NationStates Jolt Archive

This morning I’m playing around Nationstates and reading my newspaper. And what do I see in my paper? Some politician is claiming that we only use 10% of our brain.

I see and hear this statement several times a year, in newspapers, movies or just in chats with friends.

Well, it’s not true, we certainly do not use only 10% of our brain.

A little wondered why so many people claim this 'scientific' urban legend, I googled around et voila:

http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html

http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percent.asp

http://www.csicop.org/si/9903/ten-percent-myth.html

Are you sure the politician wasn't saying that he/she only uses 10% of her/his brain.

Are you sure the politician wasn't saying that he/she only uses 10% of her/his brain.

He said: ‘if we know that we only use 10% of our brain capacity, then the solution for our environmental problems is hidden in the unknown 90%.’

He said: ‘if we know that we only use 10% of our brain capacity, then the solution for our environmental problems is hidden in the unknown 90%.’

I was having a joke. I should have also posted :tongue:

I was having a joke. I should have also posted :tongue:

I have no sense for humour. ;)

Awww... I clicked on this thread hoping to have a good rant about how the whole 10% of the brain thing was a myth. Damn you for disappointing me :p

Yeah, 10% complete BS. There's still lots of parts we don't know exactly what they do (though we generally know basic functions involved), and we certainly do not use all our brain at any one point in time but that's really not the same thing.

what politician so the rest of us know not to vote for him.

Awww... I clicked on this thread hoping to have a good rant about how the whole 10% of the brain thing was a myth. Damn you for disappointing me :p

Yeah, 10% complete BS. There's still lots of parts we don't know exactly what they do (though we generally know basic functions involved), and we certainly do not use all our brain at any one point in time but that's really not the same thing.


I believe the major part is used for vision, but I forgot the percentile.

Sorry for blowing up the rant.

I thought it was interesting, because many people (some are very intelligent ones) claim this rather a lot.

400% of my brain is used for failing to understand basic maths.

I have no sense for humour. ;)

Yep that is contianed in the upper 15% of the brain.

He said: ‘if we know that we only use 10% of our brain capacity, then the solution for our environmental problems is hidden in the unknown 90%.’

Can you source this, I googled but nothing.

It's a most ridiculous statement by a politician, I don't really care for the 10% fallacy but where the 'if' is wrong, the conclusion from that 'if' is more than laughable as a statement, it's cause for some concern.

'If we know that the moon is made of cheese, then the solution to rising sea levels is an enormous space-based raclette grill'.

Please don't say it's the Minister of the Environment, or whatever equivalent.

Can you source this, I googled but nothing.

It's a most ridiculous statement by a politician, I don't really care for the 10% fallacy but where the 'if' is wrong, the conclusion from that 'if' is more than laughable as a statement, it's cause for some concern.

'If we know that the moon is made of cheese, then the solution to rising sea levels is an enormous space-based raclette grill'.

Please don't say it's the Minister of the Environment, or whatever equivalent.

mmm, raclette.

Can you source this, I googled but nothing.

It's a most ridiculous statement by a politician, the 'if' is wrong and the conclusion on 'then' is more than laughable as a statement.

'If we know that the moon is made of cheese, then the solution to rising sea levels is an enormous space-based raclette grill'.

Hehe. We don't speak English here. It doesn't matter, I hear this statement rather often, sometimes even by scientists!

I was not out to make that politician look dumb, because a significant part (maybe a majority) is thinking the same.

Hehe. We don't speak English here. It doesn't matter, I hear this statement rather often, sometimes even by scientists!

I was not out to make that politician look dumb, because a significant part (maybe a majority) is thinking the same.

we have found a country dumber then the US woohoo. I feel less embarrassed now.

Hehe. We don't speak English here. It doesn't matter, I hear this statement rather often, sometimes even by scientists!

I was not out to make that politician look dumb, because a significant part (maybe a majority) is thinking the same.

You don't need to make him sound dumb when he sounds completely insane.

I'm really not bothered by the 10% statement, it's a common enough fallacy trotted out in every bar by every resident weird, old bearded bloke.

It's the conclusion that bothers me.

mmm, raclette.

Indeed Homer.

I find it amusing that the problem for musico-neurologists is finding which areas that are not being used when listening to music. Some liken it to looking at a Christmas Tree.

Clearly this politician has no idea.

I find it amusing that the problem for musico-neurologists is finding which areas that are not being used when listening to music. Some liken it to looking at a Christmas Tree.

Clearly this politician has no idea.

Is this counting for Britney Spears music as well?

If you disregard water and fat, there's only about 10% of the brain left.
And what really gets used, anyway? ATP and neurotransmitters, sodium and potassium ions. Isn't that about it? ;)

I'm really not bothered by the 10% statement, it's a common enough fallacy trotted out in every bar by every resident weird, old bearded bloke.
wait...that would be you, would it not?

wait...that would be you, would it not?

Nah, it's Peeps.

Nah, it's Peeps.

Oi I ain't old, okay!

Is this counting for Britney Spears music as well?

I'm not sure if that is an oxymoron or not?:D

Oi I ain't old, okay!

You're so old you've actually only got 10% of your brain left :)

Is this counting for Britney Spears music as well?

If that's what they enjoy, then yes.

You're so old you've actually only got 10% of your brain left :)

Oi! What the hell is going on here? Pick on peeps day huh huh!:mad:

Oi! What the hell is going on here? Pick on peeps day huh huh!:mad:

Here we go, the old man rant, wave your stick around ya old codger.

I blame Uri Gellar for perpetuating this myth. And the psychic government spies, but that goes without saying.

I believe the major part is used for vision, but I forgot the percentile.


Vision is significant... though I also couldn't say the percentile, if you add in the other senses, perception generally accounts for a lot of brain activity. Interestingly perception of certain objects (or specifically faces) uses a completely different part of the visual system than perception of other types of objects - even if the faces are only cartoon drawings.

Vision is significant... though I also couldn't say the percentile, if you add in the other senses, perception generally accounts for a lot of brain activity. Interestingly perception of certain objects (or specifically faces) uses a completely different part of the visual system than perception of other types of objects - even if the faces are only cartoon drawings.


Between 25% and 35% is used for vision.

Between 25% and 35% is used for vision.

So if you were blind you could reuse it for mental superpowers instead.

So if you were blind you could reuse it for mental superpowers instead.

What actually happens is that the area previously used for interpreting visual signals starts to help interpret other senses, such as sound or smell or touch.

There's no real difference between them all, nor the signals that come in, simply the organs used to detect.

So if you were blind you could reuse it for mental superpowers instead.

No. That's another urban legend. People really think that blind people have better hearing (or other) capacities, but it's not really true. The brain part for vision can't be used for something else.

Blind people are just better trained to use their ears. But non-blind people could achieve the same results rather quickly.

No. That's another urban legend. People really think that blind people have better hearing (or other) capacities, but it's not really true. The brain part for vision can't be used for something else.

Blind people are just better trained to use their ears. But non-blind people could achieve the same results rather quickly.

No,

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19626264.800-blind-people-tap-unused-brain-to-hear-better-.html

Further, you don't need eyes to 'see', there's a project out there that 3D maps an image onto the tongue by depressing the image, the tongue being very sensitive, the brain can interpret, blind people can thus reach out and open, say, a door.

The brain is pretty flexible.

No,

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19626264.800-blind-people-tap-unused-brain-to-hear-better-.html

Yes, I know. I have my data from a more recent source.

In short it was like this: If you blindfold people for a few days, they will achieve the same results. It was a matter of concentration.

I have to go now, but i'll look it up and post a decent answer later.

Yes, I know. I have my data from a more recent source.

In short it was like this: If you blindfold people for a few days, they will achieve the same results. It was a matter of concentration.

I have to go now, but i'll look it up and post a decent answer later.

Compared to scanning the brain and seeing sections of the brain normally used for seeing used for hearing?

This is fairly new stuff, my link is 2007 and they're already doing projects as described in my previous post.

It was always thought the brain had specific sections to deal with specific tasks but we're realising that it's far more flexible than that.

I'm sitting at a table draped in black, surrounded by black curtains. Candles, spheres, and unfamiliar symbols have been placed before me. My right hand, arms, and head are strapped with wires, and my mouth is filled with electrodes. I'm blindfolded.
Although this may sound like a scene for a Black Mass, it's even stranger than that: I'm trying to see with my tongue.
The gear I'm wearing was invented by Paul Bach-y-Rita, a neuroscientist at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Bach-y-Rita has devoted much of his career to a single, revolutionary concept: that our senses are interchangeable. The brain, Bach-y-Rita and many other neuroscientists believe, is an organ of astonishing plasticity: If one part of it is damaged, another part can serve the same function. To prove the point, his collaborator Kathi Kamm, a professor of occupational therapy at the university's Milwaukee campus, has strapped a small video camera to my forehead and connected it to a long plastic strip hanging from my mouth. A laptop computer reduces the camera's image to 144 pixels. Those pixels are converted to an electric current that is sent to the business end of the plastic strip—a 12-by-12 grid of electrodes that rests on my tongue.

Link (http://discovermagazine.com/2003/jun/feattongue)

EDIT: Fairly new, this experiment was being done in 2003, depends on the definition of new.

Here we go, the old man rant, wave your stick around ya old codger.

Whipper-snapper!

It was always thought the brain had specific sections to deal with specific tasks but we're realising that it's far more flexible than that.

As far as I know this is correct, but there are cases where functions of a damaged brain, have been re-routed to othyer areas of the brain, and thus some limit functionality has been restored.

Routed BTW for our American friends is pronouced Rooted, one of my lil bugbears.:D

what politician so the rest of us know not to vote for him.

:soap:

It matters which one? Meh. None of them bother with such trivia as facts, or data or research, unless its a focus group of some sort. Urban myth is so much less time consuming, so he/she can get right back to feeding out of the public trough and shovelling pork back home to stay in office.

God Above, what I wouldn't give for a political leader who doesn't bloody want the job, but does it anyway because it needs doing? It would be nice to get a side order of "Fiscal Responsibility" along with that entree of "Reluctant but Competent and Dutiful."

I suppose its too much to ask for, that the government let me decide how to spend my money rather than deciding for me.

Okay, rant over.

As far as I know this is correct, but there are cases where functions of a damaged brain, have been re-routed to othyer areas of the brain, and thus some limit functionality has been restored.

I seem to recall something similar involving paraplegics and harnesses to see if it had any effect on the paralysis.

A little bit.

Routed BTW for our American friends is pronouced Rooted, one of my lil bugbears.:D

See, this is why we have to keep fixing your language. :tongue:

To be honest it sounds like hiw point is unrelated to the 10% myth. He could've easily just have said "we have the capacity to solve these problems, if we just put our mind to it".

http://i35.tinypic.com/3355w20.jpg

I beleive that we use all of our brain but I don't believe we use it to its fullest capacity.

As the other 90%, this whole thread is lulzy.

For thought and learning and such, the 10% might be accurate. When people think of "using your brain", I find that they usually mean using it for thought and learning. The other 90% is used for everything else, from keeping you alive (monitoring and changing how fast the heart beats, breathing, etc.) and moving the body to keeping each region and neuron in touch with eachother.

Hell, I've even heard that 90% is used just to help the brain regions interact with eachother. It all depends on what you mean by "using the brain".

That myth is old. In reality 10% is what a below average person uses at one time. Actually studies show that the few percentage you use the more efficient your brain is. So if you say your brain uses 5% at a time. Its about twice as efficient as another person who uses 10% at a time. We probably use most if not all of our brains each and every day of our lives. We simply only use so much at a time. If only I remember where I read that. I'd link it.

As for eyesight. Its interesting to know we don't actually 'see' with our eyes. We see based on chemical reactions in the brain caused by stimulating electrical pulses from our optic nerve. Of course the optic nerve isn't the only thing that can trigger these reactions. Take hallucinogenic drugs for example. :-P