In article <39a12868_1 at news3.prserv.net>,
"Sergio Navega" <snavega at attglobal.net> wrote:
>mejqb at my-deja.com wrote in message <8nmnvd$eag$1 at nnrp1.deja.com>...
> >In article <39885cd9_4 at news3.prserv.net>,
> > "Sergio Navega" <snavega at attglobal.net> wrote:
> >> MS wrote in message ...
> >> >It sounds like a premature generalization to say that because
several
> >tasks
> >> >activated one area that it validates a g-factor of intelligence.
> >Given the
> >> >role of working memory across complex tasks and the importance of
> >> >dorsolateral PFC in working memory, couldn't a working memory
> >impairment
> >> >account for those findings?
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >Marcello
> >> >
> >>
> >> I agree. Although I'm sympathetic to the concept of general
> >intelligence,
> >> I don't think we have a specific area of the brain responsible for
> >> it. I think it is premature and somewhat "sensationalistic" to
claim
> >> to have found such an area.
> >
> >The notion of a specific area of activity and the notion of a general
> >intelligence factor as propounded in The Bell Curve aren't even
> >vaguely related.
>> I'm not sure why you bring The Bell curve to the discussion, as it
> offers something that's far from what has been discussed here.
It would help if you would actually *read* the thread once
in a while:
"
Scientists measuring blood flow to regions of the brain have found
that one particular area (the frontal lateral cortex) was stimulated
when performing complex tasks. Even tasks that required a wide range
of cognitive functions did not stimulate numerous regions of the
brain, as some scientists predicted. This finding gives credence to
the highly controversial idea of a "g" factor (generalized
intelligence), as advocated in The Bell Curve.
"
--
<J Q B>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
