I thought the US had a higher quality of life on average? It was a big thing because those lifestyles are not going to be sustainable in the near future....
People are arguing a sandman, yourself included, saying that I am saying that no physical changes occur
What I am saying is that all working non defective brains start off equal, and that changes made are not persistent.
am saying that the biggest cause of intelligence or a way of thinking is upbringing and environment, and that studying a brain will not show anything special.
There are exceptions where we may learn something from studying an exceptional brain, but people with exceptional brains are going to tend to be strange in some way. The people who seem smarter than most have a greater interest, or try harder or whatever.
If you can show me any definitive research that shows that brains that are not defective can be significantly different, and those difference can lead to increases in intelligence, I would appreciate it.
Some people do have a physical advantage, it's true. However given most people starting off equal, the person who puts in the most effort will be rewarded.
Have you any example of someone who had an analogous physical advantage in their brains?
I guess if you want to be pedantic you could say that it is a structural change. The same way a two harddrives with the same files will store them in slightly different ways.
However, this is hardly meaningful, and we would learn nothing new by studying it.
A more apt comparison would be with RAM.
We spend our lives patching and updating our brain OS, and while we are alive it is stored in the same way as RAM.
When we die the power is off, and so is the BrainOS. Studying our brains will not show a persistent structural change, just as studying a RAM chip that has been without power for a day won't show anything significant.
Never once did I mention magic or a soul, so please don't try and put words in my mouth.
What I am saying is that the personality of a person, or the "software" is a result of nurture.
To clarify, all working non defective brains start off the same and have no meaningful variations. (point 1)
The neural pathways that may be mapped as a result of upbringing and environment will not be observable upon death. (point 2)
Thus, studying the brains of dead people is misguided.
If you can show some evidence against point 1 or 2, I would appreciate it. Let me ask you again: What meaningful variations did we learn from studying Einstein's brain? Oh, that's right. None.
If I spent 10 years maintain a correct diet and exercise regime, then yes, I could quite likely run faster than Usain Bolt.
Just like your diet and what you do to your body can determine how it looks/acts during your life, the way you treat your brain can result in differences
Someone who studies most of their life and tries to come up with new ideas will have different "software" from someone who watched TV and parties most of their life. These difference are not in the "hardware" or structure of the brain, simply in the "software".
You've been making claims this whole thread, yet have not provided a single source.
You seem to be arguing from what you personally believe, none of which is backed by current understanding.
I'd point you to the wiki page on the human brain, and when you have a better understanding I would be interested if you hold the same beliefs as you do currently.
The "the arrangement of magnetic domains on the HDD platter surfaces" is something done by the software to standard hardware, so it still goes with what I said above.
If you buy a new car and there is a problem with cruise control, does that mean it is correct to infer that there may be cars of the same model that have significantly better cruise control?
That is the leap you are making, and it is not supported, either logically or with our observations.
My statements are not contradictory. You're extrapolation that the presence of defects means the presence of meaningful variations of a working model is false. That's all.
Why couldn't you be like Einstein or Telsa? Those guys were knowledgeable more than anything, and kept thinking and thinking until they found something that made sense. You will find the people who make new discoveries these days are the same, laboring away at it.
The worst thing we did was put these guys on a pedestal of intelligence, when they were probably not that more intelligent than many people on/.
For the record, what were the significantdifference found from studying Einsteins brain? Oh, right. None.
Can you provide a source showing why you believe intelligence is highly heritable? My research indicates quite the opposite....inheritance can play a part, but nurture plays more of a role than nature.
It seems to be due to a part of the brain missing.
What the people above don't seem to get is the prevalence of many types of defects is not evidence of radical possible differences in a working brain.
A particular car will be shipped out and most will work. The ones that work all work the same. The ones with defects may be grouped into the different defects. Yet if you fix that defect, it will be just like all the other working cars.
You're argument has so much more authority when you use insults...
Anyway
I am not denying variations in brain exist. I am saying teh variations in brains are about as meaningful as variations in livers, and are not the causes for different types and levels of intelligence in people.
Your use of an autistic mind as an analogy is interesting, but flawed. An autistic mind is a defective brain. Using my PC analogy before, an autistic mind is the equivalent of only being able to boot in single user mode.
Sorry, but I have read a lot on this and never found anything to meaningfully support that differences in the physical brain correspond to personality or intelligence. The differences in brains influence our personality or intelligence just as much as the differences in our livers or hair.
Slashdot Mirror
Finally, a voice with power pointing out the obvious.
Will anyone get on the bandwagon, will it go any further?
documentaries? Jesus Christ, that's just depressing.
Courts around the world?
They were cleared in the US, and the EU stupidly went after a 10 year old issue and fined them for it.
Sorry, but I think MS are pretty clear legally.
Besides, your last paragraph describe Apple to a tee.
I thought the US had a higher quality of life on average? It was a big thing because those lifestyles are not going to be sustainable in the near future....
I'm not ignorant.
People are arguing a sandman, yourself included, saying that I am saying that no physical changes occur
What I am saying is that all working non defective brains start off equal, and that changes made are not persistent.
am saying that the biggest cause of intelligence or a way of thinking is upbringing and environment, and that studying a brain will not show anything special.
There are exceptions where we may learn something from studying an exceptional brain, but people with exceptional brains are going to tend to be strange in some way. The people who seem smarter than most have a greater interest, or try harder or whatever.
If you can show me any definitive research that shows that brains that are not defective can be significantly different, and those difference can lead to increases in intelligence, I would appreciate it.
Some people do have a physical advantage, it's true. However given most people starting off equal, the person who puts in the most effort will be rewarded.
Have you any example of someone who had an analogous physical advantage in their brains?
Einstein didn't and Newton probably didn't.
It is well known that when a brain suffers trauma or damagage, other parts of the brain can be "rewired" and refit for a different purpose.
This still has nothing to do with the claim I made above about "standard" brains.
Agreed, but that has nothing to do with a discussion on whether or not we can learn something from studying a dead brain.
I guess if you want to be pedantic you could say that it is a structural change. The same way a two harddrives with the same files will store them in slightly different ways.
However, this is hardly meaningful, and we would learn nothing new by studying it.
A more apt comparison would be with RAM.
We spend our lives patching and updating our brain OS, and while we are alive it is stored in the same way as RAM.
When we die the power is off, and so is the BrainOS. Studying our brains will not show a persistent structural change, just as studying a RAM chip that has been without power for a day won't show anything significant.
You're not arguing a point that relates to the claim I made. You are arguing an adjacent point, essentially a strawman.
Otherwise, show me where I stated anything that is even close to fairy dust/unicorn farts/souls etc.
I know that everything is phsyical, genius.
Never once did I mention magic or a soul, so please don't try and put words in my mouth.
What I am saying is that the personality of a person, or the "software" is a result of nurture.
To clarify, all working non defective brains start off the same and have no meaningful variations. (point 1)
The neural pathways that may be mapped as a result of upbringing and environment will not be observable upon death. (point 2)
Thus, studying the brains of dead people is misguided.
If you can show some evidence against point 1 or 2, I would appreciate it. Let me ask you again: What meaningful variations did we learn from studying Einstein's brain? Oh, that's right. None.
If I spent 10 years maintain a correct diet and exercise regime, then yes, I could quite likely run faster than Usain Bolt.
Just like your diet and what you do to your body can determine how it looks/acts during your life, the way you treat your brain can result in differences
Someone who studies most of their life and tries to come up with new ideas will have different "software" from someone who watched TV and parties most of their life. These difference are not in the "hardware" or structure of the brain, simply in the "software".
You've been making claims this whole thread, yet have not provided a single source.
You seem to be arguing from what you personally believe, none of which is backed by current understanding.
I'd point you to the wiki page on the human brain, and when you have a better understanding I would be interested if you hold the same beliefs as you do currently.
nurture. not nature.
The "the arrangement of magnetic domains on the HDD platter surfaces" is something done by the software to standard hardware, so it still goes with what I said above.
Agreed, completely.
As you say though, it falsified a hypothesis -- yet people still continue down the same road. Why?
Wait, a simpler analogy.
If you buy a new car and there is a problem with cruise control, does that mean it is correct to infer that there may be cars of the same model that have significantly better cruise control?
That is the leap you are making, and it is not supported, either logically or with our observations.
Jesus Christ dude.
How many times do you have to try and understand?
The presence of various defects of a working model do not imply the presence of meaningful non defecting variations of a working model.
You seem to be convinced that's the case. Care to back it up?
My statements are not contradictory. You're extrapolation that the presence of defects means the presence of meaningful variations of a working model is false. That's all.
Why couldn't you be like Einstein or Telsa? Those guys were knowledgeable more than anything, and kept thinking and thinking until they found something that made sense. You will find the people who make new discoveries these days are the same, laboring away at it.
The worst thing we did was put these guys on a pedestal of intelligence, when they were probably not that more intelligent than many people on /.
For the record, what were the significantdifference found from studying Einsteins brain? Oh, right. None.
We could also predict they would be individualistic, egocentric and disrespectful of authority. All you had to do was look at me...
And with this, you have demonstrated your complete ignorance of genetics. Well done.
Can you provide a source showing why you believe intelligence is highly heritable? My research indicates quite the opposite....inheritance can play a part, but nurture plays more of a role than nature.
It seems to be due to a part of the brain missing.
What the people above don't seem to get is the prevalence of many types of defects is not evidence of radical possible differences in a working brain.
A particular car will be shipped out and most will work. The ones that work all work the same. The ones with defects may be grouped into the different defects. Yet if you fix that defect, it will be just like all the other working cars.
What?
Let me clarify for you, since the simple is not obvious
Brains are all physically the same, with the significance of variations being negligible.
Sometimes brains have an error that is reproducible, and that has the same symptoms.
There. Now, what don't you get?
You're argument has so much more authority when you use insults...
Anyway
I am not denying variations in brain exist. I am saying teh variations in brains are about as meaningful as variations in livers, and are not the causes for different types and levels of intelligence in people.
Your use of an autistic mind as an analogy is interesting, but flawed. An autistic mind is a defective brain. Using my PC analogy before, an autistic mind is the equivalent of only being able to boot in single user mode.
Sorry, but I have read a lot on this and never found anything to meaningfully support that differences in the physical brain correspond to personality or intelligence. The differences in brains influence our personality or intelligence just as much as the differences in our livers or hair.