Reply
Mon 3 Oct, 2005 04:41 pm
Brain imaging is progressing by leaps and bounds. Today, researchers employ magnetic resonance imaging techniques and tracer work to distinguish disordered thought from normal, intelligent thought. But a problem has arisen. A researcher in the field puts it like this:
"Some animals that appear to exhibit intelligence, particularly birds, have brains quite distinct from the human brain. What this tells us is that the birds do not think like us. Instead, their brains exhibit Avian Rationale. Here, normal thoughts and intelligence are absent and instead the avian brain employs processes exhibiting the properties of dance and ritual. The dance format is employed against informational patterns received by their senses and is used in all aspects of their perception."
It really is worthwhile realising that JJ is taking the piss.I'm assuming,of course,that you like to titter and choke on your cocoa after you've made it back from the pub.
He's the latest thing in alternative comedy.And streets ahead of the opposition.He's a sort of Stanley Unwin except that you know the words.
All my posts are true. Those who are interested in their own advancement and the advancement of humankind, should study my posts and just be bloody grateful that someone is spending their precious hard-earned time in trying to learn you something.
JJ-
Where exactly will I advance to.I like to have an idea of my destination before I buy a ticket.
The foot shall follow the sock, the sock shall follow the shoe, the shoe shall follow the pupil, the pupil shall follow the master, and so shall all arrive together.
Arrive at the straws I suppose and have a clutching orgy.
Why is it an alternative to intelligence?
The fact that birds use different part of their brains is not new news.
That's a confident statement.
parados wrote:Why is it an alternative to intelligence?
The fact that birds use different part of their brains is not new news.
Because the avian brain is different to that of the human brain, then birds cannot have thoughts like the human. Instead, all of their conceptual and behavioural life is governed, not by thought and intelligence, but by complicated sequences of dances of patterned thought and behaviour.
John Jones,
You would be surprised just how little we actually know about how the brain works. It's still a huge mystery. You can't say that just because use the dance area of their brain, they can't think like humans...because we don't really understand what thinking is, on the physical level....we don't know how humans do it, and we don't know how birds do it.
I'm not familiar with the research that you're not citing, but my father is one of the leaders in the field of avian intelligence research, and I have witnessed birds perform many feats of intelligence and learning that indicate that they DO think, much like humans do.
On a related note, I was very loosely involved with a group of researchers this past summer who worked on trying to image an entire brain. I'm not talking about measuring the stimulation of areas of the brain based on sensory stimulation...they were actually working on a project to slice the brain into micro thin layers, and then user computer analysis to map the neuron structues, in an attempt to build a model showing roughly the structural connections between neurons in different areas of the brain. This is called the mouse brain networks project and you might be interested in checking it out.
stuh505 wrote:John Jones,
You would be surprised just how little we actually know about how the brain works. It's still a huge mystery. You can't say that just because use the dance area of their brain, they can't think like humans...because we don't really understand what thinking is, on the physical level....we don't know how humans do it, and we don't know how birds do it.
I'm not familiar with the research that you're not citing, but my father is one of the leaders in the field of avian intelligence research, and I have witnessed birds perform many feats of intelligence and learning that indicate that they DO think, much like humans do.
On a related note, I was very loosely involved with a group of researchers this past summer who worked on trying to image an entire brain. I'm not talking about measuring the stimulation of areas of the brain based on sensory stimulation...they were actually working on a project to slice the brain into micro thin layers, and then user computer analysis to map the neuron structues, in an attempt to build a model showing roughly the structural connections between neurons in different areas of the brain. This is called the mouse brain networks project and you might be interested in checking it out.
If the claim that brain imaging can detect disordered thought and mental illnesses is true, then imaging can also detect normal thought. Now the avian brain is different. So it must think entirely differently. Otherwise the claim that brain imaging can detect mental illnesses and normal thought is a false claim.
Quote:Otherwise the claim that brain imaging can detect mental illnesses and normal thought is a false claim.
Yes, this is false. Brain imaging can be used to detect the areas of the brain that are being used only. This may allow researchers to make a correlation between the areas of the brain that are used during normal thought under certain situations, but it does not imply that all normal thought will follow this pattern. More importantly, there is no reason to assume that these will be the same areas in completely unrelated species!
stuh505 wrote:Quote:Otherwise the claim that brain imaging can detect mental illnesses and normal thought is a false claim.
Yes, this is false. Brain imaging can be used to detect the areas of the brain that are being used only. This may allow researchers to make a correlation between the areas of the brain that are used during normal thought under certain situations, but it does not imply that all normal thought will follow this pattern. More importantly, there is no reason to assume that these will be the same areas in completely unrelated species!
Yes, as long as we maintain that the definition of 'use' (in what it is for an area of a brain to be 'used') is perceptually based and not physically based, we can say that the claims made by the researchers into 'Avian Rationale' are false, or do not follow from their theory.
False may be going too far.
Blind guesses may be better.False is a bit bigoted I should have thought.It betrays a lack of disinterestedness.
John Jones wrote:parados wrote:Why is it an alternative to intelligence?
The fact that birds use different part of their brains is not new news.
Because the avian brain is different to that of the human brain, then birds cannot have thoughts like the human.
Makes perfect sense...
Quote: Instead, all of their conceptual and behavioural life is governed, not by thought and intelligence, but by complicated sequences of dances of patterned thought and behaviour.
Makes NO SENSE. You have no way of telling what a bird is thinking at a given time. You can only record which areas of the brain are being used. To attempt to claim it has some meaning that is easy to ascertain is BS.
Quote:Makes perfect sense...
'
This also makes no sense. It is quite possible for the same thing to be generated in 2 different ways, or in the same way from two completely different areas of the brain....especially considering that the entire brain is composed of neural networks, which is why many parts of the brain can be automatically re-wired to reproduce the function of other areas of the brain.
ake the other option:Does not follow from theory.
parados wrote:
Makes NO SENSE. You have no way of telling what a bird is thinking at a given time. You can only record which areas of the brain are being used. To attempt to claim it has some meaning that is easy to ascertain is BS.
Yes, and..
What do you make of the common claim that brain imaging/studies can differentiate disordered or dysfunctional thought?
JJ-
Are you thinking of physiology or psychology of the brain."Disordered" suggests psychology in which case "dysfunctional" is used incorrectly.It has two meanings one applicable to faulty systems such as organs the other to intentions gone wrong such as marrying in order to live happliy ever after and finding yourself skint,traumatised and homeless.The latter meaning is the stuff of comedy.
Laurel and Hardy say.
But I still don't understand the question.Is the differentiation between a type of thought the imager finds not to his liking and declares disordered.
It is "common" though.What is a disordered thought?Isn't that a value judgement?And thus political.
Neurology tells us that brain imaging can provide physical evidence of mental disorders.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace