Human potential

[Androopy]

The title of the thread reminded me of the movie Limitless.

Speaking of which, I've been researching in my very limited spare time, the case of nootropic drugs. I've been taking normal supplements, etc recently including a normal dose of gingko biloba, etc. But something that has caught my attention has been a thing called pramiracetam. Supposedly, it stimulates the brain metabolism (good for dementia I hear). My understanding of it is superficial and limited, but thought I'd let you guys know about it.

 

[Tyler Durden]

ithis quote doesnt fit perfectly, but is one i quite like.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” - einstein

Love it. Thanks

 

[cynic]

...will there come a time where everyone is a genius at the very least? and even to a more extreme view will things like telekinesis and things of this nature become possible? i know it all seems a bit out there, but things being achieved today im sure were deemed impossible by some in the past...

A number of my friends over the years, did in fact develop and demonstrate telekinetic capabilities. It was not quite at the phenomenal level that we see in "Star Wars" movies - just small things like influencing the course of billiards balls, making certain numbers always occur with the rolling of dice or spinning a needle afloat in a glass of water. I was rather envious of them in that regard as I'd failed in my numerous attempts to acquire that particular faculty for myself.

 

[bellenuit]

A number of my friends over the years, did in fact develop and demonstrate telekinetic capabilities. It was not quite at the phenomenal level that we see in "Star Wars" movies - just small things like influencing the course of billiards balls, making certain numbers always occur with the rolling of dice or spinning a needle afloat in a glass of water. I was rather envious of them in that regard as I'd failed in my numerous attempts to acquire that particular faculty for myself.

Aren't those just the standard repertoire of illusionists? Are you sure they weren't looking up some tricks on YouTube.

Uri Gellar, who touted he had telekinetic and supernatural powers and was feted throughout the media and by some governments for his so called abilities, was proved beyond doubt by James Randy to be a fraud. This is a YouTube link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9w7jHYriFo

Has anyone demonstrated telekinetic abilities in a lab environment? I know the mind can be used to control objects by thinking of certain things, but that is using electrical signals from the brain being fed into a mechanical device that does the moving and controlling of the object.

 

[Trembling Hand]

apparently the claim that we only use about 10% of our brains is utter rubbish.

Absolutely its rubbish. See how you go if 90% of your brain is damaged. :bonk:

 

[bellenuit]

Absolutely its rubbish. See how you go if 90% of your brain is damaged. :bonk:

Yes but then you are only using 1% of your brain.

 

[Trembling Hand]

Yes but then you are only using 1% of your brain.

thanks

 

[young-gun]

Absolutely its rubbish. See how you go if 90% of your brain is damaged. :bonk:

Does anyone know the scientific reason that some are blessed with 180IQ and others as low as perhaps 50 or so? or is it unknown

And also trem I think that when people claim the 10% myth they would surely be referring to a collective percentage mass as opposed to just one whole 10%. I just read that neuro surgeons are yet to find an unresponsive part of the brain when exposed to electrical pulses.

 

[McLovin]

Does anyone know the scientific reason that some are blessed with 180IQ and others as low as perhaps 50 or so? or is it unknown

Why are some people fast runners and others (like myself) are slow?

 

[Trembling Hand]

Does anyone know the scientific reason that some are blessed with 180IQ and others as low as perhaps 50 or so? or is it unknown

Its mostly irrelevant. High IQ is no guarantee of success in your chosen field. And some with very average IQ reach the top. IQ tends to be related to genetics but its a waste of time looking at high IQ test and then thinking these people will somehow become the cream of humanity.

 

[young-gun]

Its mostly irrelevant. High IQ is no guarantee of success in your chosen field. And some with very average IQ reach the top. IQ tends to be related to genetics but its a waste of time looking at high IQ test and then thinking these people will somehow become the cream of humanity.

Agree to an extent, but I can guarantee those with low iqs at the top have some high iqs hired beneath them!

Check out this gifted little individual http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/314207/Heidi-s-high-IQ-of-159-makes-her-a-genius-at-age-four

 

[Starcraftmazter]

Does anyone know the scientific reason that some are blessed with 180IQ and others as low as perhaps 50 or so? or is it unknown

Generics and upbringing.

And also trem I think that when people claim the 10% myth they would surely be referring to a collective percentage mass as opposed to just one whole 10%. I just read that neuro surgeons are yet to find an unresponsive part of the brain when exposed to electrical pulses.

People use near enough 100% of their brains, but not all areas of the brain ever light up at once. The amount of the brain used at any point in time depends on the activity and which parts of the brains are responsible for executing it.

It is true that there are some suspect areas of the brain, which neuroscientists are not sure as to the function thereof. That however does not imply that we all have special hidden powers. If 7 billion people can live their lives without being able to see through walls, or move objects with their thoughts, and so forth - then there's a good chance nobody can do that.

There is no logical explanation for why the human brain would be capable of doing something that nobody is or has ever experienced or is aware of. It would be like claiming birds live their lives without knowing how to fly or that they are even capable of flight - in the sense that if humans had such abilities, they would surely naturally and instinctively learn to utilise them.

 

[cynic]

Aren't those just the standard repertoire of illusionists? Are you sure they weren't looking up some tricks on YouTube....

Well after having the experience (whilst using my own pair of dice) of always landing on both the tax squares, every single time my token traversed the monopoly board for game after consecutive game - my opponent cheating via telekinesis seemed to be the more plausible explanation. The extraordinarily low probability of these events being mere coincidence (given that dozens of games were played) would be lower than the chances of me winning consecutive major lottery prizes.

Has anyone demonstrated telekinetic abilities in a lab environment?

Unfortunately I didn't happen to have a laboratory handy at the time - I don't normally keep such things on standby when playing board games, do you?

...Uri Gellar, who touted he had telekinetic and supernatural powers and was feted throughout the media and by some governments for his so called abilities, was proved beyond doubt by James Randy to be a fraud.

Back in the 80's I read a very entertaining book written by James in which he proudly boasted of his achievements in debunking various charlatans. I found his explanations of the practice of "cold reading" to be worthwhile. His anecdotes of the way in which he discredited psychic frauds were somewhat underwhelming - an observant five year old could just as easily have dispelled the illusions and showman tricks cited.

I was a little disappointed when he appeared on "The Don Lane Show" (also back in the 80's) . I think it could have been an insightful segment. Unfortunately the compere (Don Lane) got annoyed when James admitted that he didn't have the evidence of fraud that he'd promised regarding the purported psychic (Doris Stokes). Don promptly abused him and the show went straight to a commercial break.

Perhaps you might be able to find a link to that episode on YouTube.

 

[Sdajii]

Isn't it cute that your friends see it better to use their magical powers to beat you at Monopoly than win millions of dollars on the casino roulette wheel?

Why would our brains evolve in such a way that 90% of it is wasted? Does anyone ever stop and think about how stupid a thing to say that is? Seriously, we are the products of evolution and evolution doesn't slowly develop massive abilities which sit dormant. It's as absurd as speculating that we have gills and wings and haven't yet noticed.

Brains are very complex, which makes them difficult for us to understand well. People often start speculating in a 'religious' sort of way when there are big unknowns (like with religion itself in response to where the world came from and why the sun does its thing and all that).

If you stop having a 'religious speculation' approach it's easy to understand the potential of the mind. It's the same with arms and legs. Why can I have a reasonably healthy, functional body, but not win a gold medal in gymnastics, archery, weight lifting or sprinting? It's not because the other guys magically unlocked mysterious gifts which I haven't stumbled across in my own body, it's that they worked bloody hard to develop their bodies and/or talents and in most cases had genetic predisposition for those abilities while I drank beer and went to uni and played with lizards.

Same with the brain. There's no mystical switch you can flick to turn on some ability which evolution decided to hide from us (seriously, do people actually think that or are they taking the piss?). Some of us are born with brains better at some tasks rather than others (you may be creative and musical, I might be better with figures and logic, someone else might be very practical, etc.). On top of that, some of us work hard to develop our minds, some sit around talking crap and watching movies. We aren't all born with the same potential, that's just crap they tell people to make the stupid ones feel better. Results come from actual work or even just luck, not magic, unless you're in a Disney movie.

Seriously, this sounds like trying to find a way to make the Easter bunny bring you more chocolate or wondering why the bunny gives some people more chocolate than ever.

 

[Trembling Hand]

Sdajii nice post.

 

[young-gun]

Isn't it cute that your friends see it better to use their magical powers to beat you at Monopoly than win millions of dollars on the casino roulette wheel?

Why would our brains evolve in such a way that 90% of it is wasted? Does anyone ever stop and think about how stupid a thing to say that is? Seriously, we are the products of evolution and evolution doesn't slowly develop massive abilities which sit dormant. It's as absurd as speculating that we have gills and wings and haven't yet noticed.

Brains are very complex, which makes them difficult for us to understand well. People often start speculating in a 'religious' sort of way when there are big unknowns (like with religion itself in response to where the world came from and why the sun does its thing and all that).

If you stop having a 'religious speculation' approach it's easy to understand the potential of the mind. It's the same with arms and legs. Why can I have a reasonably healthy, functional body, but not win a gold medal in gymnastics, archery, weight lifting or sprinting? It's not because the other guys magically unlocked mysterious gifts which I haven't stumbled across in my own body, it's that they worked bloody hard to develop their bodies and/or talents and in most cases had genetic predisposition for those abilities while I drank beer and went to uni and played with lizards.

Same with the brain. There's no mystical switch you can flick to turn on some ability which evolution decided to hide from us (seriously, do people actually think that or are they taking the piss?). Some of us are born with brains better at some tasks rather than others (you may be creative and musical, I might be better with figures and logic, someone else might be very practical, etc.). On top of that, some of us work hard to develop our minds, some sit around talking crap and watching movies. We aren't all born with the same potential, that's just crap they tell people to make the stupid ones feel better. Results come from actual work or even just luck, not magic, unless you're in a Disney movie.

Seriously, this sounds like trying to find a way to make the Easter bunny bring you more chocolate or wondering why the bunny gives some people more chocolate than ever.

congratulations on completely missing the original point of the thread, which im assuming you havent read entirely. and i dont think anyone actually did say we only use 10% of our brains. the whole point of the thread is not what are we capable of naturally, but what are we capable of with the help of scientific advances and substances etc. there are plenty of examples of how the human body has excelled past its 'natural' ability with the use of supplements and all sorts of things. perhaps not at an academic level, but to think that in the future there wont be drugs that can enhance brain power is incredibly closed minded. the mind may be a very complex and impressive instrument, but its only a matter of time before scientists know it inside out and will be able to alter it.

im actually wondering if youre taking the piss.

 

[young-gun]

Why are some people fast runners and others (like myself) are slow?

sorry i wasn't very clear. I was after the scientific reason for why people are smarter than others. naturally genetics etc are the reasons why people arrive with the abilities they do. but what is it that makes one brain smarter than another? eg is there mroe connections? do electrons move faster? i dont even know if electrons have anything to do with it, but that was the path i was heading

with your example i think it is much simpler, most likely taller, longer legs, bigger muscles, and years of training.(maybe some cheeky enhancement drugs)

because surely once you unlock the reason that one brain operates more efficiently than another, and can remember more information than another, that they would then be able to replicate similar circumstances in someone elses brain. for example there may be a drug that gets developed that can speed up the connections made, or that excites electrons causing faster processing or something like that(naturally after years and years of study and research). once again jsut an example, i have no idea how the human brain actually works. in fact ill start doing some more in depth reading.

 

[Glen48]

Genetics and DNA will be the key to the future why some cells are made to be an Ear or a Heart, I see some person with a high IQ yet his father was a brickie or such but unless you know the full history of the family it is hard to work out if a high IQ is genetic..

Most of it is good memory and being able to recall steps in a procedure such as a Surgeon operating.
I watched a show were the poms were testing a Nuclear Sub captain he had 3 watches on, one watch to time each torpedo as it was fired.
Now that is memory.

 

[Glen48]

Baboons can recognise scores of written words, a feat that raises intriguing questions about how we learn to read, scientists report.

In a specially-made facility in France where they could come and go at will, monkeys learned to differentiate between a real word, such as KITE, and a nonsense word such as ZEVS.

The baboons had access to a large enclosure with several touch-sensitive computer screens, each projecting a four-letter word.

The animals had to tap one of two shapes on the screen to show that they understood whether the word was a real one or garble.

Choosing the real word got them a tempting reward of food -- a pellet of dry wheat that came from an automatic dispenser.

The six baboons used the computers up to 3,000 times a day, notching up an average total of 50,000 "trials" over a month and a half.

They learned to distinguish scores of words, identifying them with an accuracy of 75 percent, according to the study led by Jonathan Grainger at the Cognitive Research Laboratory at France's Aix-Marseille University.

There were 500 real words and 7,832 nonsense ones in the data bank.

"This ... is a remarkable result, given the level of orthographic similarity between the word and nonword," according to the paper, published by the US journal Science.

"More detailed analysis revealed that baboons were not simply memorising the word ... but had learned to discriminate words from nonwords on the basis of differences in the frequency of letter combinations."

The champion speller was a baboon called Dan, who learned 308 words, around three times as many as his chums.

There was no sign that the animals actually understood the meaning of the words.

But the fact that they learned to distinguish one word from another opens insights into the acquisition of reading.

According to a popular theory, we humans learn to recognise words thanks to speech - we process the sequence of letters into words by building on the sequence of sounds in speech.

But the baboons do not speak any human language, which means the speech hypothesis "may be at best incomplete and possibly wrong," said Michael Platt and Geoffrey Adams of Duke University in North Carolina in a commentary also carried by Science.

That leaves the field open for a rival theory: that there are brain circuits which evolved to support other functions - and we share this circuitry with our primate cousins.

One possible candidate is the visual word form area (VWFA), in the occipitotemporal sulcus region of the brain.

If so, the evidence of cerebral versatility is reassuring news for people with reading difficulties.

"The observation that the neural circuits involved in reading and writing are not hard-wired may explain why most people with dyslexia can learn to read," said Platt and Adams.

"The very plasticity that enabled humans to invent reading and writing can be harnessed to overcome dysfunctions in the underlying neural circuitry."

 

[Sdajii]

congratulations on completely missing the original point of the thread, which im assuming you havent read entirely. and i dont think anyone actually did say we only use 10% of our brains. the whole point of the thread is not what are we capable of naturally, but what are we capable of with the help of scientific advances and substances etc. there are plenty of examples of how the human body has excelled past its 'natural' ability with the use of supplements and all sorts of things. perhaps not at an academic level, but to think that in the future there wont be drugs that can enhance brain power is incredibly closed minded. the mind may be a very complex and impressive instrument, but its only a matter of time before scientists know it inside out and will be able to alter it.

im actually wondering if youre taking the piss.

Dude, chill out

I didn't miss the original post, it's a moderately interesting question to speculate on. The thing is, this is a discussion thread on a discussion forum where people discuss stuff. This means that people say stuff, then others comment on that, and so on. Not everything in a thread is a response to the original statement or question. That's how discussions work. Imagine if a one hour conversation involved a group of people all responding to the first person's statement in that conversation, or a 10 page thread where all posts were in direct response to the original post. It wouldn't work and it wouldn't be worth bothering with. I wasn't responding to your original post, I was responding to stuff posted after it, which wasn't even posted by you, so need need for you to twist your knickers

If you want me to comment on your original post, sure, why not. I'm interested in that sort of stuff, my last day job was in a medical research lab.

I'd say it's much like the rest of the body. You can eat good food and exercise, and your body will be better. You can take more extreme chemicals and get better results out of them, which often has negative side effects. The improvements are generally not all that extreme compared to what's possible without the extreme chemicals/treatments.

It's a pretty similar thing with the brain. We can frig around with it, but basically, millions of years of evolution have done a pretty good job of making a machine which works pretty well. Drugs basically flick switches which are already there, they don't give new abilities. They might make muscles grow stronger by locking the corresponding switch to keep at it the 'make the muscles stronger' setting, beyond the natural limit. Yep, the body is capable of doing that, but it doesn't do it naturally because it doesn't want to go beyond what is good for itself. The body always 'could' have done that, but it 'knows' if it does, it's going to screw itself up a lot, which isn't worth the slight benefit (if the benefit:harm ratio was a good one, that setting would already be achievable or locked in place). This is why 'extreme' chemicals/drugs have side effects which on the whole are worse than the positives. If it was an advantage to do something, evolution would already have done it. If you want to stick the brain into overdrive you can, there are lots of psychoactive drugs available legally and illegally, some of them can improve mental performance... for a while. Overall, you're generally better off without them though. In some cases, some illicit drugs actually can temporarily help you to be more creative or concentrate harder or perform better in all manner of ways. The positive attributes of illicit drugs aren't widely publicised though, because it would encourage people to use them (and none of them are good for you other than in the short term, most are outright hideous, and even the good ones totally screw many people up right from the start). Of course, most illicit drugs will just turn you into a jerk and possibly make you lose your job, house, car, wife and respect. Don't do drugs, drugs are bad, etc. etc. disclaimer etc.

Where we might be able to greatly improve the brain (and the rest of the body) is by making cyborgs. I think that was already mentioned in the thread. We can't really make the existing body (including the brain) much better without massively developing our DNA technology beyond what I can imagine coming in the next hundred years or more. However, by adding to it or replacing parts we could improve it a heap. Think Robocop. We can't make your arms massively better, but we could make something heaps better and replace what you have, or add it as an extra. We're getting heaps better at making cyborgs, the technology is getting very exciting. If we were able to use the existing brain and add auxiliary memory and calculating power we might be able to create a genuine supermind which is capable of far more than any previous brain or computer. Functionally it's far beyond current technology, but with the rapid advance we're seeing in the technology in the relevant areas, it's difficult to predict how long it will take, and it might not be that long. The precursor technology is already in use, and when that sort of thing happens it's often not long before massive leaps forward are made. Exactly how well it could work is pure speculation at this stage. It might create that amazing supermind or it might never be quite as good as (or only very slightly better than) carrying around a laptop, a calculator and a phone which interface with your eyes and ears and fingers and stuff rather than directly with your brain. The physical limitations of the brain itself might not allow for much better a direct integration than indirect (through sight, touch, etc.) anyway.