Stupid 10% of Your Brain Crap Ends Here; Read Me

[O'nus]

A'hoy hoy, It is a common mis-conception and mis-understanding on how this topic is brought up. For some reason, the common understanding is that we only use 10% of the brains potential, and that the rest is not completely fathomable. Which is interesting, because if we did not know the full capabilities of the brain, how can you rate the percentage of how much you currently use then?! What the text of this is always referring (except for people who are in dire delusions of the potential world of science-fiction) to is that the brain is, in fact, relatively slow because of how little we typically use at once. In order to use 100% of your brain, you would have to do all of the following (and I believe by listing these, it will elucidate what the percentage precipiatetes): - Be conscious and unconscious at the same time - Eat something - Talk and sing - Moving every single part of your body - Be horny - Be listening to music and paying attention to the lyrics - Reading - Smelling something 'strong' - Looking at something intriguing to the individual (art, perhaps?) - Be in the middle of reminissing past events - Be afraid of something etc. I believe that should generally explain what this "10%" is actually referring to - that the brain does not need to completely utilise every organ and part of the brain at all times. Several have argued to me that the brain is the fastest "machine" in the world. When comparing the speed of a calculator, space shuttles, etc. the brain is obviously slower. Also, others have noted that we do not have the brain completely maped or understand - which is true. However, when referring to the percentage of the brain that is consistently in use (not entirely, as to the mis-conception of this proclamation) it is referring to the general basic organs and parts of the brain that are in use, not the understanding of the brains capacity and potential. Am I not leaving a margin of possibility for psychic/supernatural abilities/further unknown capabilities/etc.? No, because it is true that the brain is not entirely understood - however, that is entirely why the reason saying "We only use 10% of our brain" is even more impossible to rate a percentage of. It is just like saying, "We have travelled 10% of the way... but we don't know where we are going." Well, I will leave it for now - it seems paramount enough to read now anyway. Thank you to whomever takes the time to read it and reply - I look forward to your feedback. Hope I have been enlightening.

[Placebo]

Funny - I was thinking about this last night. I reckon you're right... but the true understanding of what the person (Einstein wasn't it) meant should be taken into account. Did they mean the usage at any point in time, or the capacity of the brain EVER used (unlikely), or the amount of storage used up. In many or all of the possible understandings above, yes, I agree its ridiculous to know the percentage when you cannot know the total

[Identity X]

I think it's the amount of memory stored at it's peak as opposed to the total capacity for memories, kind of like a hard disk really, don't want to fill it all up. Yes, come to think about it, that is it. Which kind of makes the first post irrelevent,if you don't mind me saying so.

[Seeker]

Don't forget about housekeeping activities. Even when you are doing nothing, your brain is constantly creating and deleting relationships between the data it has stored within. Nice post!

[O'nus]

If data is the percentage we are calculating, then it is even more impossible because the organ dedicated to doing so, the hippocampus, grows along with memories. Some cells can die as well, and it can degrade throughout age (alzheimers). However, the percentage use of our brain is not entirely the hippocampus, but the entire cortex. Also, many years ago, all the human brain consisted of was the cerebellum and the basic limbic system (thalamus, amygdala, etc.) however, now , we have a much more developed frontal cortex and parietal lobes, etc. So we cannot calculate how much of the brain we can use when we may not even have the other additional organs that may or may not come to grow and develop in the future. Furthermore, if we were to use 100% of the hippocampus (the humans memory hard-drive) at once, we would be able to recollect every single detail in our entire life. The point is, we should not calculate the potential use of the brain (and most neurological texts do not, but it is commonly mis-understood that they are) when there are capabilities and parts that may develop and come to be found in the future. ~

[Demerzel]

Originally posted by O'nus Also, many years ago, all the human brain consisted of was the cerebellum and the basic limbic system (thalamus, amygdala, etc.) however, now , we have a much more developed frontal cortex and parietal lobes, etc. So we cannot calculate how much of the brain we can use when we may not even have the other additional organs that may or may not come to grow and develop in the future. All those who do not believe in evolution, read the FACTS. Yeah, enlightening posts. This belongs in about 3 forums at one time...

[CT]

I cant understand how the hell you can not believe in evolution ... it makes so much sense!!! And its been proven to death.

[Demerzel]

i agree totally. evolution happened, people! look at proof! and all youse highly religious people who think God created humans the way they are: Just think of it as part of his big plan.

[O'nus]

The major question would be as to how these organs came to develop (Darwin had much to say on the matter..) and how the brain can arbitrarily and independantly decide to develop such manifestations, and in other cases, how the majority of brains (or other varying organs) can develop simultaneously. This is the argument some neurologists use, that these organs and developments were perpetuated by God himself... which is relatively irrational and generally seems to be what people say when they cannot fathom any other possibility (much like how people commonly refer to very lucky or abnormal situations as "fate"). Considering how enlightened we are becoming of our own existance and the perpetuating self-realization of the majority, the upcoming developments of the brain and body should be interesting (this is also to keep some light shed on the people who are still hoping for a future of science fiction). ~

[Artie J]

I've been railing about this for some time. I think when people say "we only use 10% of our brains" they're implying there's 90% that never gets used for anything, and it's some kind of mysterious untapped potential. During a normal 24 hour cycle I believe most of the brain is used in a variety of tasks and experiences as in your list (eat, talk, move, etc). It makes sense that larger brains are advantageous for survival, but why would we evolve with an enormous extra capacity when it takes so much fuel to support? We may not know the full capacity of the brain, but it makes evolutionary sense that it would not be much more than what we need to survive. Did you see http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm? EXCERPT: "although certain minor functions may use only a small part of the brain at one time, any sufficiently complex set of activities or thought patterns will indeed use many parts of the brain. Just as people don't use all of their muscle groups at one time, they also don't use all of their brain at once. For any given activity, such as eating, watching television, making love, or reading, you may use a few specific parts of your brain. Over the course of a whole day, however, just about all of the brain is used at one time or another."

[evangel]

We are most definitely not using our brains to near the capacity that they are capable of... But you have a good point... If the potential of the mind is limitless (unimaginable) we have no way of measuring "10%" or any percentage for that matter. Originally posted by Techboy evolution happened, people! look at proof! rrrrubbish. http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-330.htm http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-331.htm http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-317.htm and he's s'mo'fo'yo... check it http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/

[O'nus]

Originally posted by Artie J I've been railing about this for some time. I think when people say \"we only use 10% of our brains\" they're implying there's 90% that never gets used for anything, and it's some kind of mysterious untapped potential. During a normal 24 hour cycle I believe most of the brain is used in a variety of tasks and experiences as in your list (eat, talk, move, etc). It makes sense that larger brains are advantageous for survival, but why would we evolve with an enormous extra capacity when it takes so much fuel to support? We may not know the full capacity of the brain, but it makes evolutionary sense that it would not be much more than what we need to survive. Did you see http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm? EXCERPT: \"although certain minor functions may use only a small part of the brain at one time, any sufficiently complex set of activities or thought patterns will indeed use many parts of the brain. Just as people don't use all of their muscle groups at one time, they also don't use all of their brain at once. For any given activity, such as eating, watching television, making love, or reading, you may use a few specific parts of your brain. Over the course of a whole day, however, just about all of the brain is used at one time or another.\" Ah, excellent, thank you - I did not know of any sources on the internet to help give sound to what I was saying. I also did not expect snopes.com to be it.. good site. I also like this quote: The most powerful lure of the myth is probably the idea that we might develop psychic abilities, or at least gain a leg up on the competition by improving our memory or concentration. All this is available for the asking, the ads say, if we just tapped into our most incredible of organs, the brain. It is past time to put this myth to rest, although if it has survived at least a century so far, it will surely live on into the new millennium. Perhaps the best way to combat this chestnut is to reply to the speaker, when the myth is mentioned, \"Oh? What part don't you use?\" [/b] evangel - Evolution can also be commonly mistaken or mis-used as the true meaning is modification of a certain species in order to survive or adapt to the external eviroment and challenges set forth - just like how our teeth have evolved in order to take a good first precise bite, then chew with molars - we simply modified, or in other words, evolved by modification. Those articles do not proclaim that there is divine intervention or influence on all species in order to develop, either. As I said above, it is a common belief that, because we cannot prove how exactly varying species will modify themselves in order to survive or adapt, that it must mean there was divine influence. A trump card or deus ex machina in explanation of scientific modification. "We got here and are like this because God wanted us to be." I simply cannot follow into that mentality as there is simply no explanation. Everytime that is 'argued' to me, I do not feel it is an argument. (I also make note that I expect you to insinuate that there is divine intervention considering your history of beliefs and responses to such subjects.) I also feel that there are no arguments someone with such beliefs can present besides ad hominems. However, those articles are very interesting - thank you for the enlightment evangel. ~

[evangel]

Those articles do not proclaim that there is divine intervention or influence on all species in order to develop, either. *[/b] You're right. But they do at least raise questions and point out that much of what is viewed as \"proven scientific fact\" is actually based on a presuppositional belief system that is founded on the theory of evolution. it is a common belief that, because we cannot prove how exactly varying species will modify themselves in order to survive or adapt, that it must mean there was divine influence. *A trump card or deus ex machina in explanation of scientific modification.[/b] I've never heard this argument before. Such an argument would presuppose that evolution is a possibility. I presuppose that it is complete fiction. Just because it appears to make sense makes it no less fictitious. I simply cannot follow into that mentality as there is simply no explanation. *[/b] I guess evolutionary theory MAKES AN ATTEMPT to explain, but it is a hole-ly explanation at best. I also make note that I expect you to insinuate that there is divine intervention [/b] That would be accurate, but I go a little further and say that there is not ONLY \"intervention,\" but absolute and intricate control by a designer who is omniscient. I also feel that there are no arguments someone with such beliefs can present besides ad hominems.[/b] There are hundreds if not thousands of credible institutions and scientists who argue against evolution daily ... and without ad hominem. Were there any ad hominems in the article links I included? This is tangential to the main thread, but I noticed many here had positive things to say about evolution soooo...

[Howie]

O'nus. Although 10% may be a misconception, do you believe that we utilize 100% of the brain at different points of time? Is it possible that there are some regions of our brain that we have yet to tap into. As complex as our brains are and as little as we know about all of its functions, I feel there is a good possibility that this could be true. As far as being the fastest, it may be as far as speed but take into consideration that a decision by our brains is performed not only by equating an answer by fact but the brain is functioning with intutition, emotion, fact, Fiction, mistakes and more all to come up with an answer that a computer cannot match. That is one reason a super computer cannot always beat a human at chess. It may be faster at it's cingular format on providing an answer but it does not have all of the other things to combine when deciding on an answer

[O'nus]

Originally posted by Howetzer O'nus. Although 10% may be a misconception, do you believe that we utilize 100% of the brain at different points of time? *Is it possible that there are some regions of our brain that we have yet to tap into. As complex as our brains are and as little as we know about all of its functions, I feel there is a good possibility that this could be true. * As far as being the fastest, it may be as far as speed but take into consideration that a decision by our brains is performed not only by equating an answer by fact but the brain is functioning with intutition, emotion, fact, Fiction, mistakes and more all to come up with an answer that a computer cannot match. That is one reason a super computer cannot always beat a human at chess. It may be faster at it's cingular format on providing an answer but it does not have all of the other things to combine when deciding on an answer Yes, it is possible that there are parts of the brain and the entire nervous system that we do not fully comprehend - however, we should not label a percentage on how much of the brain we can use considering that there is, most likely (and definitely, since every person believes that we do not understand the brain 100%) parts of the brain that we do not understand. When comparing the electrical activity and speed of the brain to other electrical equipment, it is slow. Considering what perpetuates and fuels the brain in comparison to the electrical equipment, however, is much more impressive, I agree. It is just stating the comparison of electrical speed. Evangel, I respect your beliefs and you and I have been able to debate civil with things in the past, so you retain my respect for you. I hope I have not offended you at all for debating with someone with nearly opposite beliefs than you can truly help develop your own or, at least, bring light to many ideas. I wish to make note to you that I am not saying you are wrong or that I am right. I understand you believe that development of the human species and our existance is a mixed system of divine intervention and influence along with (or just the following) the will and faith of change or modification, etc. of the human minds. So I wish to ask you what you think of the rare cases of humans with dissabilities, abnormalities, etc. of the brain? How they are perceived by you, is something I am interested in. I believe these abnormal cases to be a case of genetic abnormalities, recessive genes, etc. No divine intervention; simply the genes and chemicals of the elements involved being unbalance, like all things in life (everything can not be perfect). I look forward to your feedback

[evangel]

Evangel, I respect your beliefs and you and I have been able to debate civil with things in the past, so you retain my respect for you. *I hope I have not offended you at all for debating with someone with nearly opposite beliefs than you can truly help develop your own or, at least, bring light to many ideas.[/b] I appreciate that a lot. No you have not offended me. I understand that many people, even some Christians would disagree with many of my beliefs. So I wish to ask you what you think of the rare cases of humans with dissabilities, abnormalities, etc. of the brain? *How they are perceived by you, is something I am interested in.[/b] Some of these "abnormals" are actually tremendously supernaturally gifted -some are geniuses. I believe that EVERYTHING is ordered by God, down to the last molecule -and that there is no chance, possibility, accident, or element of surprise for Him. I believe He knows past, present, and future (and beyond perhaps)... I believe this is consistent with what scripture teaches. That said, I cannot answer exactly why there is so much imperfection and dissarray in creation, except that our sin reaches depths and results in consequences we cannot fathom. We are flawed and as a result, the entire earth reaps (most notably through death and sickness). I do believe that part of the reason or explanation for "abnormalities" rests in the idea that these things will eventually serve as a contrast for our understanding when God reveals himself to us all in the future. When this "revelation" comes, we will be able to see that all the earthly/human "abnormalities," retardations, psychotic outbreaks, murders, wars, mayhem, etc. will enable us to understand/experience on some level, God's perfection. I cannot provide a scientific reason for why God creates people who are born with mental or physical abnormalities, illnesses, etc. (I'm assuming this is what you're referring to). But I also believe that all these things that seem to us to be so burdensome and make us question "why" will pale in comparison to Him. They will be like specks of dust in an ocean of His mercy, justice, and love. :bravo: Sorry for the rant... but anyway, I hope this is what you were referring to.

[djaio]

Originally posted by O'nus - Be conscious and unconscious at the same time - Eat something - Talk and sing - Moving every single part of your body - Be horny - Be listening to music and paying attention to the lyrics - Reading - Smelling something 'strong' - Looking at something intriguing to the individual (art, perhaps?) - Be in the middle of reminissing past events - Be afraid of something etc. So let me get this straight... in order to use 100% of my brain, I would have to be lucid dreaming about chewing some food while starring in a broadway musical in which I'm dancing(using all of my body) and singing, and I don't know the lyrics to the song I'm supposed to sing so I have to be paying attention to what everyone else is singing, and I'm reading cue cards too, and the scene is taking place in an art gallery, and I'm afraid of the fire that just broke out backstage, and I'm smelling the smoke, and it's reminding me of when my house burned down when I was 6. Oh yeah, and I'm horny.

[O'nus]

Originally posted by djaio+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(djaio)</div> <!--QuoteBegin-O'nus - Be conscious and unconscious at the same time - Eat something - Talk and sing - Moving every single part of your body - Be horny - Be listening to music and paying attention to the lyrics - Reading - Smelling something 'strong' - Looking at something intriguing to the individual (art, perhaps?) - Be in the middle of reminissing past events - Be afraid of something etc. So let me get this straight... in order to use 100% of my brain, I would have to be lucid dreaming about chewing some food while starring in a broadway musical in which I'm dancing(using all of my body) and singing, and I don't know the lyrics to the song I'm supposed to sing so I have to be paying attention to what everyone else is singing, and I'm reading cue cards too, and the scene is taking place in an art gallery, and I'm afraid of the fire that just broke out backstage, and I'm smelling the smoke, and it's reminding me of when my house burned down when I was 6. Oh yeah, and I'm horny.[/b] LOL Yes, now you see why you can not use 100% of your brain.

[Placebo]

Recently I've been trying to be aware of myself and my thoughts - at all times. Very hard, and I'm failing miserably. But what did strike me as unusualy is that there seems to be a cap on how much you can 'think' of at once Eg. I can't see, feel, hear, sense my body, think of what Im doing, and what is about to happen, and my spatial awarenes, and speak to someone all simultaneously. At least not all 100%. Now that might sound obvious ... but why? I mean, your brain spreads out its capabilities.. so it should all work simultaneously. Only 2 possibilities I can think of: 1) Your conscious mind is limited, but not the subconscious. It kept up with all of that. The reason the conscious mind was a problem is because its largely limited to a particular area of your brain. 2) There are common areas of your brain to do all the tasks I spoke of. Thus you can't use that common area for all tasks simultaneously. Similar to (1) if you think about it I suppose

[Kaniaz]

We use 10% of our brain? Fat chance. The end.

[lumpyhed]

Perhaps someone should attempt that humongus list in an LD?

[WerBurN]

as for the evolution thing: since we are talking about a scientific theory, the only way you can convince the scientific community that it is false is to a) use purely scientific reasoning B) put holes in evolution's arguement, and c) provide a better SCIENTIFIC theory to replace it...the last of which is not possible atm ...evolution, however, if you look at it, is supposed to be that all life evolved from the first single-celled organism...nowhere in all of science has it ever been found where one organism turns into another...sure they adapt and become new species, but a dog is a dog, regardless of breed, and a cat is a cat, regardless of coat...

[Ultima]

Originally posted by CT I cant understand how the hell you can not believe in evolution ... it makes so much sense!!! And its been proven to death. Yes. evolution happened but it is not happenING. If anything, we are degenerating as a species because natural selection no longer plays a part and there are no longer any genetic pressures to make us smarter, stronger, or better than what we are.

[CT]

Originally posted by Ultima+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ultima)</div> <!--QuoteBegin-CT I cant understand how the hell you can not believe in evolution ... it makes so much sense!!! And its been proven to death. Yes. evolution happened but it is not happenING. If anything, we are degenerating as a species because natural selection no longer plays a part and there are no longer any genetic pressures to make us smarter, stronger, or better than what we are.[/b] yes, thats true, I know that.

[Placebo]

Evolution and natural selection/genetic specialisation .... they are not necessarily one and the same While natural selection is a very well known system, that has been observed and has been proven to work (with eg. genetic algorithms) .... Evolution takes it a big step further Evolution implies a big bang, the creation of our planet, bio-chemical magic in water, crawling out the seas, crossing all known species' barriers.. etc etc Natural selection has NEVER been observed to cross species barriers... Not to say that it can't ... but its worth considering when people start getting beligerent about evolution Evolution and Natural Selection are *not* necessarily the same thing Just a thought....