Re: The wee people

MessageI really should spell check these things for typos.

I know plausible is plausible, ;)

But one other comment on encephalization quotients. There is a large portion of the brain that is there just to "run the machinery". The larger the machine is, the larger that part of the brain is. The bigger the heart, lungs, intestines, etc, the more neurons are needed to keep everything in line. Similarly, the bigger the limbs are, the bigger the cerebellum has to be. So The bigger the animal, the bigger the brain needs to be to run everything. And this is the sub-tentorial brain that I am talking about. And this is not the part of the brain that leads to larger encephalization quotients, the hemispheres are responsible for that.

And that is what is removed in hemispherectomies. And in that case, the hemisphere that is removed is largely diseased already, and functions of that hemisphere have been taken over by the other hemisphere for the most part, prior to removal. So, if you want to argue that neuronal plasticity, and redundancy of hemispheric function make EQ of 4 or greater enough to exhibit spirituality then ok, but I dont think that is a valid comparison.

You have said that you dont think it is an epiphenomenon of brain size, but you seem to say that an EQ of 4 is necessary. Why is that?

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: jack syme
  To: Glenn Morton ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 11:34 PM
  Subject: Re: The wee people

  To your last comment it is more like 1/3 of the brain that is removed. And of that 1/3 there is some redundancy, and what is removed is in a large part diseased, usuallly in the case of Rasmussen's Encephalitis , so I dont think it is a valid comparison to native encephalization quotients.

  I admit to not having a well formed arguement one way or the other. I am just asking questions on both sides.

  But, I guess the bottom line is that I am disagreeing with your premise that the Liang Bua people are just like us in a spiritual sense ala your Turning Test.

  If pushed I would have to say that I think that we are different than them physically, and our EQ of 7 is some evidence of that. I happen to agree that spirtuality is not just an epiphenomenon of brain complexity.

  So, the next question is, if spirituality is not just an epiphenomenon of brain structure, is a complex brain required to comprehend the spiritual? It still seems plausable that, despite the presence of the Liang Bua 'people", that Adam and his progeny were in some physical way different than anything that came before.
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Glenn Morton
    To: 'jack syme' ; asa@calvin.edu
    Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 10:00 PM
    Subject: RE: The wee people

      -----Original Message-----
      From: jack syme [mailto:drsyme@cablespeed.com]
      Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 8:48 PM
      To: Glenn Morton; asa@calvin.edu
      Subject: Re: The wee people

      "The brain mass for LB1, calculated from its volume26, is 433.2 g; this gives an encephalization quotient (EQ) range of 2.5-4.6, which compares with 5.8-8.1 for H. sapiens, "

      But as you said, this EQ is lower than that of dolphins.

      If you look at dolphin brains vs human, you will notice that the dolphin has enlargements in the temporal-parietal areas, where human brains have enlargements in frontal areas. This seems clear that the dolphin brain is enlarged in this area for echolocution, which is localized in the temporal-parietal areas. And the frontal lobes are for, for the lack of a better term, forsight.

      So, are we going to localize spirituality to frontal lobes?
      [Glenn Morton]
      No. The only reason one would localize spirituality is if one thinks it is an epiphenomenon. Where am I miscommunicating. I believe that spirituality is beyond the physical. If it isn't, then religion is worthless. Dolphins show no signs of spirituality and I see no reason to think they have it.

      From what you sited the EQ of LB1 is less than dolphins. So is the fact that they (the wee people) act like us merely because their encephalization is more frontal and dolphin encephalization is temporal? If the LB1 brains have a EQ that is less than dolphins, why cant we consider them "fancy animals"?
      [Glenn Morton] I have absolutely no doubt that some people will consider them fancy animals. I think the only reason not to consider them fancy animals is due to spirituality coming from outside of materialistic causes. So, if spirituality is merely an epiphenomenon, I see little reason to treat them differently than a fancy animal.

      I am not sure what your point is here or what your disagreement with my position is. I believe that spirituality is more than an epiphenomenon. If I am wrong, all sorts of views will change accordingly.

      I am not sure that comparing this to children that have had a hemispherectomy is valid. In that procedure they are not removing the sub-tentorial stuctures that are responsible for autonomic function and the like. The reason that encephalization quotient is a valid concept is that there are brain functions that are basic, that require larger brains for larger bodies, that part of the brain remains in these procedures.
      [Glenn Morton]
      It is valid because they remove something like 500-700 cc of brain. Encephalization is not what structures are there, it is the brain mass divided by the body mass. Those who have half a brain removed, have a smaller number in the numerator. Or do you disagree that that is what encephalization is? I can point you to references for a definition if you want.
Received on Sun Oct 31 00:07:17 2004