Why do 80% of the people have 20% of the brains? Is that the preferred plan?
Go!
Last edited by Ronin Truth; 07-23-2014 at 07:46 AM.
Well I guess 12 views and 0 replies could be one answer.
I'd like to see your data. 20% is far too much.Originally Posted by Ronin Truth
All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
-Albert Camus
It's really a thought experiment, just noodling around with the Pareto Principle 80/20 rule. It may turn out that I've identified the sheeple paradigm.
Thanks for the reply, I was getting kinda scared.
Last edited by Ronin Truth; 07-23-2014 at 03:40 PM.
Why use your brain when you can barely stay afloat and keep yourself and your family fed? Nose to the grindstone and keep plugging. The alternative is horrifying. There is no time for 'thinking,' that is a distraction from the daily struggle for food and shelter.
smart people generally stay silent, I fail to see the benefit of this thread truthwarrior or truthwarrior wannabe
Have you chosen and identified your segment? Hang in there.
Work smarter, not harder might be a fruitful option to consider.
For who, the millions of underemployed? The ones still looking, or the ones who have given up? People who work too much smarter mostly find their hours cut without a raise.
ah the people who love to label
The op asks about "the preferred plan". This is a religion forum. Twisting the question...was man created to question or blindly obey?
Matthew18
At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” 2 He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. 3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me. 6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. 7 Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come! 8 If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.
All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
-Albert Camus
You got a relevant Buddha quote?
And if your brain causes you to stumble, ...
The unwritten verse, clearly.
Gouge out that pesky rational thought process!
Last edited by Crashland; 07-23-2014 at 07:48 PM.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
Blessed be the shepherds.
All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
-Albert Camus
ah yes calling people f***ing sheep helps
a precedent was set:
Psalm 23:1
A psalm of David. The LORD is my shepherd, I lack nothing.
Isaiah 40:11
He tends his flock like a shepherd: He gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them close to his heart; he gently leads those that have young.
Ezekiel 34:2
"Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy and say to them: 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Woe to you shepherds of Israel who only take care of yourselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock?
Ezekiel 34:11
"'For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them.
Ezekiel 34:23
I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd.
John 10:2
The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep.
John 10:14
"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me--
John 10:15
just as the Father knows me and I know the Father--and I lay down my life for the sheep.
John 10:17
The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life--only to take it up again.
John 10:18
No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."
John 15:13
Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends.
Hebrews 13:20
Now may the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep,
1 Peter 2:25
For "you were like sheep going astray," but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
1 Peter 5:4
And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away.
1 John 3:16
This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters.
Revelation 7:17
For the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd; 'he will lead them to springs of living water.' 'And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.'"
All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
-Albert Camus
Hey, maybe we've finally found out why most folks seem to really NEED both religion AND politics. I guess that it's just really too BAAAAA-d for all of the rest of us.
Is this perhaps a serendipitous "Eureka"?
A problem well defined is half solved.
Religion and politics are both the very same thing. They are both only, very old and very effective, means to control large masses of people. It has always only been that way, and it always only will be. The ends do NOT justify the means.
The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude (pdf)
Labeling is a very desirable, necessary and time saving survival shortcut mechanism.
If every time you saw a rattlesnake you had to stop and figure out what it is this time, there probably eventually wouldn't be a next time.
- OR -
Don't you just really hate all of those those darned Labelers?
Last edited by Ronin Truth; 07-24-2014 at 05:36 AM.
Been there, done that. That's a very unfortunate good point.
http://discovermagazine.com/2010/sep...rain-shrinking Parts 2 and 3 at link
If Modern Humans Are So Smart, Why Are Our Brains Shrinking?
Here are some leading theories about the why the human brain has been getting smaller since the Stone Age.
By Kathleen McAuliffe|Thursday, January 20, 2011
Running down a list of changes that have occurred in our skeleton and skull since the Stone Age, the University of Wisconsin anthropologist nonchalantly adds, “And it’s also clear the brain has been shrinking.”
“Shrinking?” I ask. “I thought it was getting larger.” The whole ascent-of-man thing.
“That was true for 2 million years of our evolution,” Hawks says. “But there has been a reversal.”
He rattles off some dismaying numbers: Over the past 20,000 years, the average volume of the human male brain has decreased from 1,500 cubic centimeters to 1,350 cc, losing a chunk the size of a tennis ball. The female brain has shrunk by about the same proportion. “I’d call that major downsizing in an evolutionary eyeblink,” he says. “This happened in China, Europe, Africa—everywhere we look.” If our brain keeps dwindling at that rate over the next 20,000 years, it will start to approach the size of that found in **** erectus, a relative that lived half a million years ago and had a brain volume of only 1,100 cc. Possibly owing to said shrinkage, it takes me a while to catch on. “Are you saying we’re getting dumber?” I ask.
Hawks, a bearish man with rounded features and a jovial disposition, looks at me with an amused expression. “It certainly gives you a different perspective on the advantage of a big brain,” he says.
After meeting with Hawks, I call around to other experts to see if they know about our shrinking brain. Geneticists who study the evolution of the human genome seem as surprised as I am (typical response:
“No kidding!”), which makes me wonder if I’m the world’s most gullible person. But no, Hawks is not pulling my leg. As I soon discover, only a tight-knit circle of paleontologists seem to be in on the secret, and even they seem a bit muddled about the matter. Their theories as to why the human brain is shrinking are all over the map.
Some believe the erosion of our gray matter means that modern humans are indeed getting dumber.
(Late-night talk show hosts, take note—there’s got to be some good comic material to mine here.) Other authorities argue just the opposite: As the brain shrank, its wiring became more efficient, transforming us into quicker, more agile thinkers. Still others believe that the reduction in brain size is proof that we have tamed ourselves, just as we domesticated sheep, pigs, and cattle, all of which are smaller-brained than their wild ancestors. The more I learn, the more baffled I become that news of our shrinking brain has been so underplayed, not just in the media but among scientists. “It’s strange, I agree,” says Christopher Stringer, a paleoanthropologist and expert on human origins at the Natural History Museum in London. “Scientists haven’t given the matter the attention it deserves. Many ignore it or consider it an insignificant detail.”
But the routine dismissal is not as weird as it seems at first blush, Stringer suggests, due to the issue of scaling. “As a general rule,” he says, “the more meat on your bones, the more brain you need to control massive muscle blocks.” An elephant brain, for instance, can weigh four times as much as a human’s.
Scaling is also why nobody seems too surprised by the large brains of the Neanderthals, the burly hominids that died out about 30,000 years ago.
The **** sapiens with the biggest brains lived 20,000 to 30,000 years ago in Europe. Called the Cro-Magnons, they had barrel chests and huge, jutting jaws with enormous teeth. Consequently, their large brains have often been attributed to brawniness rather than brilliance. In support of that claim, one widely cited study found that the ratio of brain volume to body mass—commonly referred to as the encephalization quotient, or EQ—was the same for Cro-Magnons as it is for us. On that basis, Stringer says, our ancestors were presumed to have the same raw cognitive horsepower.
Now many anthropologists are rethinking the equation. For one thing, it is no longer clear that EQs flatlined back in the Stone Age. Recent studies of human fossils suggest the brain shrank more quickly than the body in near-modern times. More important, analysis of the genome casts doubt on the notion that modern humans are simply daintier but otherwise identical versions of our ancestors, right down to how we think and feel. Over the very period that the brain shrank, our DNA accumulated numerous adaptive mutations related to brain development and neurotransmitter systems—an indication that even as the organ got smaller, its inner workings changed. The impact of these mutations remains uncertain, but many scientists say it is plausible that our temperament or reasoning abilities shifted as a result.
Numerous phone calls later, it dawns on me that the world’s foremost experts do not really know why our organ of intellect has been vanishing. But after long ignoring the issue, some of them have at least decided the matter is of sufficient importance to warrant a formal inquiry. They have even drawn some bold, albeit preliminary, conclusions.
DUMBING DOWN
In search of a global explanation for our cranial downsizing, some scientists have pointed to a warming trend in the earth’s climate that also began 20,000 years ago. Since bulky bodies are better at conserving heat, larger frames may have fared better in the colder climate. As the planet warmed, selection might have favored people of slighter stature. So, the argument goes, skeletons and skulls shrank as the temperature rose—and the brain got smaller in the process. Stringer thinks there is something to that idea, but he doubts it is the whole explanation. As he points out, comparable warming periods occurred many times over the previous 2 million years, yet body and brain size regularly increased.
Another popular theory attributes the decrease to the advent of agriculture, which, paradoxically, had the initial effect of worsening nutrition. Quite simply, the first farmers were not very successful at eking out a living from the land, and their grain-heavy diet was deficient in protein and vitamins—critical for fueling growth of the body and brain. In response to chronic malnutrition, our body and brain might have shrunk. Many anthropologists are skeptical of that explanation, however. The reason: The agricultural revolution did not arrive in Australia or southern Africa until almost contemporary times, yet brain size has declined since the Stone Age in those places, too.
Which brings us to an unpleasant possibility. “You may not want to hear this,” says cognitive scientist David Geary of the University of Missouri, “but I think the best explanation for the decline in our brain size is the idiocracy theory.” Geary is referring to the eponymous 2006 film by Mike Judge about an ordinary guy who becomes involved in a hibernation experiment at the dawn of the 21st century. When he wakes up 500 years later, he is easily the smartest person on the dumbed-down planet. “I think something a little bit like that happened to us,” Geary says. In other words, idiocracy is where we are now.
The idiocracy is in our turning away from our source and giver of life and instead worshipping material possessions.
+'These things I command you, that you love one another.' - Jesus Christ
The Anunnaki? They probably just didn't want their gold mining, house keeping, girl sex toy, breeders, slave species from being too smart, too strong, obedient enough, and not too much trouble. (It kinda all depends on just how you read Genesis, etc.)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/br...s-1339099.html#
Brainy sons owe intelligence to their mothers
GLENDA COOPER
Friday, 28 June 1996
GLENDA COOPER
Intelligent men owe their brains to their mothers, according to research published today in The Lancet.
Growing evidence shows that several genes which determine intelligence appear to be located on the X chromosome, the one men inherit from their mothers .Any mutation on the X chromosome has more effect on a man than a woman because a woman inherits X chromosomes from both her parents, which tends to dilute the gene's impact.
But a man only has one X chromosome inherited from his mother, which is paired with the much smaller Y chromosomes from his father. Therefore, an intelligence-enhancing X gene has more of a chance of becoming the predominate gene, determining the man's basic intelligence, looks and character. It also works the other way; if the predominate gene is not as strong as it should be, the man is more likely to suffer mental retardation.
Professor Gillian Turner, the author of the study, said: "If the gene is the one that increases intelligence then its full effect will be seen in men, while in women the benefit is less pronounced. This explains why some men are extraordinarily intelligent." She concludes that if a man wants smart sons his best bet is to marry a smart woman.
http://brooklynmutt.com/post/1580249...mately-80-of-a
Medical evidence shows that approximately 80% of a child’s intelligence is acquired from the mother…
think4yourself $#@!yeahfacts:Medical evidence shows that approximately 80% of a child’s intelligence is acquired from the mother while the remaining percentage is passed on by the father. As the child grows, the existing environment further contributes to the development of his/her mental abilities. Therefore, intelligence is both a matter of nature and nurture, with the latter complementing, enhancing and enriching the former.This is probably good news for my future offspring
(Source)
Submitted by marciplayground
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us