As Cassella wrote in his doctoral thesis and in his interpretation of the return of Quetzalcoatl (2022a, 2022b, 2000, 2018c), by testing normal children in the 1940s the psychologist Jean Piaget (1983) found that human intelligence grows in five stages, from birth up to the age of 6.5 years (in actual findings, since Piaget adopted an upper limit of 7.5 years):
Because Piaget never compared autistic to normal children, he never detected that intelligence grows along two cognitive vectors:
Neither did Piaget detect that quantum computing in its turn can be split in two phases:
The power linked to quantum computing can be used to achieve sublime aims or can respond to aims that are not social. Leonardo da Vinci, for example, used the 2nd. attention in designing new cannons; and sought the 3rd. Attention in painting 'Mona Lisa' (now at the Louvre Museum) and the 'Nativity.'
Mark Johnson (1994) measured the capacity of four-month-old, normal babies for shifting their attention ten years before Landry and Bryson (2004) detected that autistics cannot follow normal children in accomplishing that feat.
In fact, John Watson (1994) detected the presence of conditional (or less-than-perfect) probability during the first year of life of normal children.
Watson and the two babies had discovered that a power exists that differs from having or not having total control (as in a Democracy, for example).
Cassella (2018c) attached that power to the quantum computing that mediates between the 100% perfection attached to our self and the maddening imperfection we attribute to the people we cannot control 100%.
The Inquisition burned thousand witches because it is too easy to confuse the opportunities opened up by creative less-than-perfection (0 < p < 1) with the dangers opened up by uncreative imperfection (p = 0). The mad followers of diabolical dictators make the same mistake.
And malevolent tyrants will use their malicious capability to lie to burn any mind that would dare to criticize them (especially, curious journalists and political opponents).
Autistics cannot handle problems that challenge the capacity of our memory of invariable knowledge, because they cannot fly over the abysm of known schemes (with p = 1) and schemes that cannot be known (with p = 0). Autistics embrace the known world (p = 1) and are vexed by anything that contradicts what they know (p = 0). Or they develop their own rules; resisting the rules imposed by others, because they cannot embrace order and chaos simultaneously.
Thus, autistics cannot handle dilemmas between two extremes, in the world between 1 and 0 explored by quantum qubits. Their difficulty to face situations of less-than-perfect control can help us understand better the worthy fiction created by pretend play.
Here is a familiar scenario: A little girl, while lying in bed at dawn, sings sweetly to her doll. The song she sings is the very song that her mother has sung to her the night before. Thus, while singing, the girl is pretending that she is the doll’s mother and that her doll is herself. This theatrical feat appears to be a piece of cake; and yet acting relies on the use of a mysterious cognitive ability, whose deficiency is the cause of the spectrum of odd behaviors observed in autism.
To an autistic individual who witnesses this precious scene, only one person is lying on the bed: the little girl. For the creative witness, however, three persons “lie” on the bed. In fact, within her pretend play, the little actress is nonlocated in three persons at the same time: her mother, the doll to which she has given life in her imagination, and herself. If the doll is pregnant, then, four persons would lie on the bed of the example.
The situation described satisfies the principle of Ubiquity if we consider that the young singer lies here and there or in mismatched worlds simultaneously. Within her imagination, she lies simultaneously in her world, her mother's, the doll's, the world of children, and the world of adults. Indeed, she is concurrently a little girl in the present and a mother in the future. Pretend play disrupts but resets reality.
The previous example supports the theory that autism is caused by a deficiency in the cognitive dynamics that invites us to exist in separate worlds simultaneously (through the mind). In playing pretend, the girl’s artistic side nurtures her doll and her future. Through her practice of nurturing her doll, over time she will grow into a mother; the kind of person who can help others grow. Males too can dream of becoming amorous mothers.
The cognitive ability to readjust known reality is a good representation of an heuristics that Cassella has called "logos." The logos heuristics (also expressed by the Greek symbol "Λ") presents 'creative intelligence' in human beings and nature as a complementarity (the 3rd attention) between two systems dynamics:
The comparison between the tests that autistics pass and the tests they fail (page on autism and Figure A in this page) leads to the complementarity of classical and quantum computing; memory and learning; the Egyptian Crook and Flail; the Israeli Thummim and Urim; Zechariah's Hovalim and No'am; the Olmec/Maya/Toltec/Mexicas' Tonal and their Nagual; and finite speed with infinite speed.
Sequence and simultaneity, the first and the second attention, or classical and quantum computing, can boost each other or destroy each other in an individual, social concern, or in any natural system.
Unlike schizophrenics, high-functioning autistics keep alive the memory (within classical computing) of true happenings; but their difficulty to tackle quantum coherence forces them to match unmedicated schizophrenics in their inability to handle the decoherence that renovates" known" reality.
Unlike autistics, Alzheimer patients start their cognitive descent by losing their cerebral memory; whereas people with dementia lose both cerebral memory and cerebellar learning, or the two staffs of Zechariah: Hovalim and No'am. The logos heuristics could help both the old in whom intelligence wanes and the young in whom intelligence knocks at the door of life.
The scientific research behind the logos heuristics is not completely new. In 1964, Bernard Rimland asserted that “intelligence" is the ability to see relationships and meanings by having access to as many alternatives as possible at approximately the same instant of time” (Travis & Hunter, 1928, cited in Goddard, 1946).
One can add to Rimland's insight: Having access at the same time to a multitude of separate options is just the going movement of the paradoxical pendulum of creativity impaired in autism. Per se, the going movement is dangerous. Indeed, the ambiguity caused by the embrace of alternatives at war with each other will lead to madness when it is taken beyond a reasonable limit. Few of us have the vision attached to the nothingness in which we share the same space with others at the same time.
Therefore, it is essential to connect in time with the return movement of our cognitive journey. That happens when our hungry and beaten self (within the 2nd. attention) follows Christ in rejecting both the bread of the first attention and the power to fly presented by the devil in order to heighten the value of the self.
The idea, instead, is to choose a combination of alternatives that brings us “back” to a refreshed self and other.
The metamorphosis that leads to resurrection (or the 3rd. Attention) happens when we connect existing pieces of knowledge (memory, in the 1st. attention of classical computing) in a new social way. One way to do that is catching the esoteric meaning of our Sacred Text, considering that science alone may lead to self-destruction.
Most people return to reality after listening to the voice of the devil and not the voice of Gabriel. Surely enough, the devilish tyrants who wash the brains of faithful acolytes, organized in socialist battalions, know how to use pronouns.
That fact suggests that the diabolical malice of the 2nd. attention, and not the grace of the 3rd. Attention, may guide billion decisions in our daily lives; for example, in the normal use of pronouns, which autistics cannot seize.
The 3rd. Attention does not rise automatically when we learn something new through the 2nd. attention and place that repetitive piece of knowledge in the memory bank of the 1st. attention guided by sequence. There is learning (in the cunning used to deceive others); and there is learning (in the preoccupation to help others grow). Instead of giving their little ones a fake explosive belt, certain mothers could give them a doll.
Perhaps the alliance between classical and quantum computing is represented by the following process: IF THE NEW SCHEMES PRODUCED BY SIMULTANEITY PROVE USEFUL, ARE ACCEPTED BY OTHERS, AND LEAD US TO WIN WITH THEM, WE HAVE TRULY RETURNED TO A REFRESHED AND SHARED REALITY WITHIN TRUE DE-COHERENCE.
Indeed, Cassella uses the term "3rd. attention," or places an irregular capital letter in the first letter of a word, to denote our return to a win-win reality. When knowledge of the reality of the Third Attention leads us to help others grow, we reach the third point. The kind of false decoherence that results in building a bomb capable of destroying a large city, taking the life of a few innocent bystanders, or inducing any modality of revenge, guards little relation to the 3rd. attention; and no relation at all with the Third Point. When we leave the Vision of the Third Attention and the Will of the Third Point, we do not walk with God but with the devil.
As suggested by the logos heuristics (Λ), we need simultaneity (the capacity for lying and learning, which is impaired in autism) to readjust extant knowledge; and we need sequence (the capacity to preserve the truth, which is unimpaired in nonretarded autistics) to recognize the newly arrived at schemes time after time; and keep them unchanged until they become obsolete.
The preservation of sequence, the appreciation for our capacity to lie, and the potentiation of their union make the dance of change and permanence along the Way to Progress only when we smile and grow with whatever we help to smile and grow.
The next section explores the combination of local and nonlocal principles that feed our capacity to smile and to grow with others.
Cassella (2002a, 2002c) called sequence, 1st attention, or classical computing the cognitive domain (underlined in his printed books) spared or overdeveloped in high-functioning autism. He also equated classical computing with Zechariah's Hovalim, the Aztec Tonal, the Egyptian Crook, the crystal Thummim placed by Moses in the Ark of the Covenant, and the staff Hovalim mentioned by Zechariah.
Cassella found (2002a, 2002c, 2018c, 2022a, 2022b) that the 1st. attention obeys ten, or more, universal principles, which can be clustered around two statements:
Because the capacity for embracing in hyperspace both the truth and its opposite is supported by an infinite speed, within the ‘logos heuristics,’ Cassella has called 'simultaneity,' '2nd attention,' or 'quantum computing' the infinity that underlies the cognitive domain impaired in autism.
Cassella (2019a, 2022a, 2022b in the Biography page) equates quantum computing to
Cassella found (2000, 2002a, 2002c, 2018c, 2022a,2022b) that the quantum computing that underlies coherence and decoherence relies also in ten or more principles, which can be concentrated around two statements:
For example, autistics cannot handle pronouns, because pronouns call for the use of the infinite speed and the nothingness that underly quantum computing. Thus, an autistic person will reverse pronouns (using “you” and “your” instead of “I” and “mine”) because choosing the right pronoun implies (Cassella, 2018c) . . .
AUTISM, DREAMS, AND FREEDOM
Freedom can be connected to the lymph that enlivens humor and metaphor. Autistics cannot make fun of space and time through the capacity to live in separate worlds simultaneously, or to welcome in their cerebellum opposite worlds at the same time.
This fact leads to the belief that the secret behind autistics' difficulty to sustain a spontaneous dialogue represents a treasure that could open new doors in any field or knowledge. We could see that treasure as the possibility of understanding the secret of the Dance of permanence and renovation hidden behind any creative effort—from writing an exciting novel to integrating the visible world under the control of gravity with the invisible subatomic world studied by quantum physics.
The hope of discovering the roots of creative intelligence in human beings and nature may lead us beyond the present division of knowledge, toward the integration of our creative exploits in any field. But the aim of arriving at the crossroads of literature, philosophy, mysticism, and science does not perturb the slumber of the characters who manage collective resources, the militaries or the voters who empower them, the producers trapped by the need of financial return, and the consumers in search of a longer and more comfortable life span.
If discovering the nature of our affective-cognitive capacity to understand tragicomedies—which is impaired in autism and schizophrenia—were viewed as a critical factor in the advancement of mainstream science and technology, untold resources would be allocated to researching those spectra.
That dream, however, has not found yet the support of illuminated investors, governments, or institutes!
Our most cherished aims are linked to , , ,
Ironically, diabolical leaders, invested with an illegitimate authority, do not suspect that autistics, by virtue of their adoration of permanence in a universe submerged in change, may become our guides to understand the roots of creativity, of Democracy, of Grace, and even of madness.
AUTISTICS CANNOT CONCEIVE RENOVATION, SINCE THEY CANNOT CROSS THE AMBIGUOUS FOG, SIMULTANEOUSLY EXHILARATING AND FRIGHTENING, IN WHICH THE SAME SIGN MAY REPRESENT OPPOSITE MEANINGS AT THE SAME TIME.
Autistics and schizophrenics invite us to examine the union of classical and quantum computing (and Ubiquity with Coincidence) in the human brain of the person who reaches the Vision of the 3rd Attention.
For references about articles and books by Antonio Cassella, please look at the list provided in the page corresponding to Biography.
Goddard, H. H. (1946). What is Intelligence? Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 51-69.
Ito, M. (2011). The cerebellum: Brain for an implicit self. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Ed.
Johnson, M. H. (1994). Brain Development and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Landry, R., & Bryson S. (2004). Impaired disengagement of attention in young children with autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 1115-1122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00304.x
Piaget, J. (1983). La psicología de la inteligencia. Barcelona: Grijalbo.
Rimland, B. (1964). Infantile autism: The syndrome and its implications for a neural theory of behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Travis, L. E., Hunter, T.A. (1928). The relationship between "intelligence" and reflex conduction rate. Journal of Experimental psychology, 11, 342-354.
Watson, J. S. (1994). “Detection of the self. The perfect algorithm.” In Self-awareness in animals and humans, edited by S. T. Parker, W. R. Mitchell, and M. L. Boccia, 265-280. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Copyright © 2019-2023 Antonio Cassella- All the rights are kept. Reviewed on September 19, 2023
Gestito da GoDaddy