Brain Expansion (Evolution)

by dhw, Saturday, April 11, 2020, 12:21 (1685 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You recognized soul and brain have to work together at the brain's level of thought complexity ability.

dhw: I recognized no such thing. You claim to be a dualist, so what is the brain’s “level of thought complexity”?'

DAVID: Why did you leave out the word "complexity"?

I did not leave it out. Look, I’ve bolded it for you. I asked what you meant by the brain’s level of thought complexity, since you don’t believe the brain thinks. You agree that the soul uses the brain to gather information and to implement its ideas. I agree that the more information the brain has in store, the more complex the brain will be, but the dualist’s soul can use existing information to come up with new concepts (the spear example). But it can’t develop them if the brain does not have the necessary connections or capacity. Hence development of concepts leads to brain complexification (proven) or expansion (proven on a minor scale).
+
DAVID: And that is exactly which is counter to what archaeologists present: they assume the bigger brained erectus is only one capable of producing the better artifacts.

It doesn’t run counter to what they present! They don’t try to explain the expansions, and you keep ignoring the following:
dhw: […] there is no way of knowing whether the FIRST set was produced after the brain had ALREADY expanded, or the expansion resulted from the effort to design and make the artefact.

DAVID: I don't ignore. I find it unbelievable with no logical support in archaeological studies.

You keep admitting that your archaeological studies do not try to explain why the brain expanded! And there is no way of knowing...as bolded.

DAVID: […] You still want giant jumps just from thinking.

dhw: Nobody knows why there were big jumps, but since we know modern brains change as a result of the above processes, it is not unreasonable to believe that the process might have been the same in the days when expansion was possible.

DAVID: Only your body accepts your theory.

My body? You have not explained why the above is unreasonable.

DAVID: […] How does your theory provide for the time gaps that we know existed? It doesn't.

dhw: I keep explaining it to you. All the new phases have been followed by long periods of stasis. If the new brain is adequate to the needs of its possessors, there is no need for major new concepts or artefacts. […] there is no “having to learn to use it”. We (H.sapiens) used it as needed until X, Y and Z came up with new ideas – just like my old homo and the spear. But our brains complexified instead of expanding.

DAVID: Which means our brain is a totally different sort of brain from those in the past! Obvious.

I’ve just explained the time gaps. No comment from you, just a switch of subject. I would say that our brain is far more advanced, vastly more complex, but not “totally different”. Earlier homos would also have used their brains to gather information and implement their concepts.

DAVID: […] all our brain does is one cc here and there as required under plasticity. Logically earlier brains had the same limited plasticity.

dhw: But earlier brains had the plasticity to expand, whereas our brain apparently doesn’t, which is why complexity has taken over. Now tell me what facts you have to support your theory that God expands the brain.

DAVID: I find no other explanation, and you've strained for one no one else ever mentions.

I answered your point on plasticity. No comment from you. You wanted facts from me, and I gave them to you. I asked you for facts, and you can’t provide any. I have no idea whether archaeologists have dealt with my theory or have announced that God did it. Why don’t you just deal with the arguments instead of hunting for what other people have to say?

DAVID: […] God only made several enlargement steps.

dhw:If your God only deals with biggies, he must have created a mechanism which enables the brain to complexify and expand naturally, i.e. without his intervention. […] it is perfectly feasible that the unexplained expansions in earlier species could also have happened naturally through the same mechanism. Now please explain why you consider this theistic theory ”weird”.

DAVID: You are back to repeating a version of a humanistic God who gives up control to explain this most unusual brain we have now. Nice try sneaking your weird God into the conversation.

You have missed the point as usual, so I’ve bolded it now. Your silly “humanistic” argument has already been proved irrelevant by your own statements that he probably has thought patterns similar to ours, and why is it “weird” to propose a God who – while reserving the right to dabble - is interested in creating an ever changing spectacle of autonomous creatures rather than puppets, as actually exemplified by the free will you believe he has given to human beings?