Introducing the brain: general (Introduction)

by dhw, Saturday, February 26, 2022, 07:40 (787 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Complexification is an internal process in our brain that in no way explains how brains got bigger during evolution.

dhw: Of course it doesn’t. But if a very small area of our brain has expanded because of additional requirements, it is not unreasonable to suppose that in the past, when complexification could not cope with new requirements, the same process would have applied. You still like to skate over the fact that you believe the complexification mechanism works as and when required, independently of your God’s intervention, so once more: why do you think it was necessary for him to keep operating on all the hominins and homos when the same mechanism could have been used to produce new cells as and when required?

DAVID: Same mistake. Our brain has very limited ability to produce new neurons. I think God made all prior hominin/homo brains in the same form.

It is not a mistake. It is a different theory from yours. The fact that we generally do not produce new neurons can be attributed to the fact that complexification has taken over from production of new cells. We don’t know why, though at least I’m sure you will agree that our brain could hardly go on expanding indefinitely without dire repercussions on the rest of our anatomy. Imagine an elephant-sized head being carried around on your body. The time had to come when expansion would cease. I have no doubt that prior hominin/homo brains would have complexified, and since we know that they expanded, it makes perfect sense that once their capacity for complexification had been reached, they needed new cells. That also applies to your own theory. Why else would your God have needed to give them additional cells? The only difference between us is that you insist they had the extra cells BEFORE they needed them, whereas I propose that the additions were made in response to new requirements. And you still haven’t explained why your God could not have given them the same autonomy for expansion as for complexification.

dhw: What is your explanation for the end of expansion in favour of complexification. Do you think your God might have been trying out different designs? (See "BIGGEST BACTERIUM.")

DAVID: Seven ounce change objection of mine not answered.

See above. If our brains had gone on expanding indefinitely, we would have been walking around balancing an elephant head on our puny bodies. Expansion had to end at some time. Now please tell us your own explanation for the end of expansion in favour of complexification.

Neurons may make future plans

DAVID: I view this as an attempt to understand complexification.

dhw: I’ve had trouble understanding the article. Please could you explain to me what exactly neurons are believed to predict.

DAVID: Obviously handling future uses: [dhw: we don’t need the quotes]
It is in large part a theoretical prediction.

What is a theoretical prediction? Most predictions are “theoretical” since nobody KNOWS the future, though of course predictions based on established facts have every chance of coming true. (I predict that tomorrow will be Sunday, 27th February.) But I don’t understand WHAT is predicted by our neurons. It seems that you don’t either.