Melonhead attention powers

I believe one of the reasons melonheads are extremely adaptive is because whatever “attention” is, melon-backs (MMs, MTs, MCs, etc.) have a lot more of it. This is taken from the pedestrian observation that they have a lot of general-purpose willpower that can be applied to adapt to and solve problems in all sorts of weird situations. In contrast, neanderthals and sapiens appear to be extremely adapted to specific ecological niches. It’s not just that melony melonmen use their mental energy more efficiently (that is, general intelligence), they appear to have more of it to spend as well. In particular, I expect they have much more of the “perceptual glue” type of attention.

Attention is one of those words that has a general meaning outside of psychological and perceptual science, but in these areas it has specific meanings. Attention often seems to work as a spotlight, highlighting certain aspects of visual input and not others. In other ways, attention seems to serve as perceptual glue, pulling together different aspects of a stimulus into perceptual objects…

Imagine that I show you an image with many distracters and a single target, such as finding a green horizontal line as quickly as possible among many green vertical lines. This is a fairly easy task because of the horizontal line’s novel orientation. If I were to ask you to find a green horizontal line again but this time there were red horizontal lines along with the green vertical line distracters, that would be harder. Attention researches call this a conjunction search.

1-s2-0-s0896627302010917-gr2

Most people have the sense that they have to look at all of the distracters and dismiss them one at a time until they happen on the target. That is not the case, but you do have to allocate some attention to each target. As you do, you seem to be able to combine the information about these different features. Attention is what enables you to combine the different features of a stimulus. You can scan for color or orientation, but to scan for both at once requires attention.

Peter Vishton
Understanding the Secrets of Human Perception
(Course guidebook, lecture 14)

I think the reason for the high observed levels of willpower comes down to being better at these conjunction searches in chaotic situations with many distractors having many of these qualities. And that’s because willpower is the opposite of decision fatigue: the more willpower you have, the more of it you have to spend to reach a state of decision fatigue.

Here’s my theory: The reason for this may be due to an attitude of “beginning with the end in mind” at a very deep level. It’s like when you imagine the color red in the abstract and red objects in your environment “pop out” at you. If you are able to imagine the exact object you’re looking for ahead of time, the pop out effect ought to be strengthened, which would make you much more efficient in a conjunction search.

search

Now, here’s the most tenuous part of this theory…I think decisions are like visual conjunction searches for the best possible future you can imagine, according to your abstract values. In order to make a decision, you’re imagining the potential outcomes and literally comparing them to your “vision” of an ideal outcome. But instead of looking for values like color, orientation, and shape, you’d be comparing possible outcomes in terms of your dominance, prestige, righteousness, dopamine, or whatever your values are.

If this is true, then a person with a clearer abstract vision of what they value is going to be much more efficient in these imaginary futures conjunction searches, and therefore suffer less decision fatigue per decision, and thus have more willpower. This may be due to a preference for dorsal stream-style, visually guided action planning perception over ventral stream-style conscious perception, which would be predicted by Aeoli’s bowl cut as applied to enlarged parietal lobes. Effectively, melonheads could be described as having more willpower due to prioritizing objects in the environment within hierarchies of functional meaning and value, because they are predisposed to treat most things in the environment as functional rather than objective and self-existent.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Melonhead attention powers

  1. Boneflour says:

    DANKPOSTING RETURNS

  2. Sammykid says:

    The parietal lobe is related to mathematical and spatial thought, so in that respect I could see it being related to spatially manipulating real world outcomes. I think spatial manipulation is related to cognitive empathy in a way that lets someone manipulate their thoughts in multiple ways that eventually allows them to see where the person is coming from. This might be a real-world advantage melons have over everyone else. a logical and spatially dominant brain will lead to better simulations of different scenarios, thus amplifying cognitive empathy as well and future orientation. I do have a question on what purpose the occipital would serve here though. which do you think is a better simulator, the parietal or occipital? I know that the occ is necessary for visual perception, so would it function as a visual simulator, stimulating dream-like simulations, and the parietal functioning like a logical simulator of thought and action? I know it’s been discussed on other forums, where there exists a bit of discussion on the parietal and Game theory and how it allows the logical cultivation of possible scenarios into action.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      The connection between dorsal stream preference and parietal elongation relies only on the additional premises that streams prefer to course through dominant lobes and volume correlates with lobe dominance. Your reasoning may be correct but it’s a bit more involved than mine.

      >I do have a question on what purpose the occipital would serve here though. which do you think is a better simulator, the parietal or occipital?

      They act at different abstraction levels. Generally the parietal is more adaptive for modern living, just as coding Python will give you better job prospects than coding in binary.

  3. bicebicebice says:

    “Here’s my theory: The reason for this may be due to an attitude of “beginning with the end in mind” at a very deep level.” = MAGA

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      More generally, having a consistent One Thing that drives you, which is the distinguishing trait of Great Men.

      • bicebicebice says:

        Itz a double-edging sword imo. The NEET-autisté epidemic, isn’t that just amplified by population explosions and the basterd offspring of lords and laidies over time, which is why Trump is so supported by the internetists, that then spend their time digitally dominating pixels instead of going outside domesticating or destroying the sapes, having already satisfied both sides of the deal via tools and an ideological archetype?

        If the nature of the sape is being a wild cannibal rapist headhunter, then an IQ injection will just make hime more creative, and a minus T-score over time for a thard will just make him weaker in the physical-mental-tribal needed to remove a threat, which makes the internet way more viable instead. For a while, but in the end useless if it can’t be used as a tool to get T scores back up again. The genetic lottery should not exist at all, it might spark a creative outburst but then itz back to baseline again, it seems.
        Mars or no deal, consolation prize being techno amish with a little bing bing on weekends when the solar charger can run the bing bing station for a few hours.

        Drive with no energy thats how kave men go bad and dead, or realize their limits and “give up” but scale down instead.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN5gqfsxtHM looks like white roving rape gangs is back on the menu, sape dna comes with a time bomb.

  4. Robotnick says:

    I’ve been thinking for a while that there is a hemispheric (left brain/right brain) aspect to this as well.

    “Damage to this lobe in the right hemisphere results in the loss of imagery, visualization of spatial relationships and neglect of left-side space and left side of the body. Even drawings may be neglected on the left side. Damage to this lobe in the left hemisphere will result in problems in mathematics, long reading, writing, and understanding symbols. The parietal association cortex enables individuals to read, write, and solve mathematical problems. ”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parietal_lobe

    Left side of the parietal responsible for Math and semantics while the right side responsible for certain spatial abilities and imagery. I wasn’t surprised by this.

    Some people in general will be either more right brained or left brained, more “creative”, “intuitive”, etc… or more rationalistic, etc… So among Melonheads you have Goethe, who seems very right-brained, vs… idk some uber pragmatic closed-minded melon who is more left-brained.

    Also, Back cone and Backswept seem to be more parietal proper. This is where you will find many grand-strategists, who deal with large scale spatial endeavors like battlefield strategy and whatnot.
    The Occ seems to deal more with raw perception (picking up on things, noticing movement, differences, etc..) but the parietal deals with the position of objects in space.

    As you move more towards midcone and front cone you move away from parietal towards frontal. And instead of a spatial focus you have more “Meta”. Higher abstraction dealing with ethical/philosophical axioms and whatnot or something? Archetypes, etc…

    Just pulling this out of my ass and dumping it here, the latter especially.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s