al variations of it are used in around 102 answers only according to the first item. That demonstrates no controversies concerning the representation of the prison. Narratives are various: “letter, saint, bar (s), torture, punishment, crime, periode/edge, limitation, in court/trial/tribunal, guardian” (9); “lack of freedom, unfair punishment, exrteme terror that is followed by death, torture of mind and body, offences of the person, hope in Lord/God” (25); “torture, cold, starving, bars, police, hand-cuffs” (60); “terror, torture, lack of freedom, fright, belief, prayer, hope, brain wash, new man, courage” (23); “isolation, unlawful/unjustly, lack of affects, violence, criminals, time lost, lack of love, rectifying/correcting, regret, torture, offences” (15); “suffering, alone, starving, fear, cold, beating, boring” (39).

The idea of “death”, of “monstrous regime”, of “despair” is present in discourses about prison: “room, dark, bars, poor bed, rules, reprove, beating, punishment, regret, despair, tears” (16); “isolation, alone, a continuous faith, despair, outrunning of self limits” (3); “fear, despair, beatings, belief, starving, cells, bars” (49); “cell, bars, walls, beatings, starving, monstrous regime, guardians” (46); “suffering, prayer, freedom, life, consequences, power, death” (40).

The pragmatic expectations [8] concerning the mental representation of the prison cover the image of a captivity space often ugly. The constraints during the communications according to the item discussed reveal a monster because of the different aspects of previous memory and learning about the prison: “dark, black, bar, doors, hand-cuffs, cold, starved, torture, despair, cops/police” (21), “guilty, not guilty, criminal, torture, security…” (26); “punishment, terror, lack of freedom, horror, torture, despair, death, pain, missing from home and from family” (27); “deprivation, order, prisoniers, police, sport, upset, punishment, crying” (29); “isolation, walls, bars, cell, punishment, black, judgment” (30); “punishment, prisoners, work, worst/difficult life, cold, worst food” (31); “missing of beloved persons, violence, boring, misery, worst food” (32); “suffering, torture, crying, penitence, punishment, criminals, re-education, violence, hope, guardians, revelation” (34). In fact, moral and religious aspects involved in writings speak about the idea that moral is the law but Romanians are disillusioned with the relationship between moral law and legal law: “punishment, dark, cold, law, guardian, cell, bars, security” (48; 61); “detention, lack of freedom, law mistifying, rigid rules, building, …” (63); “bars, enclosing freedom, alone, detention, law mistifying, prisonier, captivity, worst food, lack of freedom” (64); “cells, suffering, bars, detention/captivity, guardian, cold, misery, hurt, fence, wire” (65); “crime, bars, guardians, security system, correction, law, dark, system, injustice” (66).

The visual [9] and spatial of the prison interconnect awareness, memory, attention, communication functions as in the following examples: “lattice work, black, grey, men, cold, wet/humid, dark, murder, ugliness, pain, punishment” (5); “institution, prisoner, place, hand-cuffs, order (guardians), cops/police, bars” (13); “chains/ fetters, hand-cuffs, grades/degrees, brick, cold, police, gun/arm, alarm, key” (17); “guardians, prisoners, key, beatings, suffering, pray, soldarity” (20); “freedom, constraint, punishment, instruction, life, lesson, learning, cell” (35); “punishment, enclosed, captivity” (36); “austere, lack of freedom, despair, missing family and friends, upset, waiting” (37); “hurt, frustration, suffering, ill, worst food, violence, hand-cuffs, small rooms, lack of light and sun” (47).

Washing brains, imprisonment in past communism of the greatest Romanian personalities, moral justice are several aspects that infer about social neuroscience in space cognition; it is not false cognition, it reactivated the implicit memory.

The item regarding the comments of the words, images and notions remained in mind after reading the fragment from the novel by Ana Blandiana fit the immediate memory and the image representation of the prison as a military space. The data collected could be interpreted in terms of: literary analysis and scientific exegesis of the discourse. The literary register is considered the personalized wording of the key terms about the image of prison Jilava. The content analysis proves that some of the respondents re-create the narrative about the space of the prison: “the most important images in my mind are linked to the portrait of this prison. This suggests me that the prison is a place of despair, suffering, torture, ill-will” (6; 46); “the prisoners avoid to evade because the prison from outside is even more horrible comparing to the inner face of the prison” (15; 61). A first example in an optical re-interpretation of the description by the author, the term ‘portrait’ making connections based on visual and spatial descriptions of the prison. The second answer selected is the mental representation about prison containing only social and moral cognition; it is the lack of physical properties or material measurable dimensions of the military space.

From the vantage point of judging the images [10] of the prison in terms of standard vision about the real prison the data collected sustain two distinguished codes engaged in wording: the codes of Ana Blandiana and the codes of the target population. The scientific investigation generates the use of referential material from the fieldwork that proposes the examination of the findings from the vantage point of the third code, the code of neuroscience.

The description of the author defines in a metaphoric way the picture of Jilava giving the impression of an oral presentation. We consider the fragment a “text picture” because of the local details and national meanings of the prison; it illustrates the drawing of the “video” presentation inside literary discourse about the prison. The codes of the respondents are related to the author’s description/statement, provide inter-textuality (are related to other knowledge about the Jilava prison), offer literacy reflections and produce “photographic” understanding of the military space: “The image of the Jilava prison is dark/sinister but at the same time well known (he have watched several films about camps); this vision becomes special place, a penitence paradise. Man realizes that the prison has no security system and this is unusual for the habitual procedures” (2); “The presidential convoy passing in front of the prison as the chief of the national prison visits the prisoners without meeting their expectations. It was only an exercise of authority from the part of the president. …wire, fence, high watch towers, unbelievable image, shoven character, striped uniform, penitential paradise, lack of freedom assumed” (20; 37); “The surprise of the engineer that there is no guard, no soldier, no gun because the prisoners guard themselves the prison. The entire country being a prison the prisoners have no way out. This gave him (the engineer) a great mobility taking into account the fact that there were not many differences between inside and outside of wired fence” (22); “an image that rests in my mind is that of the prison without guardians. Re-education, fear; in a metaphoric way the prison has extended outside” (18; 60).

The cognitive task involved into the item is not related only to memory; the enclosed space of Jilava indicates a concrete space, a symbol of moral justice and a pretext for simulating re-experiencing visual and spatial features of military space in a controlled way.

Synonyms of the term “image” are used in collected data many times-around 90 explicit uses are discovered. Visual representations [11] of Jilava reveal affective cognition of the captivity: “it is an image that hurts” (24); “upsettin, horror images of Jilava, all around with wire fence” (29); “I was very impressed by an image: all the citizens of the country were prisoners” (19). The exegesis of the metaphorical pictures rejects the possible questions regarding distortions of the findings because the discourses of the target population about Jilava are in terms of the current positions of neurosciences: “penitence paradise or imprisonment paradise” (1); “it is not a security system and the prisoners had no reason to escape from inside because all the country was a prison” (3); “high (watch) wooden towers, fence visually extended, the passing of the convoy, a shoven character” (4); “because of the (communist) regime Romania was a prison” (8); “the restrictions of the citizens are expressed in the image of the country as a prison” (9; 37); “I understand that there was no need of guardians because all the country being a prison. The enclosed persons had no ways to evade” (10); “The cold and dark walls of one building, all around wire fence, … The absolute silence is synonymous with death, means death” (11); “Ana Blandiana suggests the need for more freedom; the need to demonstrate the courage to say the whole truth” (14).

The greatest parts of data collected are distinguished by the moral cognition of Jilava and many questions remain to be debated from the functional point view of the moral brain: “a prison of extreme torture that could not be imagined by a normal mind; the shoven character in his striped uniform; this penitence paradise was watched and lived by the monk father Arsenie Boca. Being enclosed father Arsenie Boca travelled to the funerals of his mother and after that he come back inside the prison” (25); “an image of a virtue …as the result of the orthodox belief” (40). Diverse answers offer self-projection, reflections about the picture of Jilava, imagery processing: “shoven character in a striped uniform, wire fence, presidential convoy” (21; 39); “the entire country was a prison” (23); “reservation/enclosed/fold, -this is a hard term used in the text for prison; guardians-lost in their proper area; wire fence-place where there is no way out” (26); “an interesting description is that of the author concerning the risk of passing from one part to the other of the world-it doesn’t matter” (27); “lack of freedom self assumed-it is possible to become perfect” (28); “the prisoners guard themselves the prison but there are no differences between inside and outside the prison” (30; 44); “prisoners are guarded themselves; German soldier armed; high watch towers” (31); “high watch power; wire fence, the prisoner that watch the road; lack of guardians” (32); “the country as a prison” (33, 37); “camp movies; armed soldier; country being a prison, the prisoniers have no way to evade. The writer anayses the day by day life” (64); “presidential procession, prison, controlling towers, guardians-prisoniers, hair-cut; high walls that do not delineate a space-the prison, does not divide a town (Berlin) into two parts because it is about the borders of a country. The wire (fence) cuts the map of Romania from the geography class” (66). The concrete space of Jilava is connected to moral and social time of the Romanian history.

The content analysis of the data by details of visual images reveals a list of key terms or categorizations of the entities.

4. Discussion

The approach was feasible: visual and spatial representation of the prison is precise and close to the text of the author; the most important visual inputs are recognized in findings. As in the quantitative research the “associative cortex” solves in individual ways the task: mental imagery (as can be seen in the previous comments and Tables 1-3) the representation of the prison inherently becomes part of construction. There are some differences between the original description of captivity and the visual processing of it into the students’ narratives.

The analysis is made in normal conditions and with normal students; the visual and spatial abilities of target population are various. Presumably, we can expect or discover high performances in terms of military applications with persons having remarkably visual and spatial abilities (navigation, air forces and so on). That is, we consider, opening for our next studies because the cognition itself might parameterize the representation of prison.

Table 1. Images of the prison.

Table 2. Narratives’ categorization in terms of brain functioning.

Table 3. Content analysis-details of the images delineated and frequency of occurence.

5. Conclusions

- The approach could be considered a methodological innovation because it is a unique investigation that uses metaphor as a stimulus for measuring images by quantitative metrics.

- The findings re-new a paradox [12] : from the vantage point of propositional and analogous code [13] of the target population the research reveals important results because of the limits (visual ability of respondents).

- The presumption that the space cognition is dependent on social and moral cognition [15] is validated, the findings from the first item providing how the brains accomplish language of the prison: the semantic network of the term prison is formed by the social and moral extension of metric space in case of the imprisonment. Comparing to quantitative researches, this feature of the semantic structure defines the conditions of the experiment in the lab: other researchers on the topic in Eastern countries might use this technique and the results.

- The hypothesis about the relationship between the image of the prison in terms of military space and the implicit memory was confirmed. The interconnectedness of all constituent parts of visual and spatial brain [14] is dependent on storage, retrieval and recognition [15] of previous algorithms.

Cite this paper
Trif, V. (2016) Can Images—As a Result of Processing Metaphorical Brain—Be Processed by Quantitative Metrics?. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 4, 123-129. doi: 10.4236/jss.2016.43018.
[1]   Trif, V. (2015) Gender and Spatial Reasoning. Papers of the “Conference Gendered Divisions of Space”, Addleton Academic Publishers, New York.

[2]   Blandiana, A. (1992) Thunderous Applause in A Drawer (Sertarul cu aplauze). Editura Tinerama, Bucuresti, 329-330.

[3]   Trif, V. (2015) Spatial Cognition: Theoretical Considerations. Procedia SBS, 187, 168-172.

[4]   Trif, V. (2015) Case Study between Typical and Atypical Investigations. Proceedings EIIC 2015-4th Electronic International Interdisciplinary Conference, Zilina, 37-39.

[5]   Trif, V. (2014) Epistemological Limitations of Study Case. An Empirical Investigation. Procedia SBS 16547, 417-421.

[6]   Halliday, M.A.K. (1994) Language as Social Semiotic. Edward Arnold, London and New York.

[7]   Taylor, S. (2013) What Is Discourse Analysis. Bloomsbury Academic, London.

[8]   Nathan, P. (2011) The Oxford Handbook of Culture and Psychology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

[9]   Gardner Gardner, J., Merriam, E., Movshon, A. and Heeger, D. (2008) Maps of Visual Space in Human Occipital Cortex Are Retinoptic, Not Spatiotopic, The Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 3988-3999.

[10]   Dayan, P. (2006) Images, Frames, and Connectionist Hierachies. Neural Computation, 18, 2293-319.

[11]   Kosslyn, S. (2008) Remembering Images. Memory and Mind, Taylor and Francis Group, New York and London.

[12]   Kapur, N. (2011) The Paradoxical Brain. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

[13]   Matlin, M. and Genesco, S. (2014) Cognitive Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Singapore.

[14]   Fields, R. (2008) Beyond the Synapse. Cell-Cell Signaling in Synaptic Plasticity, Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge & New York.

[15]   Trif, V. (2015) Spatial Cognition: Qualitative Data Measured by Quantitative Metrics. Oxford Neuroscience Sympo- sium, University of Oxford, 25th March 2015, Unpublished Paper.