Why does man have such a large fleshy brain organ?

[Athelwulf]

-Bob-,

:bugeye:

This is a serious matter, Athelwulf. Don't for a second think I am not treating it with the utmost of seriousness.

Too late (to put it bluntly).

the brain stem runs the involuntary functions. That is actually a small part of the brain no bigger than a wallnut dude.

Uh . . . yeah! That's exactly what I was saying.

How do you explain then, scientists measuring slight changes in weight at the time of death?

And that guy on tv who talks to the dead?

plus the existence of souls is proven by this webpage.

http://xoomer.virgilio.it/fedeescienza/englishnf

Souls exist. Therefore souls do the work of intelligence and consciousness. Therefore brainflesh is useless.

I don't argue with ya on the possibility that we have souls that live after the body has died. But I wouldn't consider the brain useless because of the fact we have a soul.

My real name is Bob, fuckface. Yes, I happen to be American.

My icon is a picture of Harvee's monster thickburger, only the greatest burger ever.

Thats two patties of beef, cheese, bacon, mayonnaise and butter.

Thats 1,420 calories, bitch. And you know you love it.

Typical American . . . I should know, for I'm one too!

But back on topic now! Focus now!

Plenty of other people believe as I do, therefore I am not a kook.

There are . . . more of yer kind?!

*Scoff* No, that's not true. I'm sure the only person on this or any Earth that thinks like ya do is you. Therefore, ye'r most definitely a kook.

This may come as a surprise to you, but I have smoked marijuana, crack and dust before, and also I've ingested LSD, Ecstasy pills, and hallucinogenic mushrooms. Not to mention the occasional sixpack of beers.

*Gasp* I am . . . so . . . shocked!

Now these substances obviously affect the brainflesh, and kill brain cells (a lot of them). But I feel fine. How then is it that my brainy tissue is the cause of this thinking?

Ya feel fine, yes. But so would I after some vodka, aside from a hangover. Ya can't feel yer brain cells dying, and ya don't feel different after brain cells die.

Another possibility (and one I doubt) is that ya haven't used enough of that shit. Go smoke a few dozen more joints. Lick a few more batches of shrooms. See where that takes ya.

Your mom doesn't seem to mind my size (btw its five inches long- thats average size). She says its the best cock she's had in a while. So go figure.

Another bundle of factoids I can classify under "Stuff I'm okay with not knowing".

I don't want to bother anyone.

Too late.

Jeez, man. Get a sense of humor or something. Or use that brainflesh of yours.

Ya mean that useless brainflesh?

Hyuck hyuck . . . Trolls are entertaining! I wonder what he'll do if we poke him. *Pokedy poke poke*

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

I think it's a good question.
Why did we need such a big brain?
The human body could be considered an inferior design in some ways, which requires a decent brain to be successfull, but really our apelike ancestors could do ok with a moderately powerful brain half the size of ours and a body that was basically the same as ours.
The fact our brain is more than adequate is evidenced by the fact we aren't struggling to survive. Remember traits only need to be "good enough" to be favoured by evolution so this is peculiar.
I think the only explanation is the pressure from other humans rather than any environmental demands. The competition within the human species(or more accurately our ancestors), fighting over territory and so forth, must have gradually favoured genetic lines with superior intellect.
Ofcourse competition happens within every species, so this might seem like a poor explanation, but humans might have naturally relied on smarts for success in the first place rather than the lion for example who relies on strength and ferocity, and so became smarter and smarter with each generation, rather than stronger or faster or whatever.
Solved. I rock.

 

[-Bob-]

I think it's a good question.
Why did we need such a big brain?
The human body could be considered an inferior design in some ways, which requires a decent brain to be successfull, but really our apelike ancestors could do ok with a moderately powerful brain half the size of ours and a body that was basically the same as ours.
The fact our brain is more than adequate is evidenced by the fact we aren't struggling to survive. Remember traits only need to be "good enough" to be favoured by evolution so this is peculiar.
I think the only explanation is the pressure from other humans rather than any environmental demands. The competition within the human species(or more accurately our ancestors), fighting over territory and so forth, must have gradually favoured genetic lines with superior intellect.
Ofcourse competition happens within every species, so this might seem like a poor explanation, but humans might have naturally relied on smarts for success in the first place rather than the lion for example who relies on strength and ferocity, and so became smarter and smarter with each generation, rather than stronger or faster or whatever.
Solved. I rock.

Doctor Lou, thanks for the response. I hope my rejoinder will entertain you further.

Your explanation makes sense. But, I have an alternative explanation. Lets say that the human species was favored in competition by its soul, and the faculty of reason that goes along with the soul, right?

If so, then evolution wouldn't really favor big brains one way or another. So perhaps brains are just a signal of the insignificance of our biological makeup.

For instance. Modern man grows a large bum and thighs, but yet is still as competitive as his neighbors. Bum and Thighs take up a massive amount of bloodflow, and yet have no real evolutionary significance, much like the brain. This I think is a more powerful explanation, especially since the brain seems to be composed of fatty tissue, much like bums, thighs, and boobs.

Or maybe like large boobs, large brains increase the chances of getting laid. However, I don't see much evidence for this theory so far, as I explained before. Though people talk about "fucking so-and-so's brains out", and "mind-fucking", and also "mental masturbation", I have yet to actually see that crap happen.

So what do you got now, to refute my theory that the brain is just evolutionary trash baggage, which accumulates like the fat on my mighty ass in the wake of my soul doing all the dirty work and absolute competive advantage?

Your loyal idiot,

-Bob-

 

[-Bob-]

Uh . . . yeah! That's exactly what I was saying.

So why does it need to be so large?

I don't argue with ya on the possibility that we have souls that live after the body has died. But I wouldn't consider the brain useless because of the fact we have a soul.

mmmkay. So you think we have souls, and are those souls capable of thinking, feeling, percieving? So it does all that crap without the brain? If so, isn't the brain useless?

There are . . . more of yer kind?!

Try looking out your window dude.

Ya feel fine, yes. But so would I after some vodka, aside from a hangover. Ya can't feel yer brain cells dying, and ya don't feel different after brain cells die.

Oh right. First you argue against my assertion that brain cells are useless, then you go drinkin a bottle of vodka. Earth to Athelwulf! Alchohol kills brain cells. A good drinking session kills brain cells like a boxing match or a strong blow to the head.

And saying that you feel the same afterwards only proves my point further. I mean sure that stuff changes the way you think, but how? Maybe it only deludes your senses, and not your mind.

Another possibility (and one I doubt) is that ya haven't used enough of that shit. Go smoke a few dozen more joints. Lick a few more batches of shrooms. See where that takes ya.

Thats a good idea.

Ya mean that useless brainflesh?

Good one Einstein.

Hyuck hyuck . . . Trolls are entertaining! I wonder what he'll do if we poke him. *Pokedy poke poke*

Poke me and I get excited.

 

[Shenzhou]

Bob,

The fact that personality and mental ability are so sensitive to changes in brain chemistry (drugs, hormones etc.) - not to mention physical trauma - surely suggests that consciousness originates in the brain itself. It does to me anyway.

 

[-Bob-]

Well, in that case why can certain types of brain damage cause loss of memory or personality changes? It would suggest that the processing device, not the output, is damaged.

It would suggest that, but this is wrong. The body only dims the soul, entraps it. You can change the ways that the soul affects the body by affecting the body. But that doesn't affect the soul, i.e. the thinking and reasoning part.

And for that matter, if you were to be controlled by a noncoporeal soul as opposed to ball of interconnected cells firing chemical and electrical signals to each other, why should booze or drugs make you drunk or high? A soul should be untouchable by such things.

Booze and drugs only block the influence of the soul upon the body. The eternal soul is ultimately unaffected by these things.

 

[-Bob-]

Bob,

The fact that personality and mental ability are so sensitive to changes in brain chemistry (drugs, hormones etc.) - not to mention physical trauma - surely suggests that consciousness originates in the brain itself. It does to me anyway.

When you place your hand above your eye, and you stop seeing, does that necessarily mean that the seeing is caused by your actual eyelid?

 

[Shenzhou]

Of course not, but it does imply that visual perception occurs due to a physical process which can be affected by this reality.

 

[-Bob-]

Brain cells store memory and skills through networking which makes memory and skill stored in a highly redundant matrix, when one cell dies it functions can be ignored and replaced, when cells die in a network they can be circumnavigated. A study was conducted on rats train to run through a maze, then varying amount of cortex was removed, it took a surprising amount of cortex to be removed before the rats could not remember how to run through the maze, the part to remember was that after shearing way enough cortex the rats did forget how to run the maze, any damage of cortex does have a much greater effects on how to learn to run a maze though and on details of memory. An artist once came out of car accident with brain damage to a specific section of brain that interpreted color. Try as he might he could not see colors anymore, everything was gray, he tried to imagine a orange, but all he could image was a gray fruit, to him all perception of color was lost, he knew red, green and blue should exist from what he told, but everything he could see or dream of was gray.

We are not talking about rats here. We are talking about human beings, who feel love and have consciousness and free will. Read the article I provided. Your puny deterministic laws are impotent, and cannot provide any explanation whatsoever for things like love, friendship, experience, free will and such.

Hahah!

Two theories exist then, the brain is the center of thought and all thought exist physically, or thought uses a physical vessel in such a way as to be undistinguishable from being strictly physical, yet exist metaphysically. One of these theories is simpler and more likely, it removes a step, a step that is based on no evidence, as step that for all practical purposes is a waste of time, and toe believe it that step is faith, and not science. Copernicus came out with a mathematical algorithm that predicted planet motion with the sun as the center and not the earth, yet Copernicus’s theorem had to compete with a convoluted theorem used to predict the planets motion based as the earth as the center. Both systems could predict the planets motion with some accuracy, though many astronomers were bought by the easy of calculation of Copernicus’s theorem, it was a much similar answer. The simplest answer is more likely to be correct.

Studies have show that in rare cases usually children (who can train other parts of the brain to take over task that damaged section did with much greater success the adults.) can go on living life almost normal. In most cases thought the damage is a detriment of easy detection and study. And unless you have medical evidence that you have significant damage to your brain, your not living proof. Pot and magic mushrooms are not proof unless you have a MRI photo of your brain with big holes in it!

It may be that things which affect the brain, work to occlude or otherwise block the interaction between body and soul. Like the light from a lamp might become dimmer. Read this.

http://www.bahai.org/article-1-3-2-25.html

The doctor said my brain was damaged though.

Those that thought the world was round based their ideas on science and philosophies that allowed them to come to those conclusion with evidence and logic. Kooks base their ideas opposite to occam's razor, base their ideas on mythologies, choose evidence that is usually not validated and against a mass of counter evidence.

You can't explain consciousness by physical deterministic laws. Therefore my explanation is simpler. Of course affecting the physical brain has consequences. But I am talking about the size of it. Thats a little bit different. Our brains possess memory, see color, etc. So do animals, they do all those things. But you only need a walnut sized brain for that.

So my theory is, that humans have a soul and that is why they have free will and all that other crap. Therefore the brainflesh surrounding their soul-seat will grow bigger over time, much like our bounteous rear ends and titflesh, merely because there is nothing to stop it from growing. So thats what I am saying here. Perhaps much like fatty cells in my ass, fatty brain cells can be sucked out through a tube? Call it "psycho-suction".

When proclaiming an idea science yet basing it on religion or pseudoscience, that is being a kook. Many believe in life after death but that is outside of the range of discussion of science, science has yet to prove such a thing, it is simply faith to believe it now, thus theology and religion, not science. If you want to talk about the soul then religion sub-forum would have been better. Discussing it here is being a kook.

Of course this deals with the soul... only because you people keep on claiming that the brain's function is to provide consciousness.

 

[Shenzhou]

You can't explain consciousness by physical deterministic laws. Therefore my explanation is simpler.

There is currently no entirely satisfying physical explanation for consciousness (correct me if I'm wrong), but that doesn't mean that there never will be one. Long ago the motion of the planets was also an unexplained phenomenon. The supernatural was invoked to explain that, as it has been every time that science has temporarily struggled to find answers. But the niche filled by the supernatural is gradually diminishing - thank God

 

[ElectricFetus]

Bob,

Who to say animals don't feel love and emotions?

Chemicals in the brain explain emotion quite well in fact we can manipulate emotions with drugs, we can make people happy or said or grumpy, how could we do that if emotions are from the metaphysical soul?

But I have explain consciences by physicals laws, free-will all the crap can and has been explained as being within the realm of physical reality. Your belief otherwise is based on a faith of something that wholly undetectable, thus not science but theology.

 

[Shenzhou]

Personally, I don't even believe in 'free will'. As long as the universe is ruled by infallible laws, and as long as we are of the universe, then we too are bound by its laws. At best, I can concede that quantum randomness might play a part (I mean beyond the level at which it plays a part in all phenomena - but even then we'd still be slaves to the universe).

 

[Clockwood]

Bob, please try to confine yourself to laying down one post at a time. The edit function is there for a reason.

 

[-Bob-]

Bob,

Who to say animals don't feel love and emotions?

Chemicals in the brain explain emotion quite well in fact we can manipulate emotions with drugs, we can make people happy or said or grumpy, how could we do that if emotions are from the metaphysical soul?

But I have explain consciences by physicals laws, free-will all the crap can and has been explained as being within the realm of physical reality. Your belief otherwise is based on a faith of something that wholly undetectable, thus not science but theology.

My belief is based on my inner experience of all that 'crap', and the inability of science to explain it. Oh, you say that consciousness has been explained by physical laws? What physical laws, pray tell? As I said before, you don't really influence emotions with the chemical crap, you only substract from their original being and prevent or other wise distort their translation into reality.

Clockwood:

Bob, please try to confine yourself to laying down one post at a time. The edit function is there for a reason.

Ah, thanks for the pointer. Will do.

 

[Shenzhou]

As I said before, you don't really influence emotions with the chemical crap, you only substract from their original being and prevent or other wise distort their translation into reality.

But you are assuming that those emotions have a reality other than that which is apparent to us on this 'plane'. To me this seems to be an unfounded assumption.

What would be a testable difference between drugs influencing emotions directly and drugs "distorting their translation into reality"? It's so many meaningless words.

 

[-Bob-]

But you are assuming that those emotions have a reality other than that which is apparent to us on this 'plane'. To me this seems to be an unfounded assumption.

Its founded on our observation that humans are qualititatively different from animals and raw matter; they posess spirit.

 

[Shenzhou]

What is your definition of "spirit"?
And how is it exclusive to humans? Where's the cut-off point?
Do children have it? The mentally retarded?

 

[-Bob-]

What is your definition of "spirit"?
And how is it exclusive to humans? Where's the cut-off point?
Do children have it? The mentally retarded?

sure children and retards have it.

We know that humans have spirit because only they are capable of self-consciousness.

Certain types of human are beset by diseases that render the expression of their souls incomplete. Children are not developed well enough for their soul to shine through completely.

 

[Clockwood]

I could argue that animals have at least some self-consciousness as well. Look at Koko. You can have an intellignent, 2-way conversation with her in sign language. In my estimation, she has more mind to her than many retarded humans and small children.

 

[-Bob-]

I could argue that animals have at least some self-consciousness as well. Look at Koko. You can have an intellignent, 2-way conversation with her in sign language. In my estimation, she has more mind to her than many retarded humans and small children.

maybe Koko has a soul then.

In your estimation. Have you ever had a conversation with Koko?

You know those gorilla trainers get paid to make them look smart.

I heard from an inside source that the gorillas jack off all day. It true.