> >Humans have roughly the same number of genes as mice, despite our
>>much more complex brains.
> In a speech in the Auckland medical school, gene tycoon J Celera
>Venter said the difference is 300.
>S Pinker too was a visiting lecturer here a few y ago. Pinker said every
>mental process is now known, or soon will be, to have a physical correlate.
>This is a huge exaggeration beyond what is actually known.
> He also says that, given such mapping of
>thoughts to electrical &/or biochemical
>processes in the brain, we have no need of the 'ghost in the machine'.
DOES HE MEAN SOULS AND SUCH? WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU
THINK HE MEANS BY "GHOST IN THE MACHINE"?
> His logic is faulty. Even if it were true that all mental
>processes had been correlated with scientific observations, that
>correlation would not illuminate the question of whether there is a person
>- roughly, that which departs at death - choosing to think this way.
WHY NOT IN PRINCIPLE?
>The physical brain changes could be results, rather than causes.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "PHYSICAL BRAIN CHANGES"? YOU MEAN EVOLUTIONARY CHANGES?
> The materialist such as Pinker assumes that
>they are causes, but the 'dualist'
>(his tag for me) that they are results.
IN PRINCIPLE THEY COULD BE EITHER UNTIL ITS CLARIFIED WITH EVIDENCE.
>Regarding the number of human genes, the doyen of milk proteins, Maubois,
>thinks human milk probably contains almost 100,000 proteins. A total of
>that order, in just one tissue, puts paid to any crude idea 'one gene - one
>protein', if there exist only ¾25,000 genes in the human that makes that
>milk (plus all the other proteins in blood, brain, etc).
AH, ALTERNATIVE SPLICING!
Jose Morales Ph.D.