What resolution do people see? - Page 8 - Science and Technology - HWzone Forums
adplus-dvertising
Skip to content
  • Create an account
  • About Us

    Hello Guest!

     
    Please note - in order to participate in our community, comment and open new discussions, you must join as a registered member.

    Our members enjoy many advantages, including the ability to participate in discussions, enjoy raffles and promotions for members of the site, and receive our weekly content directly by email.

    Do not like being harassed by email? You can register for the site but do not submit your registration to the weekly email updates.

What resolution do people see?


exXxTreAm

Recommended Posts

Although it is unconscious and involuntary but these actions that the baby "knows" to do even at day-to-day

If he knows then why did you put quotation marks?

He does not know, and certainly this is not a "tremendous amount of information" as it is said, and certainly does not give him any advantage other than the purely survival advantage.

A baby born with these reflexes has no advantage over a baby born without these "informations" and is fed artificially and kept healthy. In terms of intelligence potential. And let's not forget that that's exactly what we're talking about. The infant does not know anything that gives him an advantage in intelligence or its subsequent development - in this respect - he is born completely "empty" and begins to study right from the first day, as I mentioned above.

Believe him, in some parts of the world I've seen people who are not much smarter than a dog. Without a learning process, man is nothing more than a survival machine - and thus it is no different from an animal. But this is a completely different discussion.

Link to content
Share on other sites

  • תגובות 121
  • Opens on
  • Last comment

Prominent participants in the discussion

Prominent participants in the discussion

If he knows then why did you put quotation marks?

Because it's semantics.

If the definition of knowledge is what can be learned then the baby does not know anything (except perhaps to recognize the voice of his mother who heard when he was in the womb)

Biologically, both knowledge and reflexes are stored in connections between the neurons, and in fact it can be compared to Bius

Link to content
Share on other sites

EDOSON: You're wrong about that.

Infants are born with innate knowledge of certain issues that can not be defined as reflex.

For example, in an experiment with babies in England, the baby was placed at the same crawling distance from the two Big ones - one of a beautiful person and one of a much less beautiful person.

In each case, the babies crawled into the nicest person, proving that babies were born with some knowledge of the concept of "beauty" and applied it. These results can not be attributed to reflex because the process here is much more complex - the babies had to recognize that the images present people and choose between them, indicating a process of weighing knowledge (probably innate because the babies did not learn what is "beautiful" anywhere) and choice.

It should be noted that the test was performed on babies of approximately one week old so that no external factor can be associated with the choice of infants.

Link to content
Share on other sites

It is not good that you see 4 \ 6 with the glasses because then your eyes do not strain at all, and it is not healthy at all to the eye, and then you can develop a lazy eye (without the glasses ... - and that is because your eye will get used to the larger-new number of 4 \ 6) - Tache is giving you a larger number than you need and it knocks you out ....

I assure you that he is a very experienced optometrist with a great deal of seniority in the profession, he knows what he is doing.

Link to content
Share on other sites

It should be noted that the test was performed on babies of approximately one week old so that no external factor can be associated with the choice of infants.

What a week old baby can crawl?

And you can not say they crawled into the nicer man because you're the one who defines what's beautiful and what can change... Fat women used to be considered prettier than thin women ... So were babies born with other knowledge or something?

Link to content
Share on other sites

What a week old baby can crawl?

And you can not say they crawled into the nicer man because you're the one who defines what's beautiful and what can change... Fat women used to be considered prettier than thin women ... So were babies born with other knowledge or something?

I wrote "about". I do not remember the precise age of the babies, but believe me that there is no chance that these young babies could "learn" anything about the concepts of modern beauty.

And I can tell you that they crawled to the more beautiful man and the definition does not change or shoes - studies show that beautiful people are usually very body and face very symmetrical and have fixed proportions that are common to everyone.This has nothing to do with the definition of modern beauty or its definition in the middle ages - A person can decide what is beautiful in his eyes and culture can decide that a long neck is more beautiful than a short neck, but certain characteristics will remain constant and those that define the constants of beauty - innate genetic "knowledge" if desired.

As for fat women, I will solve the problem for you. Symmetry (which we said before that points to beauty) is also considered a sign of health and therefore we are attracted to more "healthy" people. Some bacteria attack a fetus in the womb and damage its symmetry, so a symmetric person is probably more healthy (and should be biologically matched) than an asymmetrical (and less handsome) person.

How does it relate to fat years you ask? In a time when you talk about death from starvation, it was not uncommon, and a fat woman must have eaten well (including fat people) and was able to care for the offspring, and was therefore "more worthy" than a thin (but not necessarily more beautiful) woman.

From all this we can conclude that the ideal of sexual attraction is not necessarily the most beautiful people, but the people who broadcast more "healthy" in their appearance - and most of these overlap.

In short - there is innate knowledge of man and the definition of beauty or health if you wish, is an example of such knowledge. A baby is not dipped at all.

Have a nice day.

Link to content
Share on other sites

Again we argue about the same thing. They're really going round and round.

The knowledge that you describe is, again, the mechanism of survival just as you have mentioned in yourself a response above.

I am willing to agree that a baby is born with early knowledge, if we define knowledge as an explanation for any action that a seemingly doing child might have.

Why I read structured survival reflexes - you read knowledge.

If we define knowledge in the right context, at the beginning of the argument (remember:

-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------

Quote of: Nemesis at 6.11.2005 at 16: 08: 59

I think you're missing out on one thing.

A man born, born with a huge amount of information, and this amount is used to develop his abilities in the future. It is not a blank page that learns from itself everything.

I have no doubt that if anyone finds the appropriate algorithms of self-study and heating, it will be possible to program / raise a computer that will be similar in behavior to a human / animal.

It's not the computer that is limited, it's the limited ones who do not understand ourselves enough to program a computer.

)

NEMESIS argues that it is impossible to compare the development of computers to the development of a person because a person was born with a huge amount (?!) Of Usefull info!! Information and knowledge are two different things!

NEMESIS argues that a person is born with vast information that does not place him at a "smooth" starting point in the development of his intelligence.

Information implies reserved knowledge in the brain - then information that gives it a survival advantage - I have no argument on the subject (I argue that such information, if it can be called information, is stored as reflexes). Information in the development of intelligence - there is no such thing !! A baby does not have a "language learning algorithm" (for example) when he is born.

By analogy, a baby has an advantage over the computer only by ensuring its survival.

In other things, it is definitely dipped in rasa.

A baby is a hardware that includes a sensor and memory processor (null!) Capable of teaching itself from 0 by absorbing and processing information (of course, in a broad government).

The small mule can be seen as a separate unit dealing with survival - with early information (again, in the government).

This is my opinion, and I have not encountered any studies or articles that contradict it (once, for example, some thought that babies are born with all the knowledge about all things in the world - but lose it when they grow up - this approach was never supported by evidence or experimentation)

I would be happy to hear about studies that challenge my position.

Link to content
Share on other sites

Again we argue about the same thing. They're really going round and round.

The knowledge that you describe is, again, the mechanism of survival just as you have mentioned in yourself a response above.

I am willing to agree that a baby is born with early knowledge, if we define knowledge as an explanation for any action that a seemingly doing child might have.

Why I read structured survival reflexes - you read knowledge.

If we define knowledge in the right context, at the beginning of the argument (remember:

)

NEMESIS argues that it is impossible to compare the development of computers to the development of a person because a person was born with a huge amount (?!) Of Usefull info!! Information and knowledge are two different things!

NEMESIS argues that a person is born with vast information that does not place him at a "smooth" starting point in the development of his intelligence.

Information implies reserved knowledge in the brain - then information that gives it a survival advantage - I have no argument on the subject (I argue that such information, if it can be called information, is stored as reflexes). Information in the development of intelligence - there is no such thing !! A baby does not have a "language learning algorithm" (for example) when he is born.

By analogy, a baby has an advantage over the computer only by ensuring its survival.

In other things, it is definitely dipped in rasa.

A baby is a hardware that includes a sensor and memory processor (null!) Capable of teaching itself from 0 by absorbing and processing information (of course, in a broad government).

The small mule can be seen as a separate unit dealing with survival - with early information (again, in the government).

This is my opinion, and I have not encountered any studies or articles that contradict it (once, for example, some thought that babies are born with all the knowledge about all things in the world - but lose it when they grow up - this approach was never supported by evidence or experimentation)

I would be happy to hear about studies that challenge my position.

One thing that I do not understand is who is the idiot who thinks about the comparison between a computer and a human being. It is clear that a person can do innumerable things from a computer (one and perhaps the main 1 is abstract thinking that involves whispering in a way that includes things that I have not seen or "grasped" before) The imagination is built in the form of a new vision that you could not see in reality.)

Moreover, because computers are limited by humans, they will never be able to function as fully as they do in unstructured parts of the brain today, such as emotions that do not concern survival. What distinguishes humans and animals from a machine like computer.

Link to content
Share on other sites

ארכיון

This discussion has been archived and new comments can not be added.


  • Latest news

  • Buzz-Zone: Everything hot on the net

×
  • Create new ...

At the top of the news:

new on the site