Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 09:46am PT
|
hey locker lets go climbing
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 09:49am PT
|
Ah, posting up: science flunkie #2.
"is this the quality content you spoke of" -blu
I don't expect "quality content" from flunkies, only those claiming to be scientists.
To science flunkie #1, read it again, that's my writing, not Jan's. (I posted of the "relationship".) To science flunkie #2, in case you haven't figured it out yet, no girly or nerdy or spineless "science type" here. Just giving (to a bunch of jackasses) as get as I get. ;)
Silly boy is lucky boy. Post and strut all you like - unlike ufc match, you never have to tap out or die. Lucky you.
A murder of flunkies.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 09:59am PT
|
We humans share lots of anatomy, physiology, and behavior with other animals. However, there are important differences, too. When it comes to self-awareness, I am still puzzled that young humans sometimes decide to kill themselves whereas other animals seem not to. An animal wouldn't need to use the means that humans do; it could just seek out a predator rather than avoid them.
-
Again, you have to go to the meta level to ever get a fix on the "why" of this important subject. The one crucial difference between humans and other species is that humans have a giant super-ego, known in modern times an the Inner Critic, which strangely, can channel a person's disowned rage and aggression and negativity and turn it back on the host is a shame spiral from hell. That's not to say dogs don't scurry of with their tails between their legs, but they don't generally thrown themselves in front of cars as a result of that shame.
A little while back people were discussing judgement. Self-judgement can be sobering, but also deadly if enough wires get crossed. You won't discover that information through investigating objective functioning at the level of neurons. This is meta stuff all the way, and biology doesn't explain it.
JL
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 10:36am PT
|
HFCS: I've had a year of graduate level neurobiology at a research university.
(I am amazed you actually wrote that. It’s embarrassing to even read it.)
Here’s a view on the need to think and innovation:
————————
“Need for Cognition as an Antecedent of Individual Innovation Behavior”
The authors propose that need for cognition, an individual’s tendency to engage in and enjoy thinking, is associated with individual innovation behavior. Moreover, drawing on an interactionist perspective, the authors suggest that need for cognition becomes more important when individuals face lower job autonomy and time pressure in their work. This is because, when these job characteristics are low, there is no contextual driving force for individual innovation, so personality has a stronger influence. In a multi-source study of 179 employees working in a Dutch research and consultancy organization, the authors’ expectations were largely supported. They found that need for cognition was positively associated with peer-rated innovation behavior, as were job autonomy and time pressure, even when controlling for openness to experience and proactive personality. Furthermore, the relationship between need for cognition and innovation behavior was strongest for individuals with low job autonomy and low time pressure and indeed was nonexistent at high levels of these contextual variables. This study, therefore, suggests that context can substitute for an individual’s need for cognition when it comes to individual innovation.
http://jom.sagepub.com/content/40/6/1511.abstract
—————————
If you have a vocational or avocational occupation with low time pressures and low job autonomy, you may be compelled to generate new ideas imaginatively, also reinforced by others who find themselves in the same situation.
Depending upon one’s values, the research presents a picture of either a vicious or a virtuous cycle.
For some who do not show up here, there might not be the need to spin out all of the narratives about “how things really are.”
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 10:40am PT
|
"I am amazed you actually wrote that. It’s embarrassing to even read it." -MikeL
LOL.
What do you think records or credentials are, silly.
Maybe some of you like to downplay expertise, the role of it, here, (or the mention of it; might get in the way of a good post), so I've noticed, but beyond here is the real world. You know, heart transplants, asteroid landings, cochlear implants, voice recognition engines.
As if experience or expertise in subject matter doesn't count anymore.
That is what they teach over there? lol
MikeL, need a colonoscopy? If ever the need arises, come see me. I give you good price. lol
Do not be embarrassed!
.....
PS
MikeL
"I've had a year of graduate level neurobiology at a research university."
Isn't that a year more of grad level neuro than you?
.....
Jan...
Memory like an elephant, here.
Still eager to see reference citing evidence-based research showing reduction in brain size in humans due to "using our brain better with language."
Waiting...
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 11:12am PT
|
It's not expertise that's the issue. We always go with experts to do the work of the world, and what happens in the real world tells the tlruth about what we actually believe. For example, you might tell the cop you were determined by brain function to drive 100 MPH but you still get the ticket because everyone knows you have a choice to heed the impulse to drive faster - or not. And we always go with the person with experience. That is, we don't hire a house painter who has never held a brush, or a surgeon who has never studied medicine. We go with the expert.
But the thing with you Fruity is that you only acknowledge expertise in a very narrow field of study - namely your own - and this is not somethnig any thinking person will ever take seriously. That's not to say that an engineering, or electronic or neurobiological approach will not yield some fruit. But nobody but a fundamentalist will expect any of these approaches to answer ALL questioins. The one-size-fits-all, all-or-nothing school doesn't go past Junior High.
JL
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 11:12am PT
|
Waiting...
Tempting?
did you take ur shot of vitamin T today or what?
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 11:15am PT
|
It's not expertise that's the issue... But the thing with you Fruity is...
you only acknowledge expertise in a very narrow field of study
This makes no sense. I readily acknowledge the expertise of experts in their field. Seems to me I'm among the first to do so among posters on this thread. Be it medicine, rocket science, software, car engine mechanics, whatever. Even free solo rock climbing.
"The one-size-fits-all, all-or-nothing school doesn't go past Junior High."
And nobody claims this, least of all HFCS.
But...
I give you good price on your next colonoscopy.
.....
re: Vit T
"did you take ur shot of vitamin T today" -Blu
Hey Science Flunkie, speaking of Vit T... get this...
There's a rumor, a false claim, out there circulating in pop media: Take Vit T and your balls shrink. (One of the latest, last week's Real Time w Bill Maher.) Well, take it from an expert, one data point here at least, that this is not the case. My balls are as full-sized as ever, closer to avocadoes than walnuts. So not that you or anybody asked, but if or when you hear that claim about ball shrinkage and Vit T, know it's not true. because HFCS says.
PS Who here knew "avocado" actually derives from Nahuatl Indian word for... testicle. I kid you not. Look it up.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 11:33am PT
|
Regarding who takes who seriously, we can only speak for ourselves, no? Such statements are standard "I'm with the majority, Omega Monkey" BS. Kindergarten rhetoric.
As for what biology explains or not - we're still in the primitive stages of the sciences. To make matters more ridiculous, the person stating this is pretty much in the dark as to just what the current level of scientific discover is.
To make generalize about either of the above is not something any thinking person should take seriously.
Now back to rewriting my memories....
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 11:43am PT
|
Am I the only one here who climbs and runs to Thunderstruck?
Highly recommend. Great "spirit" booster!!!
I mean, besides Vit T.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 11:58am PT
|
Jgill, have you considered that the infinity is a man made concept? And maybe the zero as well? Physicists seem to have a lot of problems with these two "numbers"
There is an ongoing but very mild discussion as to whether mathematics is discovered or created. Most practitioners take the middle ground that it is both working in some sort of mysterious harmony. In the general area of complex analysis in which I dabble the infinitesimal and the infinite underlie all the concepts, and I feel comfortable working with them. Are they man-made? Perhaps, but the mind can't seem to come to grips with ultimate ends, chronological or spatial. The experts on this thread can tell us why.
Apologies for interrupting the charming repartee.
Oh, almost forgot: MikeL, after reading your post I may volunteer for low-time-pressure and casual bud-tending here in Potville, USA in the hope it will elevate my imaginative abilities. The social sciences to my rescue!
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 12:06pm PT
|
jock locker, let's go for a run!!
Thunderstruck!!
.....
Hey, that's Kirkwood! yes?
Off chair #6!
"Please, people, don't turn this thread into the usual sh!t throwing contest..."
Mooose,
talk to the flunkies, they set the tone here.
Even when you ignore at length, they still bring it,
apparently it's all they have.
|
|
Tvash
climber
Seattle
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 12:18pm PT
|
Headed for the ID Sawtooths tomorrow for a yurt ski trip. Apparently, it's one of the few ranges with freshies right now....
BTW the whole brain size = intelligence thing is pretty much hogwash. How a brain is organized for info processing is much more important, and that varies a lot between species. Neuron connection density can vary by orders of magnitude. Ask any small brained parrot. Whales have MUCH bigger brains than humans - but they're not organized in nearly as complex a way.
We know little about how differently (or not) the neanderthal brain was organized, so a simple size comparison to modern humans - particularly when the difference is well within the variability of brain size among our own species, isn't very illuminating. We also know nothing about their languages. Were they less eloquent than homo sapiens? Who can say?
Communication is a funny thing. So much of the most important forms are non-verbal (this becomes immediately apparent in any close relationship). In general, modern humans seem very adept at misunderstanding each other, and technology isn't necessarily a help.
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
The shaggy fringe of Los Angeles
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 01:18pm PT
|
There is an ongoing but very mild discussion as to whether mathematics is discovered or created.
Love this concept.
All mathematics was created by the human mind.
You have a human mind.
Therefore you are capable of creating the mathematics necessary to resolve any problem.
I had this epiphany about 20 years ago. At which point I suddenly became very good at math.
I can be totally drunk, take the tab for 8 couples having dinner and drinks, and quickly crush it into exactly what everyone is supposed to pay including tip, to the penny, without a calculator.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 02:07pm PT
|
"The problem is a lot of you are stupid."
Werner? No.
God? Yes.
(A tweet just an hour ago.)
.....
My NEK QUETCHUN then is WHY THE FUK NOT???...
What would be the profit in it?
I don't see it. I would if there were profit in it.
It's nice to keep the climbing aspect separate from the philosophizing aspect. The latter, esp regards religions, superstitions, science and science edu, science illiteracy all have a pc (politically correct or incorrect) aspect to them and it's nice to have the freedom from it that hfcs affords me. It's a freedom I don't think I abuse, though. There's worse, far worse, here by others and even on cable news and views and elsewhere there's worse.
What's clear is that is that this is a very scientifically illiterate and theologically illiterate site. (If judged by posts.) Fully commensurate with American culture on average, I think.
Even so, life goes on...
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 02:20pm PT
|
Since fructose asked, here are a few references I was able to dig up and read in an hour's time.
As with anything connected to humans, causation is complicated if not impossible to decipher. Clearly there were mutations in the homonin line that distinguish our brain from a chimp's. We have no neanderthal brains to look at so we can only infer based on size, what we can tell about arrangement of the brain from endocasts, and the differences in technology and culture.
However, we don't have to look just at the variable brain sizes of neanderthals and humans to see the advantages of language and culture. We also know that feral children raised without language can not learn to speak after the age of 7. They certainly have the same size brain as other Homo sapiens, but they didn't use it in the same way and thus lost the ability. Likewise, deaf children until they are taught sign language. Helen Keller's autobiography is very interesting on that account.
Other reading which mirrors the most current thinking on the importance of language and culture on human biology.Obviously this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Deacon, Terrence. 1997. The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the Human Brain. Penguin.
Science Shows Why You're Smarter than a Neanderthal.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/science-shows-why-youre-smarter-than-a-neanderthal-1885827/?no-ist=
Co-Evolution of Neocortex Size, Group Size and Language in Humans
http://www.uvm.edu/~pdodds/files/papers/others/1993/dunbar1993a.pdf
Evolution of Language takes an unexpected turn
http://www.wired.com/2011/04/evolution-of-language/
Babies see Pure Color but adults through prism of language
http://www.wired.com/2008/03/babies-see-pure/#previouspost
Why Bilinguals are Smarter
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/opinion/sunday/the-benefits-of-bilingualism.html
Language Learning Makes the Brain Grow, Swedish Study Suggests
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121008082953.htm
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 02:26pm PT
|
Regarding who takes who seriously, we can only speak for ourselves, no? Such statements are standard "I'm with the majority, Omega Monkey" BS. Kindergarten rhetoric.
As for what biology explains or not - we're still in the primitive stages of the sciences. To make matters more ridiculous, the person stating this is pretty much in the dark as to just what the current level of scientific discover is.
What Tvash rails against, and what I always poke fun at (using a faux highbrow tone), is the idea that one school - here it would largely be the quantifiers - have an exclusive on knowing or knowledge, all else being of the "soft" variety. What Tvash means to say is A), once biology has moved past the "primitive stages," a biological explanation will cover pretty much all bases ("all-or-nothing"), and since I am "pretty much in the dark" per biology, I must, perforce, remain ignorant to the real-deal knowledge.
This is a a person still clinging to the old reductionistic model, where all effects can be reverse-engineered (reduced) back to biological things or processes/"causes." Poor old far never got the memo that reductionism leads back to that "which has no physical extent."
So try as some may to pimp this or that angle as the end-all or something roughly the same (biology for Tvash), we are still left holding no-thing at all in the end. And watch the squirrels scatter at the thought...
JL
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 02:28pm PT
|
First off, Jan, regarding your links, none of them seem to buttress your explicit claim above. They all seem standard material addressing noncontroversial evolutionary / developmental principles. Still reading...
A reminder for context. Your specific claim was and I quote...
"our size has gone down thanks to using our brain better with language" -Jan
Paraphrasing the claim: "Using our brain better with language" has caused "our (brain) size" to go down.
Where is the evidence for this?
.....
Of course field work is laboratory experience. I've never criticized your anthropological lab experience. Not once. It's misleading to suggest that I have.
"well that's my version of lab experience." -Jan
Which is quite impressive... and laudatory.
But nothing in your latest post specifically addressed the claim that "using our brains better with language" has caused their size to go down.
That's the crux of the biscuit here.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2015 - 02:33pm PT
|
In context, our brain size has gone down relative to the neanderthal. Previous to that, each new species had a larger brain size over a period of nearly four million years. Homo sapiens is the first homonid to reverse that trend. The question is why? The accepted answer in anthropology which you are free to agree or disagree with is that we use a smaller brain more efficiently thanks to language and culture.
I never said that our brains are getting smaller, though I agree with Werner, they often seem to be getting stupider.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!