Brain expansion (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Friday, June 26, 2020, 19:34 (91 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Fully explained. Your theory demands expansion from force of a new concept, as I understand it. Which logically brings up the contradiction, why stasis after forced expansion?

dhw: Because, as you agreed on the other thread, stasis means nobody came up with any new ideas. What does this contradict? Do you think the implementation of a concept through expansion must automatically lead to new concepts? Why? Yet again, it is the dualist’s soul, not the brain that comes up with concepts.

But as I view it the brain must be complex enough to allow the new concepts. See the other thread.

DAVID: The extra neuron circuits had clear guidelines for the necessary changes. Guidelines work.

dhw: Your theory has God dabbling more neurons than necessary and then you have the complexification system removing the superfluous ones “on its own”. What a mess! Why can’t you stick to our earlier agreement? In the sapiens brain, complexification took over from expansion and proved so efficient that certain cells were no longer needed.

Not a mess. Full capacity for the new uses that would come. The new uses were anticipated. The bold is correct in my view. That doesn't disturb my logic.

dhw: You have forgotten the point, which is the ongoing expansion of an existing organ, the brain – not the formation of new species.

DAVID: You've forgotten. Each bigger brain is in a new species. Brain don't enlarge in a vacuum.

dhw: You are playing around with the word “species”. The different homos and their brains were not brand new life forms with no known antecedent, and you’ve answered your own question. Brains don’t enlarge in a vacuum, they enlarge from brains that already exist. The expanded brain is bigger than the previous brain. It is not a new species!

The change from habilis to erectus is not a new development, and a new species. New sized brain, new skull size, new mother's pelvis and this not species change? You are grasping.


dhw: New thoughts appear using EXISTING brain complexity (the spear example). And what on earth is “the thought quality of brain”? Once and for all: in dualism the soul does the thinking. Yes or no? It uses the brain for information and for implementation as defined above. Yes or no?

DAVID: Yes and no. Please add, in life, the soul must use in its companion brain to create thought, the complexity dependent upon presently existing brain capacity for complex thought.

dhw: I have explained precisely HOW the soul uses the brain. The complexity of thought does not depend on existing brain capacity for THOUGHT. The dualist’s brain does not do the thinking! Stop muddying the waters!

I'm not allowed to follow my theory, but only yours counts? The opposite of the bold is exactly my theory and you know it. The soul, in life, must use the existing complex brain neuronal networks to think. More advanced networks, more advanced thought allowed.


DAVID: Does new-sized brain and artifact appear simultaneously? What happened to stasis? That is the gross weakness of your idea.

dhw: Yes, the new-sized brain and the new artefact appear simultaneously, because the artefact can only appear when the brain has finished expanding sufficiently to produce it. What is your problem with stasis? The new-sized brain has implemented the concept. That does not mean that our homo now has to think up lots and lots of new concepts! We have agreed: stasis means “nobody came up with any new ideas”. There is no mystery here. My theory is all the stronger for the fact that you can’t seem to find any other weakness!

My explanation of 'stasis' from the other thread applies:

"Stasis does not really apply to you or me. The input in childhood is continuous from everyone and everything that surrounds us. That did not exist in the time frame the author discussed before language really exited. The sapiens brain of 315,000 ya undoubtedly looked and could have acted much like ours, was larger by 200 cc, and yet not used in the way you describe for yourself or me. As we've noted much input by many thinking folks over centuries has created the context of our awareness. It impinges upon us the moment we appear, and is sopped up quickly and constantly by a sponge-like childhood brain.

"My phrase 'learning to use it' implies the additive work done by successive humans over centuries and generations of us. They did the work. We receive the gift of that."

Think your theory is strong?


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum