I think the friend/enemy axis probably works more like a scalar coefficient
I agree! My term “friend (+) vs enemy (–) parameter” was trying to convey a model where there’s a scalar that can be positive for friend or negative for enemy.
But I think there’s also a “phase change” when you cross zero, such that the downstream consequences of friend vs enemy can be qualitatively different.
My guess is that “friend” and “enemy” are represented by two cell groups that are mutually-inhibitory, so they can’t both be very active at once. And they have two different sets of downstream consequences. I’m suggesting this by analogy to how hunger works—part of that system is (1) a group of AgRP/NPY neurons that are active when you’re hungry, and (2) a nearby group of α-MSH neurons that are active when you’re full. Each can be more or less active, but also each inhibits the other. So taking both together, you can have continuous variation between hungry and full, but you also get qualitatively different downstream effects of hunger vs fullness (e.g. the AgRP/NPY neurons increase pain-tolerance, the α-MSH neurons increase sex drive).
I’m skeptical of “frenemy”; instead I would propose that there are people who, if you think about them in one way (paying attention to something about them), then they feel like a friend, and if you think about them in a different way, then they feel like an enemy, and you can switch from one to the other in rapid-fire succession, but not simultaneously. What do you think?
I was thinking that a stranger would be ≈0 on the friend-enemy “axis”, until you find a way to judge them. :)
This is all necessarily a bit speculative, because the alleged “friend (+) vs enemy (–) parameter” neuron groups are (to my knowledge) not yet known to science—probably they’re two of the hundreds of little neuron groups in the hypothalamus that nobody has studied yet, especially not in humans (which might or might not be the same as rodents in this respect).
I agree! My term “friend (+) vs enemy (–) parameter” was trying to convey a model where there’s a scalar that can be positive for friend or negative for enemy.
But I think there’s also a “phase change” when you cross zero, such that the downstream consequences of friend vs enemy can be qualitatively different.
My guess is that “friend” and “enemy” are represented by two cell groups that are mutually-inhibitory, so they can’t both be very active at once. And they have two different sets of downstream consequences. I’m suggesting this by analogy to how hunger works—part of that system is (1) a group of AgRP/NPY neurons that are active when you’re hungry, and (2) a nearby group of α-MSH neurons that are active when you’re full. Each can be more or less active, but also each inhibits the other. So taking both together, you can have continuous variation between hungry and full, but you also get qualitatively different downstream effects of hunger vs fullness (e.g. the AgRP/NPY neurons increase pain-tolerance, the α-MSH neurons increase sex drive).
I’m skeptical of “frenemy”; instead I would propose that there are people who, if you think about them in one way (paying attention to something about them), then they feel like a friend, and if you think about them in a different way, then they feel like an enemy, and you can switch from one to the other in rapid-fire succession, but not simultaneously. What do you think?
I was thinking that a stranger would be ≈0 on the friend-enemy “axis”, until you find a way to judge them. :)
This is all necessarily a bit speculative, because the alleged “friend (+) vs enemy (–) parameter” neuron groups are (to my knowledge) not yet known to science—probably they’re two of the hundreds of little neuron groups in the hypothalamus that nobody has studied yet, especially not in humans (which might or might not be the same as rodents in this respect).