## 3.b) Reliable brain functions:

### Mathematical logic and math memory

Both the preconcepts and the automatic responses are previously created by the intellect throughout the individual cognitive development, on the other hand, the secure responses, that have a certain degree of reliability, and the ultrafast or similar ones are a result of the direct logic of the intellect.

A specific vision is set out in the GTCEL about the mathematical logic and math memory when speaking about the method of verification of transmitted genetic information, of the possible models for contrasting the theory and in the appendix regarding the technological development of the breaks in the automobile industry. A part of this exposition is reproduced in the section dealing with the genetic structure of intelligence.

Briefly summarizing, both operate on the result that billions of neurons are created with the genetic information of a progenitor and another group of neurons with the other progenitor. That is, the result of the two groups of neurons has to be waited for, and, to the extent that both results coincide, we are guaranteed their correction. In other words, the *nature of logic* requires these two mechanisms of logic control will only operate with the brain functions created from the two sources of genetic information that offer an identical result.

This mechanism implies a significant consumption of time, taking into account that, it is also looking for the certainty of responses. As soon as the results are not identical, pure reasoning or **formal logic** will stop.

## 3.c) Less reliable brain functions:

### Intuition and non-mathematical memory

The fact that formal logic control is stopped when there is not a 100% certainty that the results are correct does not mean that somewhat less certain but perhaps operative conclusions cannot be made within a reasonable margin of error. It is also possible that at the end of this non mathematical logic, a conclusion is reached that can be checked or verified by other means or with another perspective.

In any case, it is clear that intuition reaches much beyond simple reasoning. These cognitive processes bring the key idea to a definition of intuition.

From this perspective of the cognitive science, it can easily be gathered that each person will have a fair amount of intuition in comparison with their mathematical logic or intelligence (in the strict sense of the word) according to the equilibrium or imbalance of the capacities inherited from their progenitors.

This *cognitive theory* about the nature of logic can be applied to **mathematical and normal memory.** Consequently, normal memory is much more powerful than mathematical memory because it does not demand absolute certainty from its results.

Given that we are not worried about error, when the cognitive processes of non-mathematical memory are used, it is accompanied by personal calmness. It is worth pointing out that not having internal certainty of responses does not mean that the results are not objectively correct.

When 100% reliability is demanded by the cognitive process, response time can be excessively long, for example, about voice-recognizing programs. In complicated programs when there is not very serious error, 100% reliability could never be worked with; you would have to find a balance between risk of error and loosing time and energy to reduce this risk, just **like the human brain.**

It is interesting that **logic computer** works better in cases that require 100% reliability such as calculations and mathematical memory, and, on the other hand, is worse when the required reliability of cognitive process is low, such as with languages.