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]Early sapiens did not use their brain as we do, the same brain![/i]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]Of course not. Our brain has thousands more requirements to cope with, and that is why the SAME CELLS have complexified! Why would new cells be added just to lie around doing nothing?[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]The specialized five layer prefrontal and frontal cortex was relatively unused conceptually until recently. Most of the brain did not change uses when the new frontal area appeared. What enlarges is what matters.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: The key to this is your use of the word “relatively”. You keep saying your God provided sapiens with cells that were not used until thousands of years later because he put them there in preparation for future concepts. (In fact he gave us too many, because we discarded 150 cc!) I don’t believe there were any cells, including cortex cells, that were not used. I propose that our new concepts would have resulted in existing cells complexifying. (And shrinkage happened when complexification made some hitherto useful cells redundant.) 
> 
> Complexification is a new consolidation of existing neurons and connections. So neurons waiting for new conceptualization were certainly alive, somewhat active, but not like when eventually in deep active thought producing a new concept, like Einstein's special thickened area. Complexification is the result of intensive new use.
> > 
> > [b]Fire spot[/b]
> 
> > DAVID:[i] Cells cannot design new complexity by themselves. Complexification is simply a reorganization of what exists, new connections appearing between neurons.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: New connections are the key! And you agree that the cells make these connections without your God’s intervention. And so perhaps you will at last answer my question: [b]if your God could design a mechanism that enabled cells to complexify without his intervention, why do you think he could not have designed the same mechanism to cause enlargement (i.e. cells adding to their number without his intervention)?[/b]
> 
> Previously explained. The  complexity of new designs requires an active mind planning it. The whole point of ID. You want secondhand design. If you had a new play in mind, would you outline the plot to a friend and ask him to write it?
> > 
> > [b]Cellular intelligence [/b](at last!)
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]ID hides God, but He is understood to be the designer. Cells automatically follow instructions in the information in the genome.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: You have just told us that ID-ers accept cellular intelligence designed by God, and now you tell us that cells are not intelligent but follow instructions. What did you mean when you said that ID-ers “[i]accept so-called cell intelligence[/i]” from God’s design, if you did not mean that they accept so-called cell intelligence from God’s design?
> 
> No change in ID or my view of their theory about cell intelligence. Final repeat: cells act as if they are innately intelligent, but are simply following intelligent information in their genome.