Page 5 of 5 [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

patternist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,606
Location: at my computer

21 Aug 2008, 2:29 pm

Averick wrote:
I've read that buddhist monks have greater ability to use more of their brains from daily exercising like meditation and prayer -whereas Einstein was said to only use about ten percent of his brain like most people of today. Oddly enough monks don't sit in temples doing advanced calculus and physics; so in terms of brain strength, which would you prefer?


Percentage myths aside, I'm very curious about the abilities and insight of buddhist monks.



Averick
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

21 Aug 2008, 2:31 pm

Hmmmmmmmmm.......

Perhaps that was a vague statement in the least, but I did not insinuate that Einstein was a doctor of brain surgery, nor did I structure the statement to lead you in the direction that Einstein said anything about his brain capacity.

Perhaps what I should of said is that Einstein's brain post-mortem displayed scientific evidence that states he only used ten percent of his brain. Sorry for the generalization.

As for PET's and MRI's, those definately show a functioning brain while connoting use, but to dead organs, I'm sure those machines hardly elicit any factual data (except for maybe an MRI, but I'm not sure about the parameters of that.) Besides, I was only offering anecdotal reading material from several years ago. Who knows how much of what you read today is actually factual?



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 44,592
Location: Stendec

21 Aug 2008, 2:42 pm

Averick wrote:
Perhaps what I should of said is that Einstein's brain post-mortem displayed scientific evidence that states he only used ten percent of his brain.

Evidence, Please? I ask this because if only ten percent of a person's brain is functional, then that person is in a coma, a persistant vegetative state, or at least severely retarded - none of which applied to the good doctor Einstein while he was alive.

Averick wrote:
As for PET's and MRI's, those definately show a functioning brain while connoting use, but to dead organs, I'm sure those machines hardly elicit any factual data...

A dead person uses zero percent of their brain, while a live person uses all of their brain (unless their brain is damaged). These two pieces of data are indeed factual.

Averick wrote:
Who knows how much of what you read today is actually factual?

I do, because I actually check the alleged "facts" as they are stated, rather than just blindly believe whatever is printed. Also, it is readily obvious when someone is merely parroting what they've read without understanding what it means or implies.


_________________
 
Since there is no singular, absolute definition of human nature,
nor any ultimate evaluation of human nature beyond that which we project onto others,
individuals should be judged or defined only by their actions and choices,
and not by what we only imagine their intentions and motivations to be.


Averick
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

21 Aug 2008, 2:58 pm

Oh, Fnord. Not that I would normally dodge a nice, terse conversatio with someone of your wit, but I think you understood all that I said in the previous post and to futher indulge you in such would be a waste and futile use of both our times. I personally also believe semantics are overused on WP; I will not indulge in such, and that is all this discussion will lead to in my estimation.

....

But I will add that scientists divided that Einstein's estimate was from the differences of soft-matter and hard-matter within his brain, post-mortem of course. Perhaps that answer clarifies something for you.



patternist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,606
Location: at my computer

21 Aug 2008, 3:00 pm

Quote:
I personally also believe semantics are overused on WP


Agree; what does it acheive, really?
I don't post to be cross-examined. And I don't read posts to cross-examine. But apparently some people enjoy it.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 44,592
Location: Stendec

21 Aug 2008, 3:00 pm

Averick wrote:
Oh, Fnord. Not that I would normally dodge a nice, terse conversatio with someone of your wit, but I think you understood all that I said in the previous post and to futher indulge you in such would be a waste and futile use of both our times. I personally also believe semantics are overused on WP; I will not indulge in such, and that is all this discussion will lead to in my estimation.

....

But I will add that scientists divided that Einstein's estimate was from the differences of soft-matter and hard-matter within his brain, post-mortem of course. Perhaps that answer clarifies something for you.

The matter was clarified long before this thread was started. The "ten-percent" statement is wrong, was wrong, and always will be wrong, and any excuses to the contrary are irrelevant.


_________________
 
Since there is no singular, absolute definition of human nature,
nor any ultimate evaluation of human nature beyond that which we project onto others,
individuals should be judged or defined only by their actions and choices,
and not by what we only imagine their intentions and motivations to be.


Averick
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

21 Aug 2008, 3:08 pm

Fnord wrote:
Averick wrote:
Oh, Fnord. Not that I would normally dodge a nice, terse conversatio with someone of your wit, but I think you understood all that I said in the previous post and to futher indulge you in such would be a waste and futile use of both our times. I personally also believe semantics are overused on WP; I will not indulge in such, and that is all this discussion will lead to in my estimation.

....

But I will add that scientists divided that Einstein's estimate was from the differences of soft-matter and hard-matter within his brain, post-mortem of course. Perhaps that answer clarifies something for you.

The matter was clarified long before this thread was started. The "ten-percent" statement is wrong, was wrong, and always will be wrong, and any excuses to the contrary are irrelevant.


You are omitting something of utter importance here anyway, smartie.



benjimanbreeg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,515

21 Aug 2008, 3:09 pm

patternist wrote:
Quote:
I personally also believe semantics are overused on WP


Agree; what does it acheive, really?
I don't post to be cross-examined. And I don't read posts to cross-examine. But apparently some people enjoy it.


thats why simple discussions can't be had on here. Once they get started with that stuff, they just take over the thread, and it spirals out of control.



Averick
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

21 Aug 2008, 3:10 pm

benjimanbreeg wrote:
patternist wrote:
Quote:
I personally also believe semantics are overused on WP


Agree; what does it acheive, really?
I don't post to be cross-examined. And I don't read posts to cross-examine. But apparently some people enjoy it.


thats why simple discussions can't be had on here. Once they get started with that stuff, they just take over the thread, and it spirals out of control.


Exactly. He might think like a scientist, but I think like a lawyer. :wink:



michel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 735
Location: Ecuador

21 Aug 2008, 3:11 pm

Are we still talking about reincarnation? :P



Averick
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

21 Aug 2008, 3:14 pm

Sure, if you would like to add something, Michel. :D



patternist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,606
Location: at my computer

21 Aug 2008, 3:14 pm

no, we're talking about talking about reincarnation. Completely different :P



greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

21 Aug 2008, 3:14 pm

I rememeber the mentioning of the ten percent related to Einstein's brain, I remember it was like an insinuation that we don't use all the available potential of our brain as Einstein did, and that was within the 10 percent limit. Usually that comes from the belief of the paranormal, like telekinesis and telepathy and stuff like that, which would be the 90% of the brain we don't use, according to the belief.

That has been proven wrong by now, with the brain scanning stuff fnord mentioned, if that was true, we should have had that confirmed in labs by now, with experiments and tests, especially with savants, although the savants thing is my opinion.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


Last edited by greenblue on 21 Aug 2008, 3:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

benjimanbreeg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,515

21 Aug 2008, 3:17 pm

Averick wrote:
benjimanbreeg wrote:
patternist wrote:
Quote:
I personally also believe semantics are overused on WP


Agree; what does it acheive, really?
I don't post to be cross-examined. And I don't read posts to cross-examine. But apparently some people enjoy it.


thats why simple discussions can't be had on here. Once they get started with that stuff, they just take over the thread, and it spirals out of control.


Exactly. He might think like a scientist, but I think like a lawyer. :wink:
:D



Averick
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2007
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,709
Location: My tower upon the crag. Yes, mwahahaha!

21 Aug 2008, 3:29 pm

greenblue wrote:
I rememeber the mentioning of the ten percent related to Einstein's brain, I remember it was like an insinuation that we don't use all the available potential of our brain as Einstein did, and that was within the 10 percent limit. Usually that comes from the belief of the paranormal, like telekinesis and telepathy and stuff like that, which would be the 90% of the brain we don't use, according to the belief.

That has been proven wrong by now, with the brain scanning stuff fnord mentioned, if that was true, we should have had that confirmed in labs by now, with experiments and tests, especially with savants, although the savants thing is my opinion.


Let us not forget that Einstein probably also had a brain-deficiency that would've concluded that he didn't use all his brain like a neurotypical.