Intellecto-Persona

This piece was originally written in 2013. It is part of my archive project, now being revisited and edited in 2025 under my Wattpad series Between Sparks. You can read the refined version here: [https://www.wattpad.com/BetweenSparks].

___________________

___________________

The picture is revealing two hemisphere of the mind - left and right, cliche at this point.

What is notable is these activities of the brain do exist and function in those hemispheres - parts of the brain like the hippocampus being the "catalyst" for long-term memory - these parts/sections exist in these hemispheres yes...

AND I do not want to pretend I know the specific locations of brain chemistry and/or neuroscience for that matter... That is the practice of neurology at its finest and perhaps my weakest discipline of cognitive studies, but the idea stands... Two hemispheres hold a seemingly patterned nature which, for the instance, that those types of thinking exist related to positioned side of brain -or- basically, the moment you are logical it's on the left side of the brain. 

This hemispheric inference is false.

Since psychology is the individual awareness and study of individuals and/or groups.... hemispheric analogizing is too minimalistic and simplistic to the point of devaluing the complexities of active thinking in momentary conversation... Which **fucks shit up when trying to exchange ideas with others. AS WELL in normative science studies.

To add: The brain activating is not something to consider is unitary, or functioning strictly to specific parts of the brain at single moments... At most, there is one specific part/section of the brain which activates first to activate many more.  However, most likely, several parts/sections activate at once to start the activation process... our cognition... 


Essentially, that is how our looks in a millisecond of neural activity - the left or right hemisphere will NEVER be active without the other hemisphere at the same time.  Even if, one side of the brain did/does 'light' up more than the other, the other side is still lighting up. 

** Check out: http://isthismindmaterial.blogspot.com/2013/02/how-communication-fucks-shit-up.html
__________
/
/                This is your brain on 'wrdos'
/__________

Now it's clear I do not necessarily believe knowledge of the hemisphere matters... But perhaps HOLDS these thinking types or overall recognizable intelligent-based mechanisms.

My overall contemplation of intellecto-persona, and how it relates to the 1st image is kind of interesting actually - depending on certain features of the individual types of thinking... can demonstrate personality as well as intelligence.
 
For an easy map start anywhere where you feel most relate-able to (1 of the 12 types of thinking) . Then the next most relate-able, and so on. Now, let's say this list is your intellecto-persona. What your strengths are (your first few picked) will be supported by the middle and weaker thinking types. So what ever (let's say first 3) your strongest types are, will be the pinnacle of your thinking-style or intellecto-persona BUT it does not stop there, as although the rest of the types are still in you, and support your primary types. Overall your 'mind-brain' relationship will be based off of how this system of connected thinking types work with one another: how strong, how weakly...

A good example would be autism. Think about Ramon from Rainman the film. He could be considered highly skilled in 'logical thought' 'detail analysis' and 'long term memory' but would be absolutely awful with 'conscious awareness' 'abstract thought' and 'wholistic' --- While autism is extreme, the different is only the fact while his "absolutely awful" abilities are weak, they allow whatever support for the highly skilled as well as give more brain capacity to perform those skills better....

 ____________________

The above analogy involving Rainman is a rough-rough idea of mine, but here is a more visual explanation:

For this blog post sakes I will continue using the original picture but now in the framework of this little image (which I have no good name for -or- know the name of).

Remember, avoid the hemispheres!

Now, the original image have 12 listed thinking types, I think there may be 8 - 12 (but ignoring my the number of types and more focus on how they apply to one another). So, for the purpose of this post go ahead and label those types of thinking from 1 - 9 (combine conscious and unconscious, short and long term, AND abstract with gestalt ... for new graphs sakes) and start the numbering from the top left - down and right - down...

This graph depicts a blank intellecto-persona. All of the types of thought are connected to one another. All types are attached with a line, lets call them 'connective modules' or Cmods for short.

These Cmods are critical. They will depict the individual's intellecto-persona. Their strengths, weaknesses, and the in between. Their personal potential for a certain intelligent task is dependent on the certain strengths and weaknesses of their respective Cmod network - their intellecto-persona.

I asked you to number the first picture and relate it to this graph. Now here would be a rough demonstration of a random intellecto-persona:



This would be more of the visual conception in which somebody's Cmods may look like. (It's rough and kind of rushed.) What do the colors mean? Again, just to display the general idea of my thoughts here:

Red - Strongest
Orange - Strong
Yellow - Less Strong
Green - Less Weak
Blue - Weak
Purple - Weakest
*Blacks Cmods matter, just didn't color them all in, not TOO necessary, because this is a rough representation anyways.

You can go ahead and suggest for yourself, what type of person I mapped out in the above - as far as doing that here, will prove VERY LENGTHY. But, feel free to not have wasted your time of putting numbers to types of thinking or intelligent-based mechanisms!

(Note: I am ignoring naming the specific Cmods for length purposes, and well, these thoughts are still under going development.)
_________________
The practicality of this (proposed/undeveloped) theory is beyond benefiticial for mapping of individual consciousness, but for how we educate.

This post is pretty long as is, so in brevity:

Let's say you are a logical, long-term and fast input thinker (as being the three main Cmods)... We some how figured this out through brain scans, testing, whatever.

But, you hate math, you hate history, you just dislike academics all together for some reason. Well with this knowledge of your intellecto-persona, you or your educator, can figure out how to teach you anything you do want to learn.  Like abstract art or writing or some other creative skill.

This theory is benefiticial for, and designed in light of, education.  As it develops so will it's overall practicality.

Even if the theory never makes it past a lengthy journal, the idea of a multidimensional interpretations of consciousness will still be the future of brain mapping for pursuits of education as well as overall understanding of diversity in thinking of a natural order.