JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Dillon Rankine on August 21, 2018, 06:34:17 PM
-
Apparently my position on Oswald?s mental state isn?t very clear so allow me to simplify.
BRAIN AND BEHAVIOUR
It?s apparently escaped notice that neurobiological events give rise to psychological phenomena, and that brain damage results in perceptual, behavioural, affective and cognitive deficits.
The prefrontal cortex (PFC) is the most recently evolved part of the brain, biggest in humans. It does impulse control, emotion regulation, cognitive control and almost all ?higher mental processes,? including abstract thought, logic, planning, etc.
The amygdala is an ancient structure which is invoked in aggression, fear, anxiety and other emotional responses, and is often called the brain?s risk detector (even activating when people are given lousy offers in economic simulations).
The PFC and amygdala fight like cat and dog?the latter responds to some injustice and the PFC inhibits it?s function. That?s emotional control. You get angry at somebody in public (amygdala activates), but you don?t shout or fight them for social or legal reasons, or because it?s morally wrong (PFC inhibits). Of course contest alters whether the PFC cares enough (for instance, it stops you from lying except when you tell the SS officers there?s no Jews in your attic, in which case, the PFC is what makes you do a good job of it: remember to look at the eyes, adjust tone, etc).
(https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dr_Edo_Shonin/publication/264125757/figure/fig3/AS:203176994185230@1425452578675/Amygdala-frontal-circuit-of-emotion-regulation-Prefrontal-cortex-seems-to-be-involved-in.png)
NOTE: Damage or something which makes the PFC less active results in violent criminal behaviour, as all neuroimaging studies have shown.
(https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-0e982b9584ddcb5a93d34e998beadf77-c)
PFC showing blood flow in psychopathic individual (a neurological/personality disorder associated with lack of empathic processes and egocentric traits; usually with reference to diagnostic criterion of antisocial personality disorder).
(http://neurosciencefundamentals.unsw.wikispaces.net/file/view/prefronta%3B.jpg/449347998/prefronta%3B.jpg)
NEUROLOGY AND ADVERSITY
Stress is a brain phenomena (this will come as a shock to some posters) and is related to the secreation of glucocorticoids (stress hormones) which modulate neural circuits by suppressing some, mainly prefrontal ones. This, longitudinally, results in neurodegeneration (neuron death). It makes the amygdala bigger, however, and more active and more resistant to neurodegeneration.
So stress, for most of us, can make us more impulsive, selfish with some working (short-term) and long-term memory errors, even days after the stressor. Of course, before a brain region fully develops it, and it suffers things like this, it will take longer and be impaired.
But imagine what would happen if your PFC was subject to chronic stress from the earlier days of your life?
Rats deprived play exhibit PFC developmental deficits whose behavioural manifestations are akin to symptoms of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (both in humans and animal models). That?s just lack of play. It should be obvious that studies have found correlated between more extreme developmental hardship and more extreme deficits.
Collecting a large sample of people who had been the unfortunate victim of childhood adversity (any abuse or neglect), clinicians used structural and functional neuroimaging to see what happens to the brain.
Propionate to the degree and severity and longevity of the abuse or neglect were structural and functional deficits accross the brain, but to the PFC in particular. Usage of standardised psychological tests sensitive to PFC function disclosed disturbance to most of its functions, namely response inhibition and emotional processing and discrimination.* Moreover, studies concur that such childhood abuse or neglect is associated with trait neuroticism as an adult.^
OSWALD AND PATHOLOGY
So Oswald?s horrible childhood (which conspiracy author Jim Marrs repugnantly lied about in Crossfire) involving neglect by his mother, abuse by babysitters, and constant travelling where no attachments could be formed. He admitted to a psychiatrist that he would be angry at his mother if she didn?t come home with food, and would sometimes hit her. The doctor also found Oswald to be anxious, awkwardly and otherwise neurotic with passive aggressive and misanthropic tendencies. An examination lead to the diagnosis of the epigentic disease schizoid personality disorder, now known to be a precursor to schizophrenia. A developmental psychologist also gave him a standardised test (one included drawing human figures) which demonstrated the typical sociocogntive results of neglect.
Atop this lot, Oswald pulled a knife on his brother at age 8, and a disputed incident at age 13 (per John I). He also presented with various psychosocial impairemnts, just as we should expect, namely his schizoid traits. I?ve discussed his aggressive behaviour elsewhere, though some of it has been disputed and I won?t go into it here. Oswald made a suicide attempt in Russia (disputed only by complete kooks) which, surprise-surprise, is another symptom PFC (& hippocampul) degradation, especially that which comes from early life harship. He also apparently beat his wife (which we apparently just don?t talk about).
In Mexico City he was reported to be markedly emotionally unstable. The only reasons to doubt he was there are the usual scatterbrained CT nonproof. Trying to shoot General Walker was warning sign if I do say so myself.
CONCLUSION TO THE CONFUSION
Hi everybody who skipped the important bits! My conclusion is that Oswald?s brain was impaired as a result of his upbringing which caused him to be more prone to certain types of aggression (namely reactive) and neurotic psychology. Logical brain areas down, he was less than totally rational (hence the communism). He was neurotic, but not apparent to outside observers (as I?ve been reminded 19 or 20 thousand times today alone). This, and everything else mentioned, would have predisposed him to the sort of aggression that either a lone-nut or manipulated conspirator would have. Though his traits would suggest he would not work with anyone, neuronal oddities could be exploited by people he trusted (if such persons ever existed).
One must state it plainly: his neuropsychological state was such that a motive would not be necessary for either being a lone-assassin or joining a conspiracy. I?m really stabbing both CTs and LNers in the back by taking away their arguments.
Papers mentioned (Rob Caprio will likely deny the existence of these publications)
*https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3307045/pdf/fnhum-06-00052.pdf (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3307045/pdf/fnhum-06-00052.pdf)
^https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.researchgate.net/publication/11013988_Childhood_trauma_and_neuroticism_as_an_adult_Possible_implications_for_the_development_of_the_common_psychiatric_disorders_and_suicidal_behavior/amp (https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.researchgate.net/publication/11013988_Childhood_trauma_and_neuroticism_as_an_adult_Possible_implications_for_the_development_of_the_common_psychiatric_disorders_and_suicidal_behavior/amp)
-
Apparently my position on Oswald?s mental state isn?t very clear so allow my to simply.
I?m really stabbing both CTs and LNers in the back by taking away their arguments.
Did you mean simplify? Sorry it didn't.
Or could it all mean the making of an ideal patsy [a crazy mixed up kid]?
-
Did you mean simplify? Sorry it didn't.
Or could it all mean the making of an ideal patsy [a crazy mixed up kid]?
Brain make behaviour. Brain get messed up. Behaviour get messed up. Surely caveman talk is simple enough?
-
Not to hijack the thread completely but did Oswald drink?
An Irish cop arrested Lee Harvey Oswald in Illinois for being drunk and disorderly on a Greyhound bus a year before Oswald shot JFK.
Historians now know the future killer was also in possession of a firearm after trawling through FBI files on the assassination released this month.
Mayoman Bill Filan arrested Oswald and took him to a Chicago police station where he confiscated his gun and locked up Oswald until the assassin-to-be had sobered up. The following day, no longer intoxicated, Oswald was given his gun, sternly reprimanded and told to clear off.
Filan didn?t think much of the incident until the following year when he switched on the TV to find the ?obnoxious drunk? he?d arrested was now suspected of killing the president.
?I thought, that?s the dirty dog I arrested down at the bus depot that time on the Greyhound bus,? he later told his great nephew Enda Mullen.
?I?d recognize him anywhere. I could have told the captain about the arrest but I didn?t. I just kept it to myself but I never forgot it.?
November 21, 2017
https://www.irishcentral.com/roots/history/irish-cop-arrested-lee-harvey-oswald-year-before-jfk-assassination
Where are these arrest records allegedly uncovered in the FBI files?
Imagine a Chicago cop giving some drunk back his gun :D
-
PFC showing blood flow in psychopathic individual (a neurological/personality disorder associated with lack of empathic processes and egocentric traits; usually with reference to diagnostic criterion of antisocial personality disorder).
This is all very interesting, but unless these are scans of Lee Oswald's brain they are quite irrelevant.
Atop this lot, Oswald pulled a knife on his brother at age 8, and a disputed incident at age 13 (per John I).
You never did provide your source for the age 8 incident, but I would suggest that this has even less basis than Marjory Pic's overblown claim.
I?ve discussed his aggressive behaviour elsewhere, though some of it has been disputed and I won?t go into it here. Oswald made a suicide attempt in Russia (disputed only by complete kooks)
For someone who couches his arguments in scientific lingo, you sure don't seem to have a grasp of the ad hominem logical fallacy.
The question remains, what indisputable examples do you have of Oswald exhibiting violent behavior? If your supposition that he had physical brain damage resulting in violent behavior is true (and without a brain scan it's all supposition), then he wouldn't be able to situationally control it, right?
-
This is all very interesting, but unless these are scans of Lee Oswald's brain they are quite irrelevant.
You never did provide your source for the age 8 incident, but I would suggest that this has even less basis than Marjory Pic's overblown claim.
For someone who couches his arguments in scientific lingo, you sure don't seem to have a grasp of the ad hominem logical fallacy.
The question remains, what indisputable examples do you have of Oswald exhibiting violent behavior? If your supposition that he had physical brain damage resulting in violent behavior is true (and without a brain scan it's all supposition), then he wouldn't be able to situationally control it, right?
I provided metaanalyses of studies of abuse/neglect survivors, not one of whom had unscathed brains. The actual mechanism of as discussed is the effect of stress hormones on neuronal survival and understimulation of neural circuits (unused circuits have less protective proteins necessary for survival; circuits mature by firing which increases the protein).
In order to question the notion Oswald?s brain having been impaired, you implicitly have to infer that LHO neurons, proteins, growth factors, and hormones were distinct from other humans, with their mechanisms of action and maintenance differing from rest of his species.
As far as undisputed behavioural examples, I don?t think there?s one. Just because someone disputes it doesn?t mean we have reason to.
-
How do you fit or place the shooting of JFK into your thesis? Why JFK?
His attempt on Walker and to a lesser extent his shooting of JFK were deliberate, measured acts. He certainly carefully planned out the attempt on Walker. This is less so with JFK but he made some plans before hand.
Neither of the attempts on Walker or JFK were sudden explosions of anger driven by a damaged brain. They were, again, deliberate acts. The other examples you cite are, for the most part, explosions of anger and not planned acts.
My own view is that both acts had a political component or reason behind them: Oswald was a political person, he hated the American political and economic systems, he called himself a Marxist (however crudely he understood that word) and the evidence is he admired Castro.
As Volkmar Schmidt said about his conversation with Oswald, "Oswald was seething with hatred towards Kennedy" over the Bay of Pigs and other policies. The radical publications he read were reportedly filled with critical stories about JFK's policies towards Havana. Marina said that she found Oswald on their porch one day dry-firing his rifle. He told her, "Fidel needs help." Three weeks later he goes to Mexico City in an attempt to defect to Havana.
Saying Oswald was prone to uncontrolled violence because of brain malfunction doesn't explain, to me, these political, deliberate acts. In fact, they contradict one another.
-
How do you fit or place the shooting of JFK into your thesis? Why JFK?
His attempt on Walker and to a lesser extent his shooting of JFK were deliberate, measured acts. He certainly carefully planned out the attempt on Walker. This is less so with JFK but he made some plans before hand.
Neither of the attempts on Walker or JFK were sudden explosions of anger driven by a damaged brain. They were, again, deliberate acts. The other examples you cite are, for the most part, explosions of anger and not planned acts.
My own view is that both acts had a political component or reason behind them: Oswald was a political person, he hated the American political and economic systems, he called himself a Marxist (however crudely he understood that word) and the evidence is he admired Castro.
As Volkmar Schmidt said about his conversation with Oswald, "Oswald was seething with hatred towards Kennedy" over the Bay of Pigs and other policies. The radical publications he read were reportedly filled with critical stories about JFK's policies towards Havana. Marina said that she found Oswald on their porch one day dry-firing his rifle. He told her, "Fidel needs help." Three weeks later he goes to Mexico City in an attempt to defect to Havana.
Saying Oswald was prone to uncontrolled violence because of brain malfunction doesn't explain, to me, these political, deliberate acts. In fact, they contradict one another.
What you say about his politics jibes completely with my thesis (not saying it?s correct, but it works). PFC disruption is the most common defect seen in psychopathic offenders who meticulously plan their attacks. Ask yourself this: plenty of people hated Kennedy, why did only this one actually do it? (Of course, there were others who tried but most people who loathed JFK didn?t kill him or even try to).
We all hate some political figure somewhere, and in times of ideological anger many (perhaps even most) people would consider a world in which this person was no more. It?s the PFC that comes online, reminding us of the legal and moral implications of such behaviour. If the political end is true, Oswald?s PFC would have failed to activate, though, more often that not, the causality is reverse?the defective neuroanatomy is what gives rise to the political motivations, which themselves arise from the brain.
-
Oswalds's interest in Communism marks him as illogical? Strongly dissagree.
Communism of course, as most of us know it, means repression and exploitation of the working stiffs, that's not true communism, or socialism, LHO never promoted that. What he was asking for is the rights of ordinary people, the complete opposite of what you'd expect from a psycho. When he was asked on tape whether he was a communist, bpoth times you can hear the nervous laughter because he knew very well the stigma that handle brought you in American society. That stigma is mostly due to pure propoganda and you know it too. Reds under your bed BS was still under effect, bigtime.
Also on another point, Buell Frazier tells of a Lee who very much wanted to associate with his fellow workers and at first tried to but because he was different, thought differently and talked differently they laughed at him, so he gave up, that's freakin' normal, not freaky.
"Worker's rights, minimum wage, no forced overtime? Give us a break, this is Dallas USofA". Now who's for Domino's?
Frazier's habit was to eat alone in the gloomy basement and look what became of him.
-
"The Soviets have committed crimes unsurpassed even by their early day capitalist counterparts, the imprisonment of their own peoples, with the mass extermination so typical of Stalin, and the individual suppression and regimentation under Khrushchev."
Who wrote that? One Lee Harvey Oswald.
Source/link: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/notesonCPUSA.htm
That he thought otherwise before going there and that he ignored all of the evidence indicating how brutal the regime was - people were fleeing from the Soviet Union and Eastern bloc countries NOT fleeing to them - tells us a lot about his thinking.
Insane? I don't know, I'll leave that up to the trained people. But quite naive. To his credit, he quickly learned otherwise.
Oswald said he was a Marxist not a Communist. He believed, he wrote, that both the capitalist and communist system were "slave" systems and needed to be replaced. With what exactly? He didn't say. But he insisted that both had to be destroyed.
Source/link: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/undeliveredspeechnotes.htm
Marxism/Communism are evil, bankrupt systems. They belong in the dustbin of history.
-
How often must it be said: the reality of neurological pathologies goes beyond the meaningless phrases like insane, mad, unstable or psycho?which if referring to psychopathy, is completely inaccurate?and lay expectations of such gibberish. It?s time for big boy talk?use actual jargon or GTFO. Do your research?no, Rob, not the 26 volumes?which, shockingly enough had been provided for you (those handy links go to scientific papers).
Not a single item in the vexatious profusion of ?rebuttals? has answered my main question: how did Oswald?s brain survive his childhood adversity when the evidence suggests it shouldn?t need have?
The question requires an understanding of neuroendocrinology, not what some random who knew Oswald thought (like we should care).