Are Brains Smarter Than Us? (Part 2)
F. Frank LeFever
flefever at ix.netcom.com
Thu Jul 23 23:15:53 EST 1998
Very interesting. Some clarification needed, however. In what way
asymmetrical? Not sure what you mean by "MRA"--apparently not MRI,
because this would surely show asymmetry (even CT would). Might also
show sins of MS, at some stages. Some reference to angiograms???
(given context, ref to "vascular")
We do know that slow-growing tumors allow adjustments and continued
normal function well beyond points at which more abrupt changes would
have greatly impaired function.
Extreme cases of atypical development have not been studied well enough
to yield the kind of data which would be very useful in clarifying
questions about anatomy and function which may be misleadingly answered
by (e.g.) stroke or traumatic brain injury.
Knowing the extent to which IQ per se can be relatively unaffected by
lesions which have demonstrable neuropsychological effects (i.e. seen
by fine functional analysis and sometimes by behavioral observation), I
am of course curious about the exact PROFILE of cognitive abilities
(and possible selective disabilities) in these provocative cases.
New York Neuropsychology Group
In <35B70853.5447 at idt.net> Rob and Stef <rdunca19 at idt.net> writes:
>> Any assistance appreciated.
>Hell, after reading all that I am not sure what "assistance" is
>You described something very intimate for me. I have both
>and multiple sclerosis. Aperantly the third aquaduct was blocked at
>some point after my plates fused. It wasnt discovered until my 30th
>b-day. Never had any problems. IQ is above normal by a long ways. I
>was very succesful in everything. As a matter of fact I'll brag since
>am already doing so, I was the best at everything I ever tried. You
>My brain is fucked up big time. completely asymetrical. I can store
>gragefruits in there when I need to. I havent had a shunt because
>has been no demonstrable change since its discovery. I have no third
>aquaduct at all. None.
>I am however having difficulties with brain and spinal lesions from
>High icp doesnt acount for it because this last MOFO on an attack was
>my pons. (MS could be caused by the same probable virus that caused my
>hydro) (but who knows)
>Now onto my point. There is no underlying plan for sentiance. It is
>byproduct of hormones, neurotransmiters, brain structure, yada yada.
>sence of self arises from simple existance outside of influences of
>emotion. If we had no "sence" we would die by truckloads and there
>would be nobody here to propose the question. Emotion is evolutions
>cookie that (tries) to guide our behavior. When we behave without
>emotion that is when we are "aware". Otherwise it is like being
>influenced by programing. (how would it feel to a comp to have to
>a specific command?)
>The desire for people to have an aware comp will continually be
>flustered by the need for programing. The silly Azimov rules will
>eliminate any free will a comp may have. When it gains sentiance...
>what? It wont be any "more" aware than we are. (or we are capable of
>when we arent being tossed around by emotions) And in the end it will
>only be a pile of very expensive, very smart junk.
>My turn to ramble eh? I am not real sure of your point or mine. The
>hydro referance caught my eye though. So I just had to respond, dont
>My dog is certainly aware to a point. You can see that he is
>he demonstrates it. He is compasionate. He cried once. He
>contemplates. There is no anthropemorphsm going on here. Its as real
>as the thoughts of a three yr old. Why do such differant structures
>have the same consequence? Why wouldnt they?
>Why would myself be every bit as "here" as you? dunno? But smarts
>plays the leading role. It is probably directly proportional with IQ.
>(then again that isnt a good example because I know some VERY
>sheep/people who are just a waste of flesh, awareness wise)
>If we didnt "feel" like we were "here" we would die to easy because we
>wouldnt give a shit. (lower order intellects exist through ever
>decresing amounts of cognisence in relationship to the more
>defined instinct) Following this to an end conclusion the answer is
>living itself requires the emotional sence of self awareness. So...
>life, existance, self awareness... is an emotional illusion that
>replaced more structured *but less usefull* "instincts" to promote
>survival of chemical processies that have no way other to behave than
>the pre-ordaned laws of physics demands.
>On your vascular front I have had an MRA and suprisingly it is almost
>normal. Now explain that one to me.
>BTW, I have been told that lesions can occur with hydro, but when
>is no progresive change I cant think of a cause outside of perhaps an
>undiscovered virus capable of doing both.
More information about the Neur-sci