Brain Expansion (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Saturday, April 25, 2020, 22:56 (35 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: The obvious conclusion by all written is the artifacts represent creation by the current brain size found. Your bold is a contortion of reasoning generally accepted. Raising a possibility doesn't prove your theory.

dhw: The articles don't deal with the cause of expansion! Do give us a reason for expansion which is “generally accepted”.

Of course they don't. The scientists are limited to their assumption natural evolution caused expansions and the bigger brained hominins made the artifacts found with them. Theists believe God did it.

DAVID: As I read your prose, all it tells me is the smaller previous brain immaterially thought of the artifact, which to me means visualized it, and that forced a 200 cc enlargement…..

dhw: Once again you ignore what I write, so let me repeat it with a bit more emphasis: small brained homo’s initial concept: KILLING FROM A DISTANCE. Not visualizing it, and no, no, no, the initial concept does not force an enlargement. What forces the enlargement is the process of DESIGNING, WORKING OUT THE DETAILS, LEARNING TO RECTIFY MISTAKES and also making it, because while our homo is making it and trying it out, there will be NEW INFORMATION which will require MORE of that you call “hard thinking”, and it is the “hard thinking” that causes changes – in this case expansion – to the brain.

I'm afraid all I can do is analyze what I have done with our very specialized brain. I start recognized need (not a hard part) and then with design as you do. I would remind you design implies visualizing a possible product solution. That is the hard part. I must ask you: tell me about your experiences in conceptualizing a new productive p, and ow difficult is any of it?


DAVID:…. the new species waited awhile (your stasis)*** and then put it together easily because of the new complex enlargement.

dhw: Crazy! Once the new artefact is made, we have a newly enlarged brain. There then follows a period of thousands of years when there are only minor developments which, as you said yourself, “add nothing to size until the next jump”. THAT is the STASIS! (You fussed about the gap between the launch of sapiens’ brain and the 260,000 or so years of STASIS that followed. I explained it.)

A terrible explanation!!! Early sapiens 315,000 years ago lived just like erectus and other following pre-sapiens in a stone age until 12,000 years ago. Yes, they picked up an early form of language and some better hunting artifacts, like the two-foot throwing stick. That is real stasis with a great advanced brain sitting around waiting to be used much more completely.


DAVID: Thus archaeologists find brain and artifacts timed together. You've invented a possibility that is not based on any interpretations I've seen or had myself for 50 years. I fully reject it.

dhw: Of course the brain and artefacts are timed together. The FIRST artefacts could not exist until the brain had finished expanding.

We agree, but n o on the method of expansion. I'm still with God doing it

dhw: Now please explain to me why it is unreasonable to assume that if changes to the modern brain are the RESULT of hard thinking, changes to the ancient brain might also have been the RESULT of hard thinking.

It is obvious our advanced brain is totally different from the early ones, like Lucy's and following. Our brain shrunk 150 cc in the past 35,000 years. How does that factor into your thinking. Just ignore it is mainly what you are doing. You are focused on one change, but not the other. The shrinkage tells us how advanced our brain is and how different from past ones. At the natural level of discussion, which we are doing, you've proven nothing by focusing on only one point of brain function. You must use the whole picture as I do before I'll accept any sort of slim proof of your hopeful very strained conjecture.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum