Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!throopw From: throopw@dg_rtp.UUCP (Wayne Throop) Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: Re: ESP as evolutionary disadvantage (was: none) Message-ID: <659@dg_rtp.UUCP> Date: Mon, 20-Oct-86 17:52:21 EDT Article-I.D.: dg_rtp.659 Posted: Mon Oct 20 17:52:21 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 22-Oct-86 03:41:22 EDT References: <217@sri-arpa.ARPA> <3598@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> Lines: 44 Summary: resource consumption isn't the main point (though thought isn't cheap) >,>>> ranjit@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Ranjit Bhatnagar) >> tan@ihlpg.UUCP (Bill Tanenbaum) >>> We can imagine that the production of overpowering psychic distraction >>> requires little more resources than does thought. >>You can imagine whatever you want. > I could imagine that psychic powers are powered by tiny nuclear reactors > in the pituitary gland. However, I instead imagined that they are related > to the process of _thought_, which is not an unreasonable assumption to > make. Now, (I can't resist this:) for MOST OF US, the process of thought > does not consume great amounts of resources. For instance, I can believe > six impossible things BEFORE breakfast. Depends on what you mean by "great amounts". Thought is *not* trivial. During thought, the brain consumes significant amounds of sugars to power the chemical motor commonly called "the brain". Granted, the major motor muscles and the heart consume more. But the resources devoted to thought are not trivial. To draw this back to the original line of discussion, the original notion of the generating of masking "psychic waves" to confuse predators means that impulses of thought-stuff are "broadcast" without actually thinking the thoughts they indicate. The original rebutting point is that this ought to be no different than, say, seeming to having a shape that one does not "really" have, or a smell that one does not "really" have, or in general any sensory seeming that one does not "really" have. There is no particular reason to suppose that it is easier to think thoughts that one does not really think than it is to fake any other sensory trace an animal might leave. It is therefore not so much a question of resource consumption, but practicality of altering thinking structure to produce "fake thoughts" while retaining the ability to think "real thoughts". And again, there is no reason to suppose that this is more practical than altering the physical structure to have a "fake shape" while retaining the ability to function in some more "real shape". -- I've always had the greatest respect for other people's crackpot beliefs. --- Sam the eagle -- Wayne Throop !mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!throopw