QUESTION6.com
We,The People, are not happy
14 - The human brain
Before we pretend to dominate the universe, we should keep in mind that modern humans are 98.8 % genetically similar to chimpanzees, 75% genetically similar to chickens and 60% genetically similar to banana trees.
The human body is marvelous. Unfortunately, it comes equipped with a brain that is a total disappointment. Every second our body completes about 500 trillion faultless copies of hemoglobin – a protein having 10000 atoms in 574 amino acids. That makes the human brain look rather limited compared with the human body. To make an evaluation of our thinking, we compare ourselves with other animals. That’s cheating. We should compare the development of our brain with the development of our own body. That would make us very humble.
A good place to start would be the way Mother Nature implemented thinking on planet Earth.
Let’s start with the octopus.
An octopus has 9 brains, one in the center of its body and one inside each of its 8 arms. Each arm can taste and touch and think for itself. An octopus can learn by watching the mistakes made by another octopus. It has three hearts. This is a warning to humans. You need a balance between thinking and feelings. The octopus recommends 3 hearts for 9 brains. It is also capable of tender loving care.
For 7 months, the female octopus takes care of her eggs and dies after the last one has hatched. It is colorblind and sees the world in shades of grey. It can recognize a human face and remember it. The octopus is a sign that Mother Nature is using brains as a tool and is not attached to one brain in particular. Nine brains and three hearts could mean that thinking should not be left alone.
Another implementation of thinking on Earth can be found in birds. Some birds perceive magnetic fields
Some birds have a brain divided into two and can switch between them. They can use one half while the other half gets some rest. They can keep flying for months without landing.
The human brain is already divided into two halves. With a little help from human evolution, we may be able, in the future, to avoid our need to sleep.
-At the other extreme we have the slime molds.
No head, no heart, no brain and very slow movements. That does not prevent the slime mold from solving problems faster than powerful computers.
Our answer to the slime’s challenge could be:
“Slimes don’t talk to each other. They don’t know about writing. They don’t know about music. They ignore everything that is not part of their domain of expertise. They are experts in a certain domain, but their domain is limited. Humans also could be experts in a limited domain. Every plant and every animal could fill a slot in nature’s unlimited domain of expertise. Why does nature make flowers grow on top of a mountain where nobody can see them? The answer is: Because “there was a place for a little domain of possibilities on top of that mountain”.
That shows the multiple connections possible between life, sense organs, thinking, movements of the body, beating of the heart, memory and tender loving care.
The human brain
Human thinking is one of the many possible implementations of thinking in the material world. Humans are somewhere between two extremes. We have one brain divided into two halves. We also have some grey matter along some nerves. The human brain has, at least, 86 billion neurons. In the past 200 years, we made locomotives, TV, computers, planes, satellites, vaccines, atomic bombs, MRI, bulldozers, dams, viaducts, and much more. This is an accomplishment. We can be proud of it, until we compare it with our body that completes about 500 trillion faultless copies of hemoglobin, a protein having 10000 atoms in 574 amino acids. Imagine what we could do with a brain as sophisticated as our body!
Let’s assume that a certain amount of thinking was created by the Big Bang. This is a limited genetic patrimony to be shared between humans. If this is the case, we should become more and more dumb as the world population increases. Such a theory is not the best way to make friends.
Another possibility is that the thinking on earth increases with the human population. That would imply that we can create thinking out of nothing. A compromise between those two extremes would be that human thinking is the result of a complex process way above our head.
How can we explain this enormous discrepancy between our mind and our body?
One explanation could come from our history. When an animal sees danger, it knows what its reaction should be. Birds fly away - Zebras run - Fish swim. When man perceives a danger, he may hesitate between different reactions. Should he hide? Run away? Call for help? Throw stones? Climb a tree? Man introduces thinking between being aware of the danger and his reaction. That takes time! A fraction of a second could make the difference between survival and becoming a meal. The more you think, the lower your chances of survival. Dropping the best thinkers for millions of years before they even have a chance to reproduce lowers the IQ of the general population. We are the survivors because we are the dumb ones. The Homo sapiens survived because of their limited thinking -)
We thought that mathematics could help. It is a way to avoid the need for reasoning. At the end of mathematical reasoning there is a formula. If you know the formula, you don’t need the reasoning. To get the surface of a rectangle you only have to remember that it is a multiplication. Nobody will ask you why. We use Mathematics to avoid reasoning. Of course, somebody had to find the formula. We called him a genius and put his name in the dictionary. This is our way to avoid bruising our ego.
Can we rely on human thinking?
The scientists are the first ones to say that our thinking is not dependable. They want everything to be confirmed by experiments. They need the approval of Mother Nature. They say that we should look at the facts and apply our thinking to the facts. Why should we associate the reliable facts with an unreliable thinking that is going to mess up everything? Does that make sense? They want A.I. to amplify human thinking. Is that reasonable? The robots that we are going to make will come from human thinking. Are you sure that this is what we want? You may amplify something good. You may also amplify something really bad.
How can we be sure that we don’t need Mother Nature’s approval anymore?
Let’s make some test of the human brain.
Here is a simple question:
“If Marie’s daughter has a son, what is the relationship
between Marie and the father of this son?”
No mathematics. This is a simple question about family relationships! There should not be any problem! We can find the answer (mother-in-law), but it takes time.
Here is another test of the human brain:
-We take a series of coins and put them in alignment and number them 1, 2, 3, 4… all heads up.
-We flip the coins 2, 4, 6… and all the multiples of 2.
-We Flip the coins 3, 6, 9, 12… and all the multiples of 3.
What are the coins that are still head up?
No need for complicated calculations. Some simple reasoning should do.
How can we explain the discrepancy between our mind and our body?
One explanation could come from our history. When an animal sees danger, it knows what its reaction should be. Birds fly away - Zebras run - Fish swim. When humans perceive danger, they hesitate between different reactions. Should they hide? Run away? Call for help? Throw stones? Climb a tree? Man introduces thinking between being aware of the danger and his reaction. That takes time! A fraction of a second can make the difference between survival and becoming a meal. The more you think, the lower your chances of survival. Removing the best thinkers for millions of years before they even had a chance to reproduce lowered the IQ of the general population. Those who survived are the dumb ones.
The Homo sapiens survived 300 000 years
because of their limited thinking
​
We made computers. That’s an achievement but could that be used as a proof of superior thinking? Maybe not! Computers are made of the association of millions of simple ideas coming from millions of different people. That does not mean that the human brain improved the day we started making computers. It only shows that we needed many people to put together many simple ideas.
Computers are following the general direction of human evolution. We started by making tools to go hunting. Those tools were simple objects. The next step was to make machines. That requires ideas using objects. With computers, we keep moving from the material world to the non-physical world. With A.I. we are taking one more step in the same direction. Humans are distancing themselves from the material world. What could be our next step? The development of our feelings?
