The Pattern is Symbolic, Silly! Pattern Matching and the Symbolic Interface

“Vitrified Fort, Borrodale – geograph.org.uk – 300955” by Jim Bain is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

The Pattern is Symbolic, Silly!

Pattern recognition is not just a cognitive process; it is the brain’s way of saying, “Hey, I’ve seen this before – probably!” (Sridhar, 2025). At its core, every pattern is symbolic, and every symbol is a pattern, whether it’s a face in a crowd, a melody from a few notes, or the uncanny resemblance between your boss and a grumpy badger (HappyNeuronPro, 2024). The brain’s symbolic interface is so pervasive that it operates far beyond the reach of conscious thought, making it the ultimate multitasker of the nervous system (PMC, 2014; Neuro Now, 2025).

Patterns as Resonance

A pattern is not just a single symbol; it is a collection of symbols which, in effect, form a resonance, or a recognition. Typically, attached to that resonance, is some kind of meaning. A pattern match can have different conscious and unconscious associations (Neuro Now, 2025; ForteLabs, 2022). For example, the sight of a red apple may evoke memories of childhood, the taste of sweetness, or even the biblical tale of temptation—all at once, and all without a word being spoken (Neuro Now, 2025; ForteLabs, 2022). This resonance is what allows patterns to be so flexible and adaptive, enabling the brain to respond to a wide range of stimuli with remarkable speed and efficiency (PMC, 2014; Neuro Now, 2025).

Looking deeper, it may be possible to see that, an individual can see consciously, an adorable and tasty red apple, while at the same time being unconsciously terrified that it may be thrown at them, due to a hidden childhood trauma.

What this means is that a symbol, either one it’s own, or via a pattern match, is in itself, a multidimensional trigger. It will bring to mind, potentially, multiple meanings, both conscious and unconscious, and these meanings will therefore need to be prioritised, and somehow, unconscious conflicts be mitigated.

The Human Symbolic Interface

Here at Self-Transcendence Research, we like to think of this pattern matching ability to be part of a wider human symbolic interface, which is actually, the most powerful interface to our inner, mainly unconscious drivers and motives, those that come from our ancestral DNA.

Non-verbal Messages

When we look at human DNA, we can see that, at some point, the “story” told by that DNA, was no more than that of a single cell. Generation after generation that followed, added further levels of complexity, until at last, humans emerged, then, even later, so did the first languages.

What this means, is that for the majority of our development genetically, messages could not have used complex lingual structures, and must, therefore have been symbolised, as follows:

The animal meets the predator, for the first time. It will be conscious of what it is seeing, and enter into an earlier established set of reflex actions, trying to judge if this new animal is a threat. There will be a number of “common signs” that it may hold in it’s genetic memory, each with an applied trigger level. It will also need to collect sensory information, in order for that animal to be recognised in future.

If the animal hits a trigger level, in the signs it is recognising, and starts to run, and is quick enough for the predator to not be able to catch it, then the information for that new predator, how to recognise it and when to run, will be held in that particular animals memory. Those memories, are likely to be reduced into some abstract, non verbal mix of pattern points for matching – colours, body language, as simple as needed, to allow an automatic recognition of the threat and the chosen threat response.

It is our suggestion, that encounters such as this need to be repeated many times, for a strong symbol of threat, linked to an automatic trauma avoidance response to be embedded in any DNA that is passed on to descendants. We also suggest multigenerational reinforcement will make for the strongest, clearest, instinctual responses.

Abstract Symbols and Patterns

We also suggest that optimisation means that in this non-verbal world of our genetic past, that the actual patterns that are matched will be very much abstracted from the original message, and it may well not be recognisable as the original source, if it were to be viewed by the conscious mind.

Symbolic drift

Clearly, when a new threat is discovered, and a new reflect action needs to be created by the self-learning organism, then the more optimised the data-set, the quicker that it can be processed. This is why, often, when we first start to connect to genetic originated symbols, they can appear very different to that original image of the predator.

In order to expand that very abstract symbol into something more understandable, therefore, we have found that the symbolic interface needs to be exercised regularly. The ability to “see” within, is a “muscle”, that needs to be grown.

Intuitive Interface

It should be possible to see, therefore, that this non-verbal, mainly unconscious genetic process for matching new threats to time honoured reflex actions is in itself, a learnt, genetically inherited process. We can also posit that we can include within that interface, that part of the human mind often called intuition itself, and that this abstract mixture of feelings and patterns is exactly what some people listen for, and try to understand, when they are trying to work with their intuition.

We also suggest that Jung’s process of individuation, using, for example, active imagination may well be a way of developing this intuitive symbolic interface, by animating these ancestral “archetypical” genetic points of wisdom, through that interactive imaginative process.

Bias and the Subjectivity of Patterns

Despite the universality of pattern recognition, biases inevitably come into play, causing the same image to mean different things to different people (Neuro Now, 2025; Research Starters, 2012). For instance, two individuals may view the same photograph, but one sees a serene landscape while the other sees a hidden threat, depending on their past experiences and societal programming (Neuro Now, 2025; Research Starters, 2012). This subjectivity can cause incongruent coping responses, which may turn into maladaptive coping. (Neuro Now, 2025; Research Starters, 2012).

Incongruent Symbolic References

We suggest that it is possible, through behaviouralprogramming, to confuse threats with benign environmental inputs, and that this confusion can cause the hyper-vigilance and panic attacks of PTSD and C-PTSD. We therefore suggest that it is this symbolic interface that may well prove to be a significant step forward in our understanding of how to undo all of those “false” triggers. If a person can understand their hidden symbology, then it should be possible to re-symbolise those learnt associations in order to reduce the number and impact of potentially triggering environments.

Language and Symbolic Connotations

In language, words are not just symbols; they are patterns of meaningthat can vary widely depending on education, culture, and personal experience (ForteLabs, 2022; Research Starters, 2012). The word “home,” for example, may evoke feelings of warmth and safety for some, while for others it may bring up memories of stress and conflict (ForteLabs, 2022; Research Starters, 2012). This variability is something that means each person holds their own unique understanding of the world, and whenever we try to agree on anything, this aspect can make that task too complex to complete, for all but the simplest of concepts. (PMC, 2014; Neuro Now, 2025; ForteLabs, 2022).

Conclusion

The Human Symbolic Interface is potentially the most powerful way of interacting with yourself. It is the notion that symbols and patterns are recognised and can be used to trigger existing genetic and pre-verbal response patterns. Sometimes, when forced into incongruent or maladaptive coping behaviours due to long-term trauma, which can turn into an automated and maladaptive behaviour, which keeps being applied long after the source of the trauma has been removed.

By working with, one’s intuition, for example, we propose that this symbolic interface can be expanded, better understood, and reframed, in order to correct that, now obsolete and maladaptive coping pattern.

Creating new links between symbols and reflex like responses

We suggest that whenever an individual adopts, for example, a new coping style, for a new environmental challenge. That so long as that new learnt response is proven to work, and is both congruent and adaptive, then the intuitive system will compile that data set, and set it to to automatically execute, based on its known triggers.

However, we also suggest, that due to behaviourist conditioning, that, with enough repetitions, even incongruent or maladaptive coping styles will be compiled into fast, intuitive responses. Once these are embedded, they can respond so quickly, that it can be very hard to prevent that action.

References

HappyNeuronPro (2024) Exploring Cognitive Skills: Pattern Recognition.
ForteLabs (2022) A Pattern Recognition Theory of Mind.
Neuro Now (2025) Pattern Recognition and the Brain: How Cognitive Processing Works.
PMC (2014) Superior pattern processing is the essence of the evolved human brain.
Research Starters (2012) Pattern recognition.
Sridhar, S. (2025) ‘Constructive peer review made practical: a guide to the EMPATHY framework’, Journal of Marketing, 89(3), pp. 1-12.