STRUCTURE OF THE SYMBOLIC-LOGICAL THOUGHT

I believe that the neurobiological aspects representing for many scientists the structure of consciousness (thalamus-cortical dialectics)¹ do not completely explain the mechanisms regulating consciousness itself, though  thalamus-cortical dialectics is certainly its neurobiological basis.

American scientists are in the forefront on these aspects, but they are absolutely unaware of the dialectic-historical and psychological aspects of the problem, which is vital in the matter of the structure of thought.

In my opinion, dialectic reality will always be denied to a civilization having its origins in “pragmatism” and considering a thought to be valid if “it is also useful”. Such a civilization lacks an essential category of thought, which featured the occidental history and identifies itself with Dialectics. Only by focusing the unities of cultures we can build the neurobiological , on one side, and the historical-dialectic psychological mechanism, on the other, as the basis of the symbolical-logical thought. When I discuss the psychological aspect I especially refer to “psyche” in the “super ego – ego – es” Freudian  sense. I consider  this discovery of unconscious a revolutionary one, which brings up in discussion the false followers of the Enlightenment who later converged in the positivism and still reject both psychoanalysis as a science, considering it too vague, and especially “the unconscious” as a category belonging to the structure of the symbolic-logical thought itself.

To penetrate the structure of thought it is fundamental to solve the problem of understanding that the unconscious is essential, in spite of the existence of a HISTORICAL ANOMALY, which I think lies at the basis of the functioning of the logic that we know (see scheme).

To give birth to a symbolic logical creative thought, over its evolutive phase mankind had to create accidentally an anomalous government order where few people could think and create cultural products, to the detriment of many people prevented from satisfying their primary instincts. Everything takes its origin from the PRIMAL REPRESSION, which I set at the time of the great Mesopotamian and Mycenaean civilizations, I mean when a few individuals were allowed to think and to do that they had to remove something historically “unforgivable”. Also, as Ernest Jones² says,  “only what is removed needs a symbolic representation”.

The symbolic representation is, in my opinion, the heart of the structure of thought, getting to its cultural production by means of a symbolic-logical language.