1) Causality is never communicated or perceived. It's internally constructed as a spatial structure. thinkers implicitly know this. People weak in like Singu have to be told the same concept over and over again using the right word in the right consensus group in the right field.


Apperception --->Categories--->image Schema--->Causal Calculus--->Causal Graph--->Parietal lobe--->Introverted Logic


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transc...l_apperception (How self-images are possible)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego..._of_categories (What can be done with self-images)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schema...nitive_science (Connection to Cognitive Science)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_..._image_schemas (Types of self-images)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality#Causal_calculus (Very popular formulation of causal reasoning)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_graph (the basis image schema for the Causal Calculus)
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_theory (graphs are very general)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pariet...l_significance (Neurology has a notion of graphs ['spatial relationships'])
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constr...d_Koeing_model ('categorical relations', there's that word category again)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_theory (there's that word category again, graphs are very general)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socion...with_memetics) (Introverted Logic--->'categorizations', there's that word category again)


2) The reason Causality is a spatial structure is because observables, measurements, datasets, words, rules, facts, etc. require a hypothesis that relates expectations as dependencies. It doesn't matter how fluid and unscientific your field is (yes, including the social sciences) because even randomness and quantum uncertainty have structure that informs expectations at some level so thinking can still occur.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judea_Pearl#Research
"His work on causality has "revolutionized the understanding of causality in statistics, psychology, medicine and the social sciences" according to the Association for Computing Machinery."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness#In_science
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

Recommended books:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality_(book)
https://www.basicbooks.com/titles/ju...9780465097609/


3) The funny thing about Singu's computer metaphor is that there is a guy who literally wrote the books "Programmer's Guide to the Mind" Volumes I and II over 22 years ago using MBTI and Neurology. You can easily relate it to Socionics with sufficient IQ (interestingly, also hypothesized to center around parietal function). So pardon me if I still don't think you're missing much from Singu.
https://web.archive.org/web/20030308...2/Book_057.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20021224....htm#Perceiver
https://web.archive.org/web/20021224...h9.htm#Objects


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuros...gration_theory