Kohl et al., (2001)
…the importance of human non-verbal signals is based upon information processing, which occurs in the limbic system, and without any cognitive (cortical) assessment. Affect thus does not require conscious interpretation of signal content. Underlying this fact is that affect dominates social interaction and it is the major currency in social interactions [6]. Affective reactions can occur without extensive perceptual and cognitive encoding. They are made with greater confidence than cognitive judgments, and can be made sooner [5, 7].
Jun 27, 2015 by Kristin Magaldi
Excerpt:
It may seem like your intelligence is being undermined at first, but that is not the case at all; in fact, this just goes to show what an amazing machine the brain is. We can create, process, and reason, all without ever knowing we’re doing it.
Oct 13, 2013 by Jon Lieff
Excerpt:
With signals of danger, such as sounds or smells, large numbers of genes become activated at the same time in large networks. The greater the aggression, the greater are the genetic changes. The genes and behavior change together. Hearing a pleasant signal or a danger signal immediately activates and dampens completely different genetic networks. In animal research these gene changes occurred within minutes.
My comment: The speed of the changes attests to the fact that responses are classically conditioned. If conscious choice was required, we could not possibly adapt as quickly as is required to survive in an ever-changing epigenetic landscape. RNA-mediated events link metabolic networks and genetic networks from the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA. Serious scientists have known about the role of social odors and unconscious affect for more than a decade.
Excerpt:
…hypotheses regarding the human mind must be tethered to a discipline we call neuroevolutionary psychobiology. In the final analysis, from a molecular biological perspective at least, the use of animal models should be – indeed, must be – the approach that is most valuable for unraveling the biological substrates that form the cornerstones of the human mind and behavior.” (p. 114)
Excerpt:
In other mammals, the olfactory link among hormones, pheromones, and a conspecific’s hormones and behavior would readily establish that visually perceived facial attractiveness, bodily symmetry, attractive WHRs, and genetically determined HLA attractiveness, are due to the neuroendocrinological conditioning of visual responsivity to olfactory stimuli.
Excerpt (with my emphasis):
Morsella and his coauthors’ groundbreaking theory, published online on June 22 by the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences, contradicts intuitive beliefs about human consciousness and the notion of self.
My comment: How many more claims can be viewed by pseudoscientists in the context of “groundbreaking” theories after details of biologically-based cause and epigenetic effects on hormones that affect behavior became available more than a decade ago?
