J.M., Reed, L.J., Colasanti, A., Tyack, R.J., Leech R, Malizia AL, Murphy K, Hobden P, Evans J, Feilding A, Wise RG & Nutt D. 

(2012). Neural correlates of the psychedelic state as determined by fMRI studies with psilocybin. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA, 109, 2138-2143, Chap-

pell, P.B., Smith, M.A., Kilts, C.D., Bissette, G., Ritchie, J., Anderson, C.& Nemeroff, C.B. (1986). Alterations in corticotropin-releasing factor-like immunoreactivity in discrete rat brain regions after acute and chronic stress. Journal of Neuroscience 6, 2908-2914. 

Clarke, S., Kraftsik, R., Van Der Loos, H., & Innocente, G. (1989). Forms and measures of adult and developing human corpus callosum: is there sexual dimorphism? Journal of Comparative Neurology, 280, 213–230. 

Cohen, H. D., Rosen, R. C., & Goldstein, I. (1976). Encephalographic laterality changes during sexual orgasm. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 5, 189-199. 

Corbalis, M. C. (1980). Laterality and Myth. American Psychologist, 35, 284-295. 

Coren, S. (1992). The left-hander syndrome: The causes and consequences of left-handedness. New York: Free Press. 

Crick, F. (1994). The astonishing hypothesis: The scientific search for the soul. pp. 265–268. New York: Charles Scribner and Sons. 

Crowell, D. H., Jones, R. H., Kapuniai, L. E., & Nakagawa, J. K. (1973). Unilateral cortical activity in newborn humans: An early index of cerebral dominance. Science, 180, 205-208. 

Dabrowska, J., Hazra, R., Ahem, T.H., Guo, J.D., McDonald, A.J., Mascagni, F., Muller, J.F., Young, L.J., & Rainnie, D.G. (2011). Neuroanatomical evidence for reciprocal regulation of the corticotropin-releasing factor and oxytocin systems in the hypothalamus and the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis of the rat: Implications for balancing stress and affect. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 36, 1312-1326. 

Dannlowski, U., Stuhmann, A., Beutelmann, V., Zwanzger, P., Lanzen, T., Grotegerd, D., 

Domschke, K., Hoholf, C., Ohmmann, P., Bauer, J., Lindner, C., Pstert, C., Konrad, C., Arolt, V., Heindel, W., Suslow, T.,& Kugel, H. (2012). Limbic Scars: Long-term consequences of childhood maltreatment revealed by functional and structural magnetic resonance imaging. Biological Psychiatry, 71, 286-293. 

Davidson, R.J. (1984a). Hemispheric asymmetry and emotion. In K.Scherer & P.Eckman (Eds.) Approaches to emotion (pp. 39-57). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 

Davidson, R.J. (1984b). Affect, cognition, and hemispheric specialization. In C.E.Izard, J.Kagan & R.E.Zajonc (Eds.) Emotions, cognitions and behavior (pp. 320-365). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 

Davidson, R.J. (1988b). EEG measures of cerebral asymmetry: conceptual and methodological issues. International Journal of Neuroscience, 39, 71-89. 

Davidson, R.J. (1992). Anterior brain asymmetry and the nature of emotion. Brain and Cognition, 20, 125-151. 

Davidson, R. J., & Hugdahl, K. (1995). Brain asymmetry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 

Davidson, R.J. & Tomarken, A.J. (1989). Laterality and emotion: an electrophysiological approach. In F.Boller & J.Grafman (Ed.) Handbook of Neuropsychology, Vol. 3 (pp. 419441). Amsterdam: Elsevier. 

Dawes, J. (2008). Do Data Characteristics Change According to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International Journal of Market Research 50, 61–77. 

Dax, M. (1865). Lésions de la moitié gauche de l'encéphale coïncident avec l'oubli des signes de la pensée. Gazette hebdomadaire de médecine et de chirurgie, 2(2eme série), m 2. (read at Montpellier in 1836.). 

De Araujo, D.B., Ribero, S., Cecchi, G.A., Cravalho, F.M., Sanchez, T.A., Pinto, J.P., de Martinis, B.S., Crippa, J.A., Hallak, J.E., & Santos, A.C. (2012). Seeing with the eyes shut: neural basis of enhanced. 

imagery following ayahuasca ingestion. Human Brain Mapping, 33, 2550-2560.O’Hearn E, 

De Dru, C.K.W. (2012). Oxytocin modulates the link between adult attachment and cooperation through reduced betrayal aversion. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37, 871-880. 

De Smet, H.J., Aquifer, P., Verhoeven, J., & Marien, P. (2013). The cerebellum: Its role in language and related cognitive and affective functions. Brain and Language 127, 334-342. 

Descartes, R. (1637). La dioptrique. In Discours de la Methode, Leiden, Ian Maire. Adam and Tannery (1964–74), Vol. VI., p 129. 

Devinsky, O., Morrell, M. J., & Vogt, B. A. (1995). Contributions of anterior cingulate cortex to behavior. Brain, 118, 297–306. 

Desmond, J. E., Gabrieli, J. D. E., Wagner, A. D., Ginier, B.L., & Glover, G. H. (1997). Lobular patterns of cerebellar activation in verbal working-memory and finger-tapping tasks as revealed by functional MRI. Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 9675-9685. 

Devilbiss, D.M., Waterhouse, B.D., Berridge, C.W., & Valentino, R. (2012). Corticotropin releasing factor acting at the locus coeruleus disrupts thalamic and cortical sensory-evoked responses. Neuropsychopharmacology, 37, 2020-2030. 

Efron, R. (1990). The decline and fall of hemispheric specialization. New York: Erlbaum. Ekman, P. (2006). Darwin and Facial Expression: A Century of Research in Review. Malor Books. 

Ethan, T.M. & North, R.A. (1986). Actions of acetylcholine and nicotine on rat locus coeruleus neurons in vitro. Neuroscience, 19, 565-571. 

Fernando, S.C., Beblo, T., Schlosser, N., Terfehr, K., Otte, C., Lowe, B., Wolf, O.T., Spitzer, C., Driessen, M., & Wingenfeld, K. (2012). Associations of childhood trauma with hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function in borderline personality disorder and major depression. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37, 1659-1668. 

Fisher, H.L., Moffitt, T.E., Houls, R.N., Belsky, D.W., Argeneoult, L., & Caspi, A. (2012). 

Bullying victimization and risk of self-harm in early adolescence: longitudinal cohort study. British Medical Journal BMJ 2012;344:e3683. 

Fink, G. R., Halligan, P. W.,Marshall, J. C., Frith, C. D., Frackowiak, R. S. J., & Dolan, R. J. (1996). Where in the brain does visual attention select the forest and the trees? Nature, 382, 626–628. 

Fornito, A., Whittle, S., Wood, S. J., Velakoulis, D., Pantelis, C., & Yucel, M. (2006). The influence of sulcal variability on morphometry of the human anterior cingulate and paracingulate cortex. Neuroimage, 33, 843–854. 

Fornito, A., Wood, S. J., Whittle, S., Fuller, J., Adamson, C., Saling, M. M., et al. (2008). Variability of the paracingulate sulcus and morphometry of the medial frontal cortex: Associations with cortical thickness, surface area, volume, and sulcal depth. Human Brain Mapping, 29, 222–236. 

Fornito, A., Yucel, M., Wood, S., Stuart, G. W., Buchanan, J., Proffitt, T., et al. (2004). Individual differences in anterior cingulate/paracingulate morphology are related to executive functions in healthy males. Cerebral Cortex, 14, 424–431. 

Freud, S. (1920). Beyond the pleasure Principle. Hogarth Press, London. Freud, S. (1923). The Ego and the Id. Hogarth Press, London. 

Gazzaniga, M. S., Bogen, J. E., & Sperry, R. W. (1962). Some functional effects of sectioning the cerebral commissures in man. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 48, 1765–1769. 

Gazzaniga, M. S., Bogen, J. E., & Sperry, R. W. (1967). Dyspraxia following division of the cerebral commissures. Archives of Neurology, 16, 606–612. 

Gazzaniga, M. S. (1989). Organization of the human brain. Science, 245, 947–952. 

Gazzaniga, M. S. (2000). Cerebral specialization and interhemispheric communication: Does the corpus callosum enable the human condition? Brain, 123, 1293–1326. 

Gehring, W. J., & Willoughby, A. R. (2002). The medial frontal cortex and the rapid processing of monetary gains and losses. Science, 295, 2279–2282. 

Geschwind, D. H., Iacoboni, M., Mega, M. S., Zaidel, D. W., Cloughesy, T., & Zaidel, E. (1995). Alien hand syndrome: Interhemispheric motor disconnection due to a lesion in the midbody of the corpus callosum. Neurology, 45, 802–808. 

Geshwind, N. & Levitsky, W. (1968). Human brain: left-right asymmetries in temporal speech region. Science, 161, 186-187. 

Gounko, N.V., Swinny, J.D., Kalicharan, D., Jafari, S., Corteen, N., Seifi, M., Bakels, R., & van der Want, J.J.L. (2013). Corticotropin-releasing factor and urocortin regulate spine and synapse formation: structural basis for stress-induced neuronal remodeling and pathology. Molecular Psychiatry, 18, 86-92. 

Gray, J. (1992). Men are from Mars, women are from VenusA practical guide for improving communication and getting what you want in your relationships. Harper Collins, N.Y. 

Gresch, P.J., Barret, J.R., Sanders-Bush, E., & Smith, R.L. (2007). 5-Hydroxytryptamine (serotonin)2A receptors in rat anterior cingulate cortex mediate the discriminative stimulus properties of d-lysergic acid diethylamide. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 310,662-669. 

Grillon, C., Hale, E., Lieberman, L., Davis, A, Pine, D. S., & Ernst, M. (2015). The CRH-1 antagonist GSK561679 increases human fear but not anxiety as assessed by startle. Neuropsychopharmacology,40, 1-64-1071 

Grillon, C., Heller, R., Hirschhorn, E., Kling, M.A., Pine, D.S., Shulkin, J., & Vythilingam, M, (2011). Acute hydrocortisone treatment increases anxiety but not fear in healthy volunteers: a fear potentiated startle study. Biological Psychiatry, 69, 549-555. 

Gundel, H., O’Connor, M.F., Litterell, L., Fort, C., Lane, & R.D. (2003). Functional neuroanatomy of grief: an FMRI study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 1946-1953. 

Gur, R.E. (1975). Conjugate lateral eye movement as an index of hemispheric activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 751-757. 

Hancock, G. (2007) Supernatural. p 283. The Disinformation Co., N.Y. 

Hannestad, J., DellaGioia, N., & Bloch, M. (2011). Effects of antidepressant medication treatment on serum levels of inflammatory cytokines: A meta-analysis. Neuropsychopharmacology, 36, 2452-2459. 

Harlow, H.F. & Novak, M.A. (1973). Psychopathological perspectives. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 16, 461-478. 

Harmelen, A.L., van Tol, M.J., van der Wee, N.J.A., Veltman, D.J., Aleman, A., Spinhoven, P., van Buchem, M.A., Zitman, F.G., Pennix, B.W.J.H., & Elziga, B.M. (2010). Reduced medial prefrontal cortex volume in adults reporting childhood emotional maltreatment. Biological Psychiatry, 68, 832-838. 

Heath, R.G. (1977). Modulation of emotion with a brain pacemaker: Treatment for intractable psychiatric illness. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 165, 300-317. 

Heath, R. G., Raeburn, C., Llewellyn, R. C., & Rouchell, A. M. (1980). Cerebellar pacemaker for intractable behavioral disorders and epilepsy: Follow-up report. Biological Psychiatry, 15, 243-257. 

Heath, R. G., Rouchell, A. M., Llewellyn, R. C. & Walker, C. F. (1981). Cerebellar pacemaker patients: An update. Biological Psychiatry, 16, 953-962. 

Heinrichs, S.C., Pich, E.M., Miczek, K.A., Britton, K.T., & Koob, K.F. (1992). Corticotrophin releasing factor antagonist reduces emotionality in socially defeated rats via direct neurotropic action. Brain Research, 581, 190-197. 

Hellige, J. (1996). Hemispheric asymmetry for visual information processing. Acta Neurobiologica Experimentia, 56, 485-497. 

Helmuth, L. (2000). Early insults rewires Pain circuits. Science, 299, 521-522 ). 

Hennesey, M.B., Fitch, C., Jacobs, S., Deak, T., & Schiml, P.A. (2011). Behavioral effects of peripheral corticotrophin-releasing factor may be mediated by proinflammatory activity. Psychoneurocrinology 36, 996-1004. 

Henry, J. P. & Wang, S. (1998). Effects of early stress on affiliative behavior. 

Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23, 863-875. 

Herrmann, M. Rotte, M., Grubich, C. , Ebert, A, D., Schlit, K., Munte, T. F. & Heinze, H. J. (2001). Control of semantic interference in episodic memory retrieveal is associated with an anterior cingulate-prefrontal activation pattern. Human Brain Mapping, 13, 94-103. 

Hogle, J.M., Kay, J.T., & Curtin, J.J. (2010). Nicotine withdrawal increases threat-induced anxiety but not fear: Neuroadaptation in human addiction. Biological Psychiatry, 68, 719-725. 

Holdefer, R.N. & Jensen, R.A. (1987). The effects of peripheral D-amphetamine and epinephrine on maintained discharge in the locus coeruleus with reference to the modulation of learning and memory by these substances. Brain Research 417, 108-117. 

Holloway, R. L., Anderson, P. J., Defendini, R., & Harper, C. (1993). Sexual dimorphism of the human corpus callosum from three independent samples: relative size of the corpus callosum. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 92, 481–492. 

Huang, H., Gundapuneedi, T., & Rao, U. (2012). White matter disruptions in adolescents exposed to childhood maltreatment and vulnerability to psychopathy. Neuropsychopharmacology, 37, 2693-2701. 

Hubbard, L, R. (1950) Dianetics: The modern science of mental health. Hermitage House, N. Y. 

Hutsler, J., & Galuske, R.A.W. (2003). Hemispheric asymmetries in cerebral cortical networks. Trends in Neurosciences, 26, 428–435. 

Hutsler, J. J., Loftus, W. C., & Gazzaniga, M. S. (1998). Individual variation of cortical surface area asymmetries. Cerebral Cortex, 8, 11–17. 

Huster, R. J., Westerhausen, R., Kreuder, F., Schweiger, E., & Whittling, W. (2007). 

Morphologic asymmetry of the human anterior cingulate cortex. NeuroImage, 34, 888-895. 

Ide, A., Dolezal, C., Fernández, M., Labbé, E., Mandujano, R., Montes, S., et al. (1999). Hemispheric differences in variability of fissural patterns in parasylvian and cingulate regions of human brains. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 410, 235–242. 

Israel, S., Weisel, O., Ebstein, R.P., & Bomstein, G. (2012). Oxytocin, but not vasopressin, Increases both parochial and universal altruism. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 32, 1341-1344. 

Jager, G., & Postma, A. (2003). On the hemispheric specialization for categorical and coordinate spatial relations: A review of the current evidence. Neuropsychologia, 41, 504–515. 

James, W. (1878). Principles of Psychology, Holt, republished by Dover, 1950. 

James, W. (1902). The Varieties of Religious Experience, republished by Wilder, 2007. 

Jaynes, J. (1976). The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind, Houghton Mifflin, NY. 

Johnson, M. K., Raye, C. L, Mitchell, K.J., Touryan, S. R., Greene, E.J., & Nolen-Hoeksema, S. 

(2006). Dissociating medial frontal and posterior cingulate activity during self-reflection. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 1, 54-56. 

Jokinen, J., Chaltzofis, A., Hellstrom, C., Nordstrom, P., Uvnas-Moberg, K., & Asberg, M. (2012). Low CSF oxytocin reflects high intent in suicide attempters. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37, 482-490. 

Kennerly, S.W.,, Walton, M.E., Behrens, T.E.J., Buckley, M. J. & Rushworth, M.F.S. (2006). 

Optimal decision making and the anterior cingulate cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 940-947. 

Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A. W., 3rd, Cho, R. Y., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science, 303, 1023– 1026. 

Kinsbourne, M. (1972). Eye and head turning indicates cerebral lateralization. Science, 176, 539


Kinsbourne, M. (1974). Direction of gaze and distribution of cerebral thought processes. Neuropsychologia, 12, 279-281. 

Kleim, J. A., Vij, K., Ballard, D. H. & Greenough, W. T. (1997). Learning-dependent synaptic modifications in the cerebellar cortex of the adult rat persist for at least four weeks. Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 717-721. 

Klengel, T., Mehta, D., Anacker, C., Rex-Haffner, M., Pruessner, J.C., Pariante, C.M., Pace, 

T.W.W., Vercer, K.B., Mayberg, H.S., Bradley, B., Nemeroff, C.B., Holsboer, F., Heim, C.M., Ressler, K.J., & Binder, T.R. & E.B. (2013). Allele-specific FKBP5 DNA demethylation mediates gene-childhood trauma interactions. Nature Neuroscience, 16, 33-41. 

Knecht, S., Dräger, B., Deppe, M., Bobe, L., Lohmann, H., Floel, A., Ringelstein, E. B., & Henningsen, H. (2000). Handedness and hemispheric language dominance in healthy humans. Brain, 123, 2512-2518. 

Koestler, A. (1967). The Ghost within the Machine. McMillan, N.Y. Koestler, A. (1978). Janus. Vintage, N.Y. 

Kosslyn, S. M. (1987). Seeing and imagining in the cerebral hemispheres: A computational approach. Psychological Review, 94, 148–175. 

Kosslyn, S. M., Koenig, O., Barrett, A., Cave, C., Tang, J., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (1989). Evidence for two types of spatial representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Perception and Performance, 15. 723-735. 

Kosslyn, S. M., Chabris, C. F., Marsolek, C. J., & Koenig, O. (1992). Categorical versus coordinate spatial relations: Computational analyses and computer simulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 562–577. 

Lee, K.H., Bishop, G.A., Tian, J.B.,& King, J.S. (2004). Evidence for an axonal localization of the type 2 corticotropin-releasing factor during postnatal development lf the mouse cerebellum. Experimental Neurology, 187,11-22. 

Leysen, J.E., Janssen, P.M.F., & Niemegeers, C.J.E. (1989). Rapid desensitization and downregulation of 5-HTreceptors by DOM treatment. European Journal of Pharmacology, 163, 145-149. 

Levy, J. (1969). Possible basis for the evolution of lateral specialization of the human brain. Nature, 224, 614–615. 

Libet, B. (1982). Brain stimulation in the study of neuronal functions for conscious sensory experiences. Human Neurobiology, 1, 235–242. 

Lindell, A. K & Kidd, E. (2011). Why right brain teaching is half witted: A critique of the misapplication of neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5, 121-127. 

Lockhorst, G. J. (1985). An ancient Greek theory of hemispheric specialization. Clio Medica, 17, 33–38. 

Lamb, M. R., Robertson, L.C., & Knight, R. T. (1990). Component mechanisms underlying the processing of hierarchically organized patterns: Inferences from patients with unilateral cortical lesions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 16, 471-483. 

Laryea, G., Arnett, M.G., & Muglia, L.J. (2012). Behavioral studies and genetic alterations in corticotropin releasing hormone (CRH) neurocircuitry: Insights into human psychiatric disorders. Behavioral Science, 2, 135-171. 

Lee, K.H., Bishop, G.A., Tian, J.B., & King, J.S. (2004). Evidence for an axonal localization of the type 2 corticotropin-releasing factor receptor during development of the mouse cerebellum. Experimental Neurology, 187, 11-22. 

Leiner, H. C., Leiner, A. L., & Dow, R. S. (1991). The human cerebrocerebellar system: its computing, cognitive, and language skills. Behavioral Brain Research, 44, 113-128. 

Levisohn, L., Cronin-Golumb, A., & Schmahmann, J.D. (2000). Neuropsychological consequences of cerebellar tumor resection in children: cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome in a paediatric population. Brain, 123, 1041-1050. 

Levy, J. & Reid, M., (1976). Variations in writing posture and cerebral organization. Science, 194, 337-339. 

Logrip, M.L., Koob, G.F., & Zorrilla, E.P. (2011). Role of corticotropin-releasing factor in drug addiction: potential for pharmacological intervention. CNS Drugs, 25, 271-287. 

Luders, E., Rex, D. M., Narr, K. L., Woods, R. P., Jancke, L., Thompson, P. M., Mazziotta, J. C., & Toga, A. W. (2003). Relationships between sulcal asymmetries and corpus callosum size: Gender and handedness effects. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 1084–1093. 

McElroy, T., McCormick, M, Stroh, N., & Seta, J. J. (2012). An investigation of measurement validity for a hemispheric activation scale. Laterality, 17, 736-740. 

McGilchrist, I. (2009). The master and his emissary, the divided brain and the making of the western world. Yale University Press, New Haven. 

McGlone, J. (1980) Sex differences in human brain asymmetry: a critical survey. Behavioral and Brain Science. 3, 215-27. 

MacLean, P. D. (1990). The Triune Brain in Evolution: Role in Paleocerebral Functions. Plenum. 

Madsen, F.F., Jensen FT, Vaeth M, & Djurhaaus JC (1990). Regional cerebral blood flow in pigs estimated by microspheres. Acta Neurochir, 103, 139-147 

Makinodan, M,. Rosen, K.M., Itio, S.,& Corfas, G. (2012). A critical period for social experience dependent on oligodendrocyte maturation and myelination. Science, 337, 33571360.) 

Marvel, C. L. & Desmond, J.E., (2010). Functional topography of the cerebellum in verbal working memoryNeuropsycholical Review, 20, 271-279. 

Mash, D.C., Koverag, C.A., Pablo, J., Tyndale, R.F., Ervin, F.D., Williams, I.C., Singleton, E.G., & Mayor, M. (2000). Ibogaine: complex pharmacokinetics, concerns for safety, and preliminary efficacy measures. Annuals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 914, 394-401. 

Matteoli, R.L. (2010) The Munchausen Complex: Socialization of Violence and Abuse, 2nd ed, Nemean Press, Monterey, CA. 

Milner, B. (1968). Visual recognition and recall after right temporal lobe excision in man. Neuropsychologia, 6, 101–209. 

Minami, M., Kuraishi, Y., Yamaguchi, T., Nakai, S., Hirai, Y., & Satoh, M. (1991). 

Immobilization stress induces interleukin-1 beta mRNA in the rat hypothalamus. Neuroscience Letters, 123, 254-256. 

Morgan, B.E., Horn, A.R., & Bergman, N.J. (2011). Should neonates sleep alone? Biological Psychiatry,70, 817-825. 

Morisot, N., Rouibi, K., & Contarino, A., (2015). CRFreceptor deficiency eliminates the long-lasting vulnerability of motivational states induced by opiate withdrawal. Neuropsychopharmacology, 40, 1990-2000. 

Mondin, G.W., Morgan, W.P., Piering, P.N., et al. (1996). Psychological consequences of exercise deprivation in habitual exercisers. Medical Science of Sports Exercise, 28, 11991203. 

Morton, B. E. (1985b). Conflict and the quadrimental brain hypothesis. International Society for Research on Aggression Abstracts, 13, 106. 

Morton, B. E. (1989). The quadrimental brain as a neuroscience working hypothesis. Neuroscience Abstracts, 15, 729. 

Morton, B. E., (2001). Large individual differences in minor ear output during dichotic listening. Brain and Cognition, 45, 229-237. 

Morton, B. E., (2002). Outcomes of hemisphericity questionnaires correlate with unilateral dichotic deafness. Brain and Cognition, 49, 63-72. 

Morton, B. E., (2003a). Phased mirror tracing outcomes correlate with several hemisphericity measures. Brain and Cognition, 51, 294-304. 

Morton, B. E., (2003b). Two-hand line-bisection task outcomes correlate with several measures of hemisphericity. Brain and Cognition, 51, 305-316. 

Morton, B. E., (2003c). Asymmetry Questionnaire outcomes correlate with several hemisphericity measures. Brain and Cognition, 51, 372-374. 

Morton, B. E., (2003d). Hemisphericity of university students and professionals: Evidence for sorting during higher education. Brain and Cognition, 52, 319-325. 

Morton, B. E. & Rafto, S. E., (2006a). Corpus callosum size is linked to dichotic deafness and hemisphericity, not sex or handedness. Brain and Cognition, 62, 1-8. 

Morton, B. E. & Rafto, S. E., (2006b). Sex and aggression: corpus callosal size is linked to hemisiphericity, not gender. In Contemporary Research on Aggression,Pro Facultate No. 8 K.Osterman, K. Bjorkqvist, eds. Pp. 267-278, Abo Akademi University, Vasa, Finland. 

Morton, B. E. & Rafto, S. E., (2010). Behavioral laterality advance: Neuroanatomical evidence for the existence of hemisity. Personality and Individual Differences, 49. 34-42 

Morton, B.E., (2011). Neuroreality: A scientific religion to restore meaning, or How 7 brain elements create 7 minds and 7 realities. Megalith Books, Doral, FL. 

Morton, B.E., (2012a). Two human species exist: Their hybrids are dyslexics, homosexuals, pedophiles, and schizophrenics. Megalith Books, Doral, FL. 

Morton, B.E., (2012b). Left and right brain-oriented hemisity subjects show opposite behavioral preferences. Front. Physiol., 3:407.doi:10.3389/fphys.2012.00407 

Morton, B. E., (2013). Behavioral laterality of the brain: support for the binary construct of Hemisity. Front. Psychol. 4:683. doi:10.3389fpsyg.2013.00683. 

Morton, B.E. (2013) Psychedelic visions from the teacher: A neuroscientist's initiation to reality and spirituality. Megalith Books, Doral, FL. 

Morton, B.E. (2014) Beyond Men are from Mars. Megalith Books, Doral, FL. 

Morton, B. E., Svard, L. & Jensen, J. (2014). Further Evidence for Hemisity Sorting during Career Specialization. Journal of Career Assessment, 22, 317-328. 

Mosch, N.M., Riese, H., Reijneveld, S.A., Bakker, M.P., Verhulst, F.C., Ormel, J., Oldehiinkel, A.J., et al. (2006). Cortical serotonin 5-HT2a receptor binding and social communication in adults with Asperger’s Syndrome: An in vivo SPECT study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 934-936, 

Nakagawa, Y., Suzuki, T, Ishii, H., Ogata, A., & Nakae, D. (2010). Mitochondrial dysfunction and bio transformation of beta-carboline alkaloids, harmine and harmaline, on isolated rat hepatocytes. Chemical and Biological Interactions, 188, 393-403 

Nieuwenhuys, R., Voogd, J., & van Huijzen, C. (1981). The Human Central Nervous System, Springer-Verlag, N.Y 

Nguyen, K.T., Deak, T., Owens, S.M., Kohno, T., Feshner, M., Watkins, L.R., & Maier, S.F. (1998). Exposure to acute stress induces brain interleukin-1beta protein in the rat. Journal of Neuroscience,18. 2239-2246. 

Nielsen, J. A., Zielinski, B. A., Ferguson, M. A., Lainhart, J. E., & Anderson, J. S. (2013) An evaluation  of the left-brain vs. right-brain hypothesis with resting state functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging. PLoS ONE 8(8): e71275. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0071275. 

O’Donovan, A., Epel, E., Lin, J., Wolkowitx, O., Cohen, B., Maguen, S., Metzler, T., Lenoci, M., Blackburn. E., & Neylan, O.(2011). Childhood trauma associated with short leukocyte telomere length in Posttraumatic TC Stress Disorder. Biological Psychiatry, 70, 465-471. 

O’Hearn, E, & Molliver, M.E. (1997). The olivocerebellar projection mediates ibogaine-induced degeneration of purkinje cells: A model of indirect trans-synaptic excitotoxicity Journal of Neuroscience 17, 8828-8841. 

O’Hearn, E, Long, D.B., & Molliver, M.E. (1993). Ibogaine induces glial activation in Parasagittal zones of the cerebellum. Neuroreport 4, 299-302. 

O’Hearn, E, & Molliver, M.E., (1993), Degeneration of Purkinje cells in parasagittal zones of the cerebellar vermis after treatment with ibogaine or harmaline, Neuroscience, 55, 303-310. 

Ornstein, R. (1997). The right mind: Making sense of the hemispheres. New York: Harcourt Brace and Company. 

Olpe, H.R., Jones, R.S.G., & Steinmann, M.W. (1983). The locus coeruleus: actions of psychoactive drugs. Experientia, 39, 242-249. 

Oropeza, V.C., Page, M.E., Van Bockstaele, E.J. (2005). Systemic administration of 

WIN 55,212-2 increases (inhibitory) norepinephrine release in the rat frontal cortex. Brain Research, 1046, 45-54. 

Palomero-Gallagher, N., Mohlberg, H., Zilles, K., & Vogt, B. (2008). Cytology and receptor architecture of human anterior cingulate cortex. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 508, 906– 926. 

Parker, K.L., Narayanan, N.S.& Andreason, N.C. (2014). The therapeutic potential of the cerebellum in schizophrenia. Frontiers of Systemic Neuroscience. 8, 163-176. 

Paus, T. (2001). Primate anterior cingulate cortex: Where motor control, drive, and cognition interface. Nature Reviews of Neuroscience, 2, 417–424. 

Paus, T., Otaky, N., Caramanos, Z., MacDonald, D., Zijdenbos, A., D’Avirro, D., et al. (1996). In vivo morphometry of the intrasulcular grey matter in the human cingulate, paracingulate, and superior-rostral sulci: Hemispheric asymmetries, gender differences, and probability maps. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 376, 664–673. 

Paus, T., Tomaiuolo, F., Otaky, N., MacDonald, D., Petrides, M., Atlas, J., et al. (1996). Human cingulate and paracingulate sulci: Pattern, variability, asymmetry, and probabilistic map. Cerebral Cortex, 6, 207–214. 

Peoples, L. (2002). Will, anterior cingulate cortex, and addiction. Science, 296, 1623-1624. 

Pesce, M.L., Speranza, S., Franceschelli, V., Ialenti, I., Iezzi, A., Patruno, A., Rizzuto, C., Robazza, M., Lutis, M., Felaco, A., & Grilli, B. (2012). Positive correlations between serum interleukin-1b and state anger in rugby athletes. Aggressive Behavior, 00, 1-8. 

Pissiota, A., Frans, O., Fernandez, M. von Knorring, L., Fischer, H., & Fredrikson, M. (2002). Neurofunctional correlates of posttraumatic stre ss disorder: a PET symptom provocation study. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 252, 68-75. 

Pitts, D.K., & Marwah, J. (1988). Cocaine and central monoaminergic neurotransmission: 

a review of electrophysiological studies and comparison to amphetamines and antidepressants, Life Science 42, 949-968. 

Proverbio, A. M., Zani, A., Gazzaniga, M. S., & Mangun, G. R. (1994). ERP and RT signs of a rightward bias for spatial orienting in a split-brain patient. Neuroreport, 5, 2457–2461. 

Pujol, J., Lopez, P. J., Deus, J., Cardone, N., Vallejo, J., Capdevila, A., et al. (2002). Anatomical variability of the anterior cingulate gyrus and basic dimensions of human personality. Neuroimage, 15, 847–855. 

Ramos, L., Hicks, C., Kevin, R., Caminer, A. et al. (2013). Acute prosocial effects of oxytocin and vasopressin when given alone or in combination with 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine in rats: involvement of the V1A receptor. Neuropsychopharmacology, 38, 2249-2259. Rapkin, A.J., Berman, S.M., Mandelkern, M.A., Silverman, K.H.S., Morgan, M., & London, E.D. (2011). Neuroimaging evidence of cerebellar involvement in premenstrual dysphoric disorder. Biological Psychiatry, 69, 374-380. 

Redmond, D.E. & Huang, Y.H. (1979). Current concepts. II: New evidence for a locus coeruleus norepinephrine connection with anxiety. Life Science 25, 2149-1262. 

Reiman, E. M., Raichle, M.. E., Robins, E., Mintun, M. A., Fusselman, M. J., Fox, P.T., Price, J. L., & Hackman, K. A. (1989). Neuroanatomical correlates of a lactate-induced panic attack. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 493-500. 

Reine, A. (1991). Are lateral-eye movements a valid index of functional hemispheric asymmetries? British Journal of Psychology, 82, 129-135. 

Riklan, M., Cullinan, T., & Cooper, I. S. (1977). Tension reduction and alerting in man following chronic cerebellar stimulation for the relief of spasticity or intractable seizures. 

Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 164, 176-181. 

Robertson, L. C., & Lamb, M. R. (1991). Neuropsychological contributions to theories of part/whole organization. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 299–330. 

Rosell, D.R., Thompson, J.L., Slifstein, M., Xu, X., Frankle, W.G., New, A.A.S., Goodman, M., 

Weinstein, S.R., Laruelle, M., Abi-Dargham, A., & Slever, L.J. (2010). Increased serotonin 2A receptor availability in the orbitofrontal cortex of physically aggressive personality disordered patients. Biological Psychiatry, 67,1154-1162. 

Roxo, M.R., Franceschini, P. R., Zubaran, C., Kleber, F.D., & Sander, J. W. (2011). The limbic system conception and its historical evolution. Scientific World Journal, 11, 2428-2441. 

Savic, D., Knezevic, G., Damjanovic, S., Spiric, Z., & Matic, G. (2012). Is there a biological difference between trauma-related depression and PTSD? DST says ‘NO’. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37,1516-1520. 

Schenberg, E.E., de Castrol Comis, M.A., Chaves, B.R., & da Silveria, D.X. (2014). Treating 

drug dependence with the aid of ibogaine: a retrospective study. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 28, 993-1000. 

Schenkenberg, T., Bradford, D. C., & Ajax, E. T. (1980). Line bisection and unilateral visual neglect in patients with neurological impairment. Neurology, 30, 509–517. 

Schiffer, F. (1996). Cognitive ability of the right hemisphere: Possible contributions to psychological function. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 4, 126–138. 

Schiffer, F. (1997). Affect changes observed with right versus left lateral visual field stimulation in psychotherapy patients: Possible physiological, psychological, and therapeutic implications. Comparative Psychiatry, 38, 289–295. 

Schiffer, F. (1998). Of two minds: The revolutionary science of dual-brain psychology. Free Press, N.Y. 

Schiffer, F., Teicher, M. H., Anderson, C., Tomoda, A., Polcari, A., Navalta, C. P., & Andersen, 

S. L. (2007). Determination of hemispheric emotional valence in individual subjects: a new approach with research and therapeutic implications. Behavioral and Brain Function, 3, 13. 

Schmahmann, J. D. (1991). An emerging concept: The cerebellar contribution to higher function. Archives of Neurology, 48, 1178-1187 

Schmahmann, J.D. & Sherman, J.C. (1997). Cerebellar affective syndrome. International Review of Neurobiology, 41, 433-440. 

Schmid, M.C., Mrowka, S.W, Turdchi, J., Saunders, R.C., Wilke, M., Peters, A.J., Ye, F.Q., & Leopold, D. A., (2010) Blindsight depends on the lateral geniculate nucleus. Nature, 466, 373-377. 

Schneiderman, I, Zagoory-Sharon, O., Leckman, J.F., Feldman, R. (2012). Oxytocin during the initial stages of romantic attachment: Relations to couples interactive reciprocity. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37,1277-1285. 

Schreurs, B. G., Gusev, P. A., Tomsic, D., Alkon, D. L., & Shi, T. (1998). Intracellular correlates of acquisition and long-term memory of classical conditioning in purkinje cell dendrites in slicees of rabbit cerebellar lobule HVI. Journal of Neuroscience, 18, 5498-5507. 

Schunck, T., Erb, G., Mathis, A., Gilles, C., Namer, I.J., Hode, Y., Demaziere, A., Luthringer, 

R., & Macher, J.P. (2006). Functional magnetic resonance imaging characterization of CCK4-induced panic attack and subsequent anticipatory anxiety. Neuroimage, 31, 1197-1208. 

Schuz, A., & Preissl, H. (1996). Basic connectivity of the cerebral cortex and some considerations on the corpus callosum. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 20, 567–570. 

Sejnowski, T. J. (2004). In memoriam: Francis H.C. Crick. Neuron, 43, 619–621. 

Shanon, B. (2002). Antipodes of the Mind. Charting the Phenomenology of the Ayahuasca Experience. Oxford University Press, London. 

Shiffer, F., (1996). Cognitive ability of the right hemisphere: possible contributions to psychological function. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 4,126-138. 

Shintani, F., Kanba, S., Nakaki, T., Nibuya, M., Kinoshita, N., Suzuki, E., Yagi, G., Kato, R., & Asai, M. (1993). Interleukin-1b augments release of norepinephrine, dopamine, and serotonin in the rat anterior hypothalamus. Journal of Neuroscience 13, 3574-3581. 

Simeon, D., Bartz, J., Hamilton, H., Crystal, S., Braun, A., Ketay, S., & Hollander, E. (2011). Oxytocin administration attenuates stress reactivity in borderline personality disorder: A pilot study. Psychoneuroendocrinology 36, 1416-1421. 

Smith, L. C. & Moscovitch, M. (1979). Writing posture, hemispheric control of movement and cerebral dominance in individuals with inverted and non-inverted hand postures during writing. Neuropsychologia, 17, 637-644. 

Somerville, L. H., Heatherton, T. F. & Kelley, W. M. (2006). Anterior cortex responds differentially to expectancy and social rejection. Nature Neuroscience 9, 1007-1008 

Sperry, R. W. (1968). Hemispheric disconnection and unity in conscious awareness. American Psychologist, 23, 723–733. 

Sperry, R. (1982). Some effects of disconnecting the cerebral hemispheres. Science, 217, 1223– 1226. 

Springer, S. P., & Deutch, G., (1998). Left Brain, Right Brain: Perspectives from Cognitive Neuroscience. 5th edn. New York, Freeman 

Squire, L. R., Ojemann, J. G., Miezin, F. M., Petersen, S.E., Videen, T. O., & Raiche, M. (1992). Activation of the hippocampus in normal humans: A functional anatomical study of memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 89, 1837-1841. 

Stephan, K. E., Fink, G. R., & Marshall, J. C. (2006). Mechanisms of hemispheric specialization: 

Insights from analysis of connectivity. Neuropsychologia, 45, 209–228. 

Strelnikov, N.N., Vorobyev, V.A., Chernigovskaya, T.V., & Medvedev, S.V. (2006).) Prosodic clues to syntactic processing a PET and ERP study. NeuroImage, 29, 1127-1134 

Supple, W.F., Cranney, J.,& Leaton, R.N. (1988). Effects of lesions on the cerebellar vermis on VMH lesion-induced hyper defensiveness, spontaneous mouse killing, and freezing in rats. Physiology of Behavior, 42, 145-153. 

Supple, W.F., Leaton, R.N.,& Fanselow, M. (1987). Effects of cerebellar vermal lesions on species-specific fear responses and taste aversion learning in rats. Physiology and Behavior, 39, 579-586. 

Swaab DF, AM Bao, PJ Lucassen (2005). The stress system in the human brain in depression and degeneration. Ageing Research Reviews, 4, 141-194. 

Tallman JF, SM Paul, P Skolinck, DS Galliger, 1980. Receptors for the age of anxiety. Science, 207, 274-281. 

Tannen, D. (1986). That’s not what I meant! How conversational style makes or breaks relationships. Ballantine Books, N.Y. 

Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand, Women and men in conversation. Ballantine Books, N.Y. 

Tannen, D. (1994). Talking from 9 to 5, Women and men in the workplace: Language, sex and power. Avon Books, N.Y. 

Teng, E. & Squire, L. R. (1999). Memory for places learned long ago is intact after hippocampal damage. Nature, 400, 675-677. 

Tolle E (1999). The power of now: A guide to spiritual enlightenment. Namaste Publishing, Vancouver. 

Trulson ME & Crisp T (1983). Tolerance develops to LSD while the drug is exerting its maximal behavioral effects: Implications for the neural basis of tolerance. European Journal of Pharmacology, 96, 317-320. 

Valentino RJ, E Van Bockstaele (2001). Opposing regulation of the locus coeruleus by Corticotrophin releasing factor and opioids. Potential for reciprocal interactions between stress and opioid sensitivity. Psychopharmacology, 158, 331-342. 

van Kleek, M. H. (1989). Hemispheric differences in global versus local processing of hierarchical visual stimuli by normal subjects: New data and a meta-analysis of previous studies. Neuropsychologia, 27, 1165-1178 

van Zuiden, M., Geuze, E., Willeman, H.L.D.M., Vermetten, E., Maas, M., Amarouchi, K., 

Kavelaars, A.,& Heijnen, C.J. (2012). Glucocortcoid receptor pathway components predict Posttraumatic Stress Disorder symptom development: a prospective study. Biological Psychiatry, 71, 309-316. 

Verbanck, P., Seutin, V., Massotte, L., & Dresse, A. (1991). Yohimbine can induce ethanol tolerance in and in vitro preparation of rat locus coeruleus. Alcohol Clinical Experimental Research, 15, 1036-1039. 

Victoria, N.C., Inoue, K., Young, L.J., & Murphy, A.Z. (2013). Long-term dysregulation of brain corticotrophin and glucocorticoid receptros and stress reactivity by single early-life Pain experience in male and female rats. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38, 3015-3028. 

Vollenweider, F.X., Vollenweider-Scherpenhuyzen, M.F., Babler, A., Vogel, H., & Hell, D. (1998). Psilocybin induces schizophrenia-like psychosis in humans via a serotonin-2 agonist action. Neuroreport, 9, 3897-3902. 

Vogt, B. A. (2005). Pain and emotion interactions of the cingulate cortex. Nature Reviews of Neuroscience, 6, 533–544. 

Vogt, B. A., Nimchinsky, E. A., Vogt, L. J., & Hof, P. R. (1995). Human cingulate cortex: 

Surface features, flat maps, and cytoarchitecture. Journal of Comparative Neurology,359


Wada, J. A.. (1977). Prelanguage and fundamental asymmetry of the infant brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 299, 370-379. 

Wan, X., Cheng, K., & Tanaka, K. (2015). Neural encoding of opposing strategy values in anterior and posterior cingulate cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 18, 752-759 

Wang, C., Istvan, U., Schomer, D.L., Marincovic, K. & Halgren, E. (2005). Responses of human anterior cingulate cortex microdomains to error detection, conflict monitoring, stimulus response mapping, familiarity, and orienting. Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 604-613. 

Watson, P.J. (1978). Nonmotor Functions of the Cerebellum. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 944-67 Weintraub, S. & Mesulam, M. M. (1987). Right cerebral dominance in spatial attention. Archives of Neurology, 44, 621-625. 

Weisenberg, T., & McBride, K. E. (1935). Aphasia: A clinical and psychological study. New York: Commonwealth Fund (cited in Springer, S. P., & Deutsch, G. (1999). Left brain, right brain: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (5th ed., p. 361). New York: W.H. Freeman.). 

Whittle, S., Allen, N.B., Fornito, A., Lubman, D.I., Simmonds, J.G., Pantelis, C., & Yucel, M. (2008). Variations in ACC folding patterns are related to individual differences in temperament. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 172, 68-74. 

Wittling, W. (1990). Psychophysiological correlates of human brain asymmetry: Blood pressure changes during lateralized presentation of an emotionally laden film. Neuropsychologia, 28, 457-470. 

Wittling, W. & Pfluger, M. (1990). Neuroendocrine hemisphere asymmetries: Salivary cortisol secretion during lateralized viewing of emotion-related and neutral films. Brain and Cognition, 14: 243-265. 

Wittling, W. & Roschmann, R. (1993). Emotion-related hemispheric asymmetry: Subjective emotional responses to laterally presented films. Cortex, 29, 431-448. 

Wolford, G., Miller, M. B., & Gazzaniga, M., (2000), The left hemisphere’s role in hypothesis formation. Journal of Neuroscience, 20(RC64), 1-4. 

Xu, Z., Chang, L.W., Slikker, W., Ali, S.F., Rountre, R.L., & Scallet, A.C. (2000). A dose response study of ibogaine-induced neuropathology in the rat cerebellum. Toxicological Science, 57, 95-101. 

Yang, G. & Iadecola, C. (1998). Activation of cerebellar climbing fibers increases cerebellar blood flow: role of glutamate receptors, nitric oxide, and cGMP. Stroke, 29, 499-507) 

Yates, M., Leake, A., Candy, J.M., Fairbairn, A.F., McKeith, I.G., &Ferrier, I.N. (1990). 5HTreceptor changes in major depression. Biological Psychiatry, 27, 498-296. 

Yeganeh-Doost, P.,Gruber, O., Falkaj, P., & Schmitt, A. (2011). The role of the cerebellum in Schizophrenia: from cognition to molecular pathways. Clinics (Sao Paulo) Jun,66(Suppl 1) 71-77. 

Yucel, M., Stuart, G. W., Maruff, P., Velakoulis, D., Crowe, S. F., Savage, G., et al. (2001). Hemispheric and gender-related differences in the gross morphology of the anterior cingulate/paracingulate cortex in normal volunteers: An MRI morphometric study. Cerebral Cortex, 11, 17–25. 

Zenhausern, R. (1978). Imagery, cerebral dominance, and style of thinking: A unified field model. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 12, 381–384. 



Bruce Eldine Morton, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus at the John

A. Burns School of Medicine of the University of Hawaii was born Southern California in 1938. After Completing the M.S .and Ph.D. degrees in Biochemistry at the University of Wisconsin in 1965, he spent post-doctoral periods as a Research Fellow at Wisconsin’s Institute for Enzyme Research, at M.I.T., and at Harvard Medical School.

He was then hired by the School of Medicine at the University of Hawaii, 1969. There he directed a neuroscience research laboratory until long after his "retirement" in 1995. In 1974 Dr. Morton set a world record for distance flown in a hang-glider. He was also active in Gymnastics, SCUBA diving, windsurfing, snowboarding, and now dual-purpose motorcycle tours of Mayan ruins. Dr. Morton has been a member of many choral societies and was in concert with the Boston Symphony. He also spent sabbaticals at USC, Stanford, and at the University of Michigan. He is a member of numerous professional societies including the International Society for Research on Aggression.

In 2014 his eighty fourth publication was: BE Morton, L Svard, and J Jensen, Further Evidence for Hemisity Sorting during Career Specialization, Journal of Career Assessment22, 315-326 (2014). His four books: Neurorealism: A Scientific Religion; Two Human Species Exist; Psychedelic Visions; and Beyond Men are from Mars are available from under his name: Bruce Eldine Morton. From his home base in Guatemala, Dr. Morton continues his research on gaining access to the wisdom of the trapped genetic Higher Intelligence hidden within each of us.
He may be contacted at
His website is



Tags: Reference

Table Of Contents

MODULAR CONSCIOUSNESS_html_fc21c1e3fca112bb.gif

Child Pages

My Recent Modifications

Copywrite © 2020 LOGICMOO (Unless otherwise credited in page)