Brain Expansion (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, May 24, 2020, 09:08 (439 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You keep forgetting, as God creates a new larger brain it already contains the ability to complexify, as I'v e stated many times.

dhw: You keep forgetting that your God must have designed the mechanism for complexification in the first place. And if so, what makes you think he could not also have designed the mechanism for expansion in the first place?

DAVID: Because I fully believe only God speciates.

Your “full beliefs” are not an answer to my question! You are merely saying you fully believe he didn’t!

DAVID: As I've reminded you, your autonomous brain enlargement has to include different bony parts to change also in baby skull, adult skull and Mother's pelvis. All without guidance.

dhw: Must I remind you that I gave you a full answer? But you don’t believe in cell communities that respond to changing requirements and so you ignore my answer.

DAVID: Your answer doesn't work. Cell committees are made to be cooperative so life can function. They do not have the ability to design for the future. Just your wishful thinking.

Yet again: my theory does NOT entail planning for the future, but RESPONDING to new requirements. And despite all the evidence to the contrary (adaptation of all kinds, and the modern brain RESPONDING to new demands) you still cling to the idea that your God steps in to expand brains, skulls and birth canals BEFORE there is any need for expansion.

DAVID: And how about telling me what specifies which parts of the brain are to be enlarged? Not autonomous if there are specifications to be followed.

dhw: […] The parts of the brain to be enlarged will be determined by the nature of the requirement. For instance, you commented on the human cerebellum:

DAVID: ...the human brain contains the ability for the cerebellum to help with language[…]. This further supports my approach to brain enlargement, that it has to be specially designed for the new processes of which it is capable. Hard thought is not capable of this result, which requires special design.

dhw: Nobody knows what hard thought can and cannot do.

DAVID: It causes our brain, the only example we have to shrink. That is a fact, not woolly wishes.

You have agreed over and over again that hard thought causes complexification, and it is the efficiency of complexification that has caused shrinkage: “Our special brain can complexify, and by increasing certain networks of neurons remove other areas as now unnecessary […] We have a special brain with this remarkable degree of complexification that can cause that much shrinkage, unlike any previous brain”. (Quoted by me on May 5 at 10.53.) Elsewhere I pointed out that if hard thought caused brains to shrink, we would finish up with a dot.

dhw: […] why did you compare complexification of the brain to expansion of the muscles? Muscles don’t complexify, and the complexifying brain doesn’t expand! But I’ll tell you what: muscles (which are also cell communities) expand with repeated exercise, and I have proposed that brains expanded with the mental equivalent of repeated exercise in the form of “hard thinking”. […]

DAVID: Ignoring that complexification shrinks brains exactly from hard thought!

See above. Now please explain what’s wrong with my version of the comparison you initiated.

DAVID: Have you forgotten the zygote carries all the information for the new individual? The zygote comes from the junction of germ cells. From there stem cells take over and modify their DNA directing it into different states for different kinds of cooperating cells in the various organs. All top down creation! The genome is its own special directive community running the others.

dhw: It’s clear that whatever the process, there is a hierarchy within cell communities, and intelligent levels issue instructions to the rest, who cooperate in producing the required result. If the genome runs all the other cooperating communities, that's fine with me.

DAVID: Hierarchy means top down control, not your bottom up.

Of course it does. My whole theory is based on intelligent cells directing operations and cell communities cooperating accordingly. I have no idea why you called it “bottom up”. Once again, thank you for confirming my theory and explaining how it works.

DAVID: You sure resent my obvious down grade of Shapiro to force you to admit, it is pure theory that has not added to any new advance in understanding evolution.

dhw: I have never ever at any point in any sentence in any thread claimed that it is more than a theory. And the proof of your theory is….?

DAVID: The basis of your theory is primarily wishful thinking, not based on the facts of the necessity of true mental design activity. Cooperation is not designing!

Of course it isn’t. The designing is done by intelligence ("top down" as you called it), and many scientists believe that cells are intelligent. Their intelligence guides the cooperation between individual cells and between cell communities. Why you call this “wishful thinking” (and “bottom up”) is beyond me, but “natural genetic engineering” remains a theory because we have no proof that this intelligence is powerful enough to create Shapiro’s “evolutionary novelties”. And now, for the third time, please tell us the proof of your theory.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum