Cellular intelligence (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, February 03, 2022, 12:07 (813 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: The bolded sentence does not explain the fact that our early brain was way over-expanded for the uses of that time. That defines 'anticipation'.

dhw: That is not a fact! You still haven’t grasped the sequence I am proposing. Our brain would have expanded, like every past brain, to meet some new requirement which the existing brain could not cope with through complexification. None of the brains were “over-expanded”. They all expanded to the size needed at the time, and the extra cells coped with all demands through complexification till the next major requirement.

DAVID: your tortured explanation does not review the fact that while each time a brain expands to larger size and complexity it has lots of room for future use with all those extra cells which then do use complexification to organize what is given.

That is precisely what I have said, but you have left out the question of why the brain expanded in the first place. I have bolded it for you. Instead of your God operating on brains to expand them BEFORE extra cells were needed, I propose that brains expanded IN RESPONSE to a need, and then proceeded to cope with subsequent needs through complexification, until once again they needed extra cells. No brain was/is OVER-EXPANDED! The cells are in use all the time. And sapiens shrinkage was not because of “over-expansion” but because cells which had been in use became redundant when complexification took over.

Fire spot
QUOTE: "Prof. Barkai concludes: "Our study shows that early humans were able, with no sensors or simulators, to choose the perfect location for their hearth and manage the cave's space as early as 170,000 years ago -- long before the advent of modern humans in Europe. This ability reflects ingenuity, experience, and planned action, as well as awareness of the health damage caused by smoke exposure."

dhw: So you were wrong. The new brain did not go unused for thousands of years, as you have claimed, and our ancestors were a darn sight cleverer than you thought.

DAVID: Not wrong. Just enabled to figure out a new problem.

So you don’t think that figuring out a new problem constitutes use of the brain.

DAVID: […] The new brain anticipated needs, without question. I assume the cave folks experimented with different areas to find the best spots.

dhw: If cave folks experimented because they were cold and wanted fires, their brains were RESPONDING to a need, not ANTICIPATING it. And their experiments would no doubt have resulted in new complexities – like illiterate women learning to read – as they worked out solutions to their problems. Complexifications do not anticipate requirements that don’t yet exist!

DAVID: Still twisted. The larger brain has new capacities to be used and complexify. Arrived in advance of new needs.

There is no disagreement here, other than over the cause of expansion and the silly notion of “over-expansion”. We do not know of any changes to the brain that take place in anticipation of a new requirement. And so, as above, the brain expands to meet a new requirement; its cells then use their ability to complexify to meet further requirements until the next biggie again requires more cells. In sapiens, complexification took over completely. You have tried to use this process to illustrate your belief that your God designs species in anticipation of changing requirements. I am pointing out that both brain and species undergo their changes IN RESPONSE to requirements. The brain expands and complexifies IN RESPONSE to new requirements/conditions; common descent entails organisms changing IN RESPONSE to new requirements/conditions. Nothing originates BEFORE it is needed or BEFORE conditions allow for innovations.

Transferred from “More Miscellany”:

DAVID: Secondhand design by many cells is amorphous without a specific direction.

dhw: The specific direction of all the designs is survival. If your God exists, he will have a wider purpose, and we can only speculate what that might be.

DAVID: No speculation, humans!

And so you repeat your theory, ignoring the massive contradictions we are discussing on that thread, and you refuse to speculate on logical alternatives.

dhw: Yep, a molecule with a mind of its own would certainly be a brilliant design. Why do you assume that a life form that acts intelligently (as if it has a mind of its own) is not intelligent and does not have a mind of its own?

DAVID: And I ask again, where did the information to make that mind come from?

dhw: How many more times? Nobody knows where life and intelligence come from, but they may have come from your God. Our current disagreement concerns the question of whether cells are or are not intelligent. So why don’t you answer my now bolded question?

DAVID: God designed cells so perfectly they look intelligent but are automatic.

You assume that are not intelligent because you assume that they are not intelligent. Not much headway there!