Different in degree or kind; language (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Saturday, January 03, 2015, 09:32 (3398 days ago) @ David Turell


> > Tony: http://www.aaets.org/article30.htm
> > http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.genet.38.072902.091907
&am... > http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7039/abs/nature03524.html
> > http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0896627395903046
> > 
> > 
> > Tony: That better?
> 
> Yes, whole different level of memory discussion-But, we have no real idea of how much they can remember, and no good way to test. To revert back to my computer analogy, most people think that all of the processing is handled and all of the data stored in the computer itself. Yet, most peripherals have their own limited storage and processing abilities. Sometimes these are very limited, such as in the case of a mouse which is almost purely limited to the circuit pathways that check which way it is moving before sending that to the brain. Others, such as some keyboards, also save information regarding their current status, contain more complex signalling pathways, and generally some form of very limited buffer (memory storage) which is used as a way to manage data flow to the computer. -The simplest cell on the planet is a million times more complex than our computer peripherals. We know that they are both transmitters and receivers, just like peripherals, but we also know for a fact that they contain the ability to act semi-autonomously, which suggest that they have some limited capacity for data processing, which in turn implies they have a limited ability for information storage. To this extent, I definitely agree with DHW regarding cellular "intelligence".-As it applies to this discussion, however, the first question is about senses. Do the peripherals which comprise our five senses operate independently, and if so, to what extent? Is there a built in bypass that allows our to process our senses, at least temporarily and in a limited fashion, independent of brain function? -The last question starts with an observation. We know for a fact that when deprived of one of your 5 senses, the other sense heighten in order to compensate for the loss of the one, sometimes to a truly astonishing degree. (I'm thinking here of blind people that see with echo-location, for instance.) If, however, we have a built in receiver, what reason do we have for believing it to be solely within the province of the brain. Could this receiver, like our other 5 senses, not act independently of the brain and simply transmit the data to the brain? If so, could it not also be true that the signal for this receiver, like the other 5 senses, becomes so much clearer absent the noise from the other senses that it too appears heightened to an astonishing degree?

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.