Ten Percent Myth

mat mats_trash at hotmail.com
Tue Feb 19 09:25:51 EST 2002


> decide to increase the growth rate of your left hand fingernails, or
> change your genetic makeup such that your next born child has one blue
> eye and one green.  is that deep enough?
> 

When did these processes come under neural control at all?  You really
are stepping of the edge if you claim people can *consciously* control
bodily processe which are not under any sort of neural control.

> I agree that you think all that.  I am really curious, what CAN the
> physical brain do by itself?  And what does it mean to have a brain by
> "itself"?  Can it wiggle around or something?
> 

I simply meant that bringing concepts such a conscious and unconscious
to the table may confuse issues of what is under neural control and
what is not, and you seem to be definitely confused about that from
the above statement.  Also I was hoping to point out to you that what
you wrote in your last post was not profound or revolutionary but well
known aspects of brain function which have been studied intensively by
cognitive scientists and neuroscientists alike.  Your analogies to an
analogue continuum or something belong in philosophy of MIND if
anywhere, not in the study of neuroscience.


> 
> I read somewhere that people who understand things very well include
> all logic into thier model.  Perhaps organized in such a way that
> EVERY-thing seems to makes sense to him/her.  Cool concept!

If everything didn't make sense, then they woudn't consider themselves
to understand it.  Or is that too obvious.  Again your talking about
philosophical issues such as epistemology which are very interesting
but not particularly useful in discussing how the brain as a
collection of neruones functions.




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list