Humans Living Normal Lives With No Physical Brain - Is This Proof Of A Human Soul???

reply to post by Rockpuck


There was one in the second link, actually what it is is a guy with a thin layer of brain mashed up against his skull with a big gaping void in the middle.

Originally posted by mentalempire
reply to post by Rockpuck

 

There was one in the second link, actually what it is is a guy with a thin layer of brain mashed up against his skull with a big gaping void in the middle.

Here is another scan of that french guy's skull compared to a normal brain



[edit on 11-11-2007 by CyberTruth]

This was discussed in a movie and a book called "What a bleeep do we know"

Basically, brain just serves as a reciever of information from quantum levels

Since we only use about 4% of brain, you only need 4% to, how we currently say - function normally. You can throw away everything else..
Or something like that

reply to post by zhuzha


that movie is such a horribly contrived stew of pseudo science and should not be given the slightest bit of credit.

they actually completely misconstrued many of the things said be the scientists they interviewed

I personally don't see how people 'Can't believe' that this person doesn't have much brain tissue when it's an actual fact that he doesn't have much brain tissue.


That's like saying 'I don't believe that black is different from white'.

The fact is, yes, if you had a developed brain, and got shot, you would either end up retarded or dead - This is beause your 'full size' brain has addapted to control your body - however if you were BORN with an abnormal brain - there is a chance that the malformed brain may well adapt to control everything just as well as a fully formed brain, infact the chances are it's probably working more efficiently than a 'proper' brain - as it will have to use a higher % of its neural matter.

On a much lighter note:

Everytime I was searching for actual brain scans I kept running into this pic- it always made me laugh in the seriousness of my quest - no offense hikix!!





[edit on 13-11-2007 by CyberTruth]

People running around with not much of a brain in their head, heck son, we just call those guys democrats.

I agree with some of the theories here that the people involved were likely born that way. Now, adaption I'm sure plays an important role here. What was the statistic that we only use 10% or our brains or so, could this be a one off mutation where the parts that weren't used just didn't develop?

They say the brain is highly adaptive with near infinite ability to rewire itself. But, that takes time and a need to do. You just can't remove 3/4 of a brain and expect it to function.

Yes, head trauma will affect someones abilities, why? well, you damaged a part o teh brain that does something, it needs time to work around it, and if there were mories there, theres not likely a backup, you lost it, but other parts of the brain can take up the slack as far as capacity goes.

I think it'd be cool to have something like that, since I would so get a door and secret compartment put in my skull, and i'd never lose my keys again.

Originally posted by CoffinFeeder
People running around with not much of a brain in their head, heck son, we just call those guys democrats.

I can't help but think of the placebo effect. I know this is different... but what if these people with little/no brain matter were fine because they didn't know they were not supposed to be fine?

I think the soul/consciousness will become synonymous some day. We're still figuring ourselves out.

I understand that a majority of us never have brain scans, so the absense of all or part of our brain wouldn't be so noticeable. But what about all the people who die and have autopsies performed? You never hear about medical examiners cracking open someone's skull and discovering that there isn't a brain there- at least not that I'm aware. So while the limited amount of brain scans performed could count for something, we also need to account for the fact that a lot of people have autopsies performed, especially when they pass away earlier than normal.

I believe in souls, but I just can't believe that a human being can live without a brain. I think you need at least some portion of a brain to function fully. I've seen several television programs about people who had to have half of their brain surgically removed, leaving the empty half to fill up with spinal fluid (they can actually feel and hear the fluid moving around if they abruptly move their heads!). So I think it's perfectly reasonable that someone can live a full and normal life with a partial brain, but I think they need at least that much to live.

Originally posted by dznetworks
I guess that explains Bush

Ha ha ha,,,,,,,::::sarcasm::: That was sooo funny...what a great way to make fun of the best president that we have ever had! What does that have to do with this post??? Obviously you're the idiot with no brain...Grow Up! You should be thrown in jail. But...it's people like us that keep people like YOU with all your rights...

Originally posted by CoffinFeeder
People running around with not much of a brain in their head, heck son, we just call those guys democrats.

I agree with some of the theories here that the people involved were likely born that way. Now, adaption I'm sure plays an important role here. What was the statistic that we only use 10% or our brains or so, could this be a one off mutation where the parts that weren't used just didn't develop?

Just so you know, that statistic is false(or, rather, misquoted). I believe it's actually that we use 10% of our brains AT A TIME; not total. So we do end up using all of our brains(or at least a significantly higher amount than 10%).

I will have to stray from all logic to give my opinion on this, but there's no doubt in my mind that there is something beyond the physical understandings that make up living things per say. The brain is perhaps what makes the interpretation of the physical world possible.

[edit on 14-11-2007 by laiguana]

reply to post by StretchUSAF


^ Wow dude, that was hilarious. You comment on a very interesting thread about the necessity of neural tissue when it comes to basic survival, and your comment has nothing to do with the topic, and is only there to bash another post meant only as a joke. Talk about no brain.

Anyway, I wonder how this effects these brainless people's thought patterns. What's their average IQ? What do they do for a living? What type of grades did they get in school? When they think about certain things, what shows up on the MRI? And, if stuck in a survival situation, would they have the capacity to adapt for basic survival?

I should also mention that this has very little to do with the soul, and in no way proves or disproves its existence. A cockroach can live for weeks without it's head until it dies of starvation. That doesn't mean a soul is keeping it alive.


[edit on 14-11-2007 by Rasobasi420]

reply to post by Vanitas


I agree. Information is stored all over the body, according to this theory. Just as with a holographic plate, even if you cut the plate into quarters, each quarter retains all the images stored on the whole. There is degradation of the image with each smaller piece until a point is reached where retrieval of the information becomes problematic.

Science has long thought that information was taught be repetitions, with the brain storing up and reinforcing the memory; one reason that school children were once taught to learn by rote.

However, there is a simple exercise that anyone can do to prove that the mind does not need to teach the body how to do each act by such painfully slow methods. Take your left arm, if you're right handed, bend it at the elbow, lean over a flat surface like a table or desk, and "print' your initials on the surface with the tip of the elbow.

This is a sufficiently abnormal thing that until I mentioned it here, you would have most likely never even thought such a thing, much less have practiced it, thereby "teaching" your body, or your brain, how to do this. Most people have little or no trouble accomplishing this, in spite of the fact that it is a unusual thing to do.

Now if the brain had to store up practice to learn new things, this would be impossible on the first ten tries, in most likelihood, because under the idea that motor control is a learned skill, there should need to be some learning curve. Without a new way of understanding learning, it should be only the hands that have been taught enough motor skills to perform this, and not an area so little used for such things as the elbow/arm.

Now before someone tells me I'm as crazy as certain other folks on this site, please remember that I'm only restating what I read as concerns the idea of the holographic viewpoint. I too lack the skill to fully explain how or why this should be so.

This is offered solely for your mental dinning pleasure.

You're saying a roach doesn't have soul because it's a roach? I think it's possible for everything to have a 'soul' so to speak, of course my idea is that science and technology haven't caught up to explain so much phenomenon that has been observed, for example, one area that has been -scientifically- documented would be quantum physics. 'Quantum physics tells us that reality isn't fixed - subatomic particles only come into existence when they are observed'
What I personally believe is that as most if not all matter in the physical world is made up of subatomic particles, we are not limited to the observable reality that keeps us in a box. Modern physics explains that we exist in a reality far beyond our ability to grasp as a whole. So considering the unlimited possibilities...there's quite some baggage out there...
And a sidenote, I actually am an atheist, so no religious influences here.

Here is another article that seems to suggest that sometimes less brain is better. In epileptic children who have severe symptoms that result in learning disabilties, neurosurgeons have been surprised to find that removal the entire hemisphere of damaged brain from patients resulted in not only the preservation of memory and personality, but improved overall mental function and learning ability.
Removing Half Of Brain Improves Epilectic's Lives


[edit on 15-11-2007 by CyberTruth]

reply to post by laiguana


I'm not saying a roach doesn't have a soul. I'm pretty much in the same realm as you are when it comes to the existence of the soul. I believe everything, living or inanimate has a soul, and that it is one unifying soul connecting everything, matter and energy, in the universe. However, using the "no brain" logic as evidence for the soul isn't logical in any way.

After all, why do so many people die from massive head trauma?

reply to post by Rasobasi420


So I guess DZNETWORKS reply was about the topic also eh? I guess that you are a Bush basher also? Whatever..believe in what you want...

But anyway...Brain or no brain...the soul carries the body... HAPPY?

reply to post by StretchUSAF


You're very funny man. The comment was a joke. For you to overreact like that was extremely immature.

It actually made you look more foolish than anyone else in the thread in my opinion.

BACK ON TOPIC

What do you think about the idea that the brain may not be necessary for the survival of human beings? In that regard, do you think it's specific to certain individuals who are born with these disorders, or do you think that someone with a full brain could survive and live the same way if 90% of their gray matter was removed?