Post reply

Reply to the message by David Turell

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> > DAVID: [i]It is relevant, since the only expansions related to it are quite small.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: How can shrinkage, which is caused by the efficiency of complexification, be relevant to small expansions? Your argument has always been that autonomous small expansions do not prove that the brain is capable of autonomous large expansions. I propose that autonomous small expansions show that the brain is capable of autonomous brain expansion, and in former times, the brain’s capacity for complexification was limited by its size and required more cells. Why is this not feasible?
> 
> In humans neurogenesis is mainly limited to small neuron additions to the hippocampus. Shrinkage in our brains is the result, primarily, of rearranging many of the extra neurons into effective circuits and discarding the unused. Of course the natural result is slight enlargement of some regions. Your theory is pure supposition in the face of these known facts.
>  
> > DAVID: [i]There is no way your 'intelligent cells' could understand how to prepare for the future.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: I don’t know how often you want me to repeat that my ‘intelligent cells’ did not prepare for the future. I have bolded yesterday’s reply. Why do you persistently ignore your own description of how they work – by reaction, not by anticipation? 
> 
> In our brain extra cells are already present to reorganize. Where did all the extra cells come from in past 200 cc enlargements? There had to be novel neurogenesis driven by what force? I'm with God.
> >  
> > DAVID: [i]Our brain lay fallow from (current science) 315,000 years ago until about 50,000 years ago with better language. But it was ready for the new burst of activity due to advanced planning with the complexification mechanism ready to go.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: Also dealt with over and over again. Yes, the complexification mechanism was ready to go. But the complexification mechanism only functions when there are new requirements to make it function. And so there was a period of stasis until new ideas resulted in new requirements. So what do you think was planned in advance?
> 
> What was planned in advance was our large human brain ready to go when we learned how to use it. Our God-given brain.