Newsgroups: comp.robotics,alt.cyberpunk.tech,sci.skeptic
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!udel!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!logica.co.uk!danb-mac.logica.co.uk!user
From: danb@lna.logica.com (Dan Breslau)
Subject: Re: The Human Brain.
Message-ID: <danb-0604951325400001@danb-mac.logica.co.uk>
Sender: news@carmen.logica.co.uk (News Manager Account)
Nntp-Posting-Host: danb-mac.logica.co.uk
Organization: Little to none
References: <3ko8d7$87a@nyx10.cs.du.edu> <Pine.SUN.3.90.950322022725.1183B-100000@LAHS.LosAlamos.K12.nm.us> <3kpfq8$pmn@news.primenet.com> <3l96ir$283@trog.dra.hmg.gb>
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 1995 18:25:40 GMT
Lines: 28
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.robotics:19587 sci.skeptic:109368

In article <3l96ir$283@trog.dra.hmg.gb>, wagray@taz.dra.hmg.gb wrote:

> 
> How about this;
> 
> a) If the brain is a product of evolution (it is)
> b) and if the evolution is still continuing (it is)
> c) then we can expect that the human brain is almost, but not quite,
          how about:            ^ "statistically average"
>    good enough, for the everyday work it has to do.
> 
> In other words, the capabilities of the brain will always tend to
> lag behind what is required. So it is unlikely that the brain has any 
> amazing hidden powers. So there probably isn't any submerged 90% or 99% 
> (depending on which view you listen to).

Another way of looking at this might be that, given that
   a) People are social creatures, and capable of communicating
      information;
   b) Some people are statistically ahead of the curve, others behind;
   c) then all it takes is for some people to be able to develop
      information ("Hey! Look at what we can do with this round thing!")
      and others to be able to use it ("Wanna drag?")

-- 
Dan Breslau                                       danb@lna.logica.com

Help!  I'm trapped inside a Dilbert cartoon!
