Big brain evolution: changes in sapiens skull shape (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Sunday, February 18, 2018, 15:22 (296 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You are equating implementation with enlargement, when the only fact we have is shrinkage. I'll stop with that in my theorizing.

dhw: But you don’t stop with that! You propose that your God enlarged the material brain, and only then were pre-sapiens able to think up their new concepts and implement them. And yet in complete contradiction you also hypothesize that the material brain is NOT responsible for thinking up concepts, which are produced by the immaterial self/soul (dualism).

My software (s/s/c) hardware (brain) concept makes that issue entirely clear to me.

dhw: And you also ignore the fact that there is no evidence of the brain modifying itself BEFORE implementation of concepts, whereas we know that it does modify itself as a RESULT of implementation, and enlargement is a form of modification.

Again manipulating the word modification to cover over the fact that new use makes the brain shrink.

dhw: …a million years ago brains must have been plastic enough to allow for lots of new neurons.
DAVID: I'm only adding to my theory about God and brain size are facts we know. If an ancient brain wanted to add many neurons and grow in volume it had to tell the skull to enlarge and the Mothers to change their pelvis size. All had to coordinated. Do you now see the reason for design?

dhw: I have always seen the reason for design, and do not dispute its logic (though I do dispute the logic of your God needing to design every single innovation, natural wonder etc. individually in order to produce the human brain). Most innovations would require changes elsewhere to accommodate them, and all changes would have been impossible without plasticity. However, none of them support your hypothesis that your God made all the changes BEFORE circumstances required or allowed them, as opposed to their taking place in RESPONSE to the conditions.

You are ignoring the point that a designer can run evolution by his plans for advancement. This removes from the equation 'circumstances required or allowed'. You are still stuck in Darwin and survival of the fittest. I propose God speciates. You are still with speciation from necessity and pressure from nature. I'm not.


DAVID: …I can reach my immaterial s/s/c only through my material brain. My living 'me' is material with active thoughts that are immaterial. My living 'me' has shaped my immaterial personality. I see 'me' as both material and immaterial all the time fully interfaced. The s/s/c becomes independent and function on its own is in death or non -functionality of the brain.

dhw: Of course all our material observations and experiences shape our immaterial s/s/c, and we are a mixture of interacting material and immaterial, and the s/s/c depends on the brain for information concerning the material world, but it is the immaterial self/soul that does the THINKING as it processes, analyses, remembers, feels, makes its decisions and issues its instructions. I don’t know what you mean by self/soul/ consciousness “reaching” itself. It IS itself, and if you think its consciousness depends on the brain, you are a materialist. Dualism (= TWO entities) separates s/s/c from body (including brain), although the two interact during physical life.

I am firmly a dualist. My material body can only sense my s/s/c if my brain is functional. You can follow my reasoning if you accept the concept that our consciousness is a quantum state mechanism that is part of God's universal consciousness. In that way consciousness mechanism is material (quanta) construction but its thoughts are immaterial. I'm agreeing with Penrose.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum