NationStates Jolt Archive


All in the Head, just unlock it??

The Republican Rulers
31-03-2005, 15:50
Could it be that a person does not actually learn over time, instead that when they are born they know everything that could ever be. The only problem is trying to unlock it. Could it be that we are all born w/ the knowledge of the world except we just have to unlock it all or find it in our brain of ours. Strange theory eh?...just unlock it??
Bogstonia
31-03-2005, 15:54
I've no idea but that is an intriguing theory. Someone needs to use it as the basis for a movie, stat!
Neo-Anarchists
31-03-2005, 15:57
Considering as humans we use less than 10% of our brain
That is a myth that has been disproved time and time again, unfortunately it hasn't yet made its way out of the public consciousness.

http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html
http://www.theness.com/articles/brain-nejs0201.html
Loveliness and hope2
31-03-2005, 15:58
Does this knowledge necessarily have to be stored in out brain, what about our soul? Kinda like Plato's ideas of the forms.
Ankhmet
31-03-2005, 16:00
Could it be that a person does not actually learn over time, instead that when they are born they know everything that could ever be. The only problem is trying to unlock it. Could it be that we are all born w/ the knowledge of the world except we just have to unlock it all or find it in our brain of ours. Considering as humans we use less than 10% of our brain, thats pretty disturbing...just unlock it??

No.
The Republican Rulers
31-03-2005, 16:06
No.
Wow thats a great answer, ur explaination was profound :sniper:
Ankhmet
31-03-2005, 16:07
Wow thats a great answer, ur explaination was profound :sniper:

It wasn't supposed to be. And don't use the noob smileys, for God's sake.

EDIT:Want an explanation?

It's impossible. It can't be genetic memory, because it's very unlikely any genetic line has the collective knowledge of the world, and genetic memory is the only explanation which makes any kind of sense. And any 'supernatural' explanation is what I like to call a cop-out.
Hailowniss
31-03-2005, 16:08
If this is the case, can someone help me find my key? I seem to have been locked out...
The Republican Rulers
31-03-2005, 16:08
Why dont u explain a little, "no"...why do u think it can't be, explaination would be nice
Ankhmet
31-03-2005, 16:10
Why dont u explain a little, "no"...why do u think it can't be, explaination would be nice

I edited my response to give you an explanation.
Hailowniss
31-03-2005, 16:10
but then again... there are quite a few other people on these forums that have been locked out too... (insert shifty eyes)
The Mycon
31-03-2005, 16:11
It's possible, but extremely unlikely. It would be an extremely inefficient way for a brain to work- thought takes up a great deal of energy to have concious thought and memory, having it wasted (and, having to imprint on a developing brain during reproduction) would make the species less viable than having them simply learn in a natural way. The only imprinted (instinctual) matter we've discovered about humans is a suckling urge- put a baby in front of anything vaguely nipple-shaped, and it will try to get milk out of it.


But, on your theory... If all knowledge were there, when new things happen, are they suddenly placed in, or is lock #1 (ability to learn) removed, but lock #2 (actual learning) still in place?

Carrying this indefinitly meant that the first sentient being had within his head all of history which is to come, and one more giant leap gives us that everything has been pre-ordained since the first two atoms bumped together at the beginning of the universe. The math of psychohistory would be a great one.
Ankhmet
31-03-2005, 16:11
but then again... there are quite a few other people on these forums that have been locked out too... (insert shifty eyes)

Anybody else find this disturbing?
Hailowniss
31-03-2005, 16:12
Thank you.
Neo-Anarchists
31-03-2005, 16:13
Why dont u explain a little, "no"...why do u think it can't be, explaination would be nice
If your original argument was that possibly the "extra 90%" had all the knowledge and as we learned we use more of our brains, then it's false because it's based on a false premise, that being the false premise that we only use 10% of our brains.
The Republican Rulers
31-03-2005, 16:13
Well i dont mean, you get a figurative key and unlock ur entire mind, i mean...example...lets say ur in algebra class, the teacher is talking about factoring polynomials, and rather than "learning" what happens is the knowledge is stored in your head already u just need a little cue to get it going. Thus you never learn anything, you just "find" it.
Ankhmet
31-03-2005, 16:14
If your original argument was that possibly the "extra 90%" had all the knowledge and as we learned we use more of our brains, then it's false because it's based on a false premise, that being the false premise that we only use 10% of our brains.

You already trashed that idea :D
Ankhmet
31-03-2005, 16:15
Well i dont mean, you get a figurative key and unlock ur entire mind, i mean...example...lets say ur in algebra class, the teacher is talking about factoring polynomials, and rather than "learning" what happens is the knowledge is stored in your head already u just need a little cue to get it going. Thus you never learn anything, you just "find" it.

I think that's the silliest idea since:

"I bet the moon is made of gouda..."
Hailowniss
31-03-2005, 16:15
wait a second... did you just actually respond to my post seriously? That just made my day...
The Republican Rulers
31-03-2005, 16:16
If your original argument was that possibly the "extra 90%" had all the knowledge and as we learned we use more of our brains, then it's false because it's based on a false premise, that being the false premise that we only use 10% of our brains.
Lets just drop the 10% deal...but does all the knowledge one have in the brain already...
Nadkor
31-03-2005, 16:40
Lets just drop the 10% deal...but does all the knowledge one have in the brain already...
that would mean that everybody knows everything there will ever be to know as soon as they are born

which is a little far-fetched
The Republican Rulers
31-03-2005, 16:47
that would mean that everybody knows everything there will ever be to know as soon as they are born

which is a little far-fetched
no not actually...it is there, they just dont know it, as in finding it in a sense but it was just a theory i thought up while at the movies
Ankhmet
31-03-2005, 17:45
no not actually...it is there, they just dont know it, as in finding it in a sense but it was just a theory i thought up while at the movies

How is that idea not far-fetched? And the fact you thought it up whilst at 'the movies' doesn't lend you any credibility :D
The Republican Rulers
31-03-2005, 22:10
How is that idea not far-fetched? And the fact you thought it up whilst at 'the movies' doesn't lend you any credibility :D
This idea wasn't meant to be the greatest thing ever discovered it was just an idea that could be discussed. It may be far fetched but if you think about it, it is truly possible. When ur born is ur "brain" a mass of mush, if so then it cannot be called a brain. SO what is in the brain then when a life is born? Something more than the thought of crying, something has to already be there, so this could be a possiblility.