Big brain evolution: brain size and intelligence (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Saturday, April 07, 2018, 16:18 (246 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: In life the dualist’s s/s/c can only “act through using its brain”, and of course it is restricted by the limitations of the brain/body, but it is not the brain/body that limits the intelligence of the s/s/c. I can imagine flapping my arms and flying, but I can’t do it. However, my dualist’s s/s/c can work out different ways in which I can use materials and enable myself to fly, and then the s/s/c uses the brain and body to give the concept material expression and form.

DAVID: Your concept leads to this preposterous idea: a person with an IQ of 70 is at that level because his s/s/c can do no better, even though his brain is really constructed just like yours and mine! But it isn't constructed the same way.

dhw: Why have you switched to the IQ? I have given you an example of how dualism works. Now you are offering me the materialist view that different brains give rise to different levels of intelligence, as if that invalidates the dualistic example. If you think my example is preposterous, and the brain is the source of intelligence, then please stop presenting yourself as a dualist. (See below.)

You don't understand my view because you refuse to recognize that in life the s/s/c is bound to work with the quality of the brain it is given. That is the point of IQ. Arthropithicus did not have the IQ of Erectus.


DAVID’s comment on Gazzaniga’s new book: If a brilliant scientist throws up his hands in surrender, who are we to try? Note my bold. Sleep walking is a great example of consciousness being present only if the brain allows it. In life the s/s/c doesn't work unless tied to the neuromechanics of the brain.

dhw: Thank you for this superb article. Sleep is yet another complex aspect of the insoluble mystery, but if you insist that the s/s/c cannot think unless the brain is “awake” and functioning, you are providing evidence for materialism. That is why NDEs are so important for dualists, since they run counter to the idea that thought depends on the functioning brain.I find it reassuring that this brilliant scientist is just as torn between materialism and dualism as I am, and I do wish you would acknowledge the same dichotomy in your own thinking!

DAVID: I'm happy to show we are all stumped. And please recognize living brain and NDE are two different circumstances, and the s/s/c may function differently in both.

dhw: Recognized. NDEs are only relevant to our discussion as evidence for dualism. Our discussion concerns the respective roles of the s/s/c and the brain in life. And you have missed the point: we are stumped because there is evidence both for dualism and for materialism, and nobody knows which is correct. When I present the case for dualism, you counter with evidence for materialism, but you refuse to recognize that IQ as a product of the brain, and new concepts as a product of the enlarged brain, both run counter to dualism. You say you are stumped. So am I, and so is Gazzaniga. He and I are stumped because we recognize the dichotomy created by the evidence. Now please explain WHY you are stumped, although you claim to be a dualist.

I am not stumped. I have a very specific dualistic theory: the s/s/c functions differently in life and in death/nonfunction. In life it must use the brain it attaches to and use it with the ability the brain has to handle whatever level of complex thought it is built to handle/allow. Thus my statement above. In death the s/s/c acts as an independent entity by a different quantum mechanism.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum