Brain expansion: different theories about rapid expansion (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, September 01, 2020, 08:11 (28 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: …if the designer did not tell us how to use our brains but anticipated how the enlargement would be used and what all hominin/homo enlargements might achieve, please tell us what he did anticipate if he didn’t anticipate what we achieved.

DAVID: God gave us free will, remember? He could not anticipate every invention of activity by our every active souls using our brains.

dhw: You have told me why your God did not anticipate what we achieved, but I asked you what he DID anticipate.

DAVID: That we would dominate the world and be in charge of everything. Generalizations non specific expectations.

So when you wrote that “pre-sapiens expansion means…the obvious enlargement but also the designer’s anticipation of how that enlargement will be used…” and “All hominin/homo enlargements are in anticipation of what might be achieved/accomplished by the new species” you just meant he knew that each new species would dominate the world. I’m surprised to hear that each new hominin/homo actually dominated the world, but even if you really meant just sapiens, why couldn’t your God’s crystal ball have given him the same message if he’d designed the autonomous mechanism I keep proposing?

DAVID: The evidence from our brain is clear. Only a few new cells are made by our extremely accomplished organ. No evidence for your theory.

dhw: Nobody knows how the brain expanded. The fact that our brain changes as a REACTION to any and all physical and mental and emotional demands made on it, and even produces a few new cells in doing so (although it has stopped expanding overall) seems to me to provide sufficient evidence for my theory to be regarded as feasible. There is no evidence that one fine night God stepped in to perform an operation on a group of Moroccan brains, skulls and pelvises.

DAVID: There is no evidence for your theory that the brain learned how to adapt itself on its own.

But you wrote: “our brain has the adaptability to react to any and all physical and mental and emotional demands we place on it”, and you have agreed that it does so without any involvement from God! He gave us free will, remember? So what does your comment mean? That God stepped in and gave all post-operative hominins and homos lessons on how to use their free will?

DAVID: There is no proof any brain knows how to expand itself, as the only brain we know doesn't.

Yes it does, but only in specific sections. And for the thousandth time, there is no proof of any theory. The best we can is offer a feasible explanation. Why is not feasible that the past brain functioned in the same way as the present brain, by reacting to “any and all physical and emotional and mental demands made on it” through complexification and expansion?

DAVID:The bold forgets my discussions of molecular errors. In advancing evolution God can not trust a DNA design mechanism totally on its own!

dhw: Your discussion of molecular errors finished up with you telling us to ignore them and focus on the 99.99999% success rate.

DAVID: Twisted distortion of my argument. To keep on living each organism needs precise editing. In evolution God is always the final editor. Two separate topics.

No distortion. See the errors thread.

DAVID: Your interpretation of how a brain reacts does not include any evidence of enlargement. [...] Advances in evolution are so complex only a thinking biological engineer can create them. The brain has never been shown to enlarge itself to the degree seen in fossils.

dhw: Once more: Nobody knows how the brain expanded, and our brain has stopped expanding overall, which is why we have to theorize. See above for the rest of the argument.

DAVID: Our brain stopping enlargement leads only to the conclusion major steps in evolution are over. Theories should fit the facts we know and not contort them.

We are not discussing whether evolution is over, but your final comment is spot on. Please tell us what facts are contorted by the proposal that just as the modern brain changes itself IN RESPONSE to new requirements by complexifying and sometimes producing a few new cells, earlier brains may have functioned (it’s a theory) through the same process, but produced a lot more new cells than the modern brain, which has now stopped expanding? (Enhanced complexification also led to the redundancy of certain cells.)


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum