"Tom Breton" <tehom at REMOVEpanNOSPAMix.com> wrote in message
news:m38z4krkb8.fsf at panix.com...
> "Kenneth Collins" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> writes:
>> > the argument that a larger overall brain size is correlated with
> > information-processing capacity is hard to defend because all things
else
> > being proportional, because of the longer fibers necessary, an
overly-large
> > brain suffers a penalty in energy consumption and/or convergence
> > 'time'.
>> Convergence time... It's odd that we don't ever hear about that when
> science-popularizers are chortling that "women use both halves of
> their brains and men don't". (to accomplish specific tasks, but that
> usually goes unsaid)
'Homo sapiens sapiens type consciousness' DO TAKE LONGER TIME (processing
time) to 'materialize' than other "less evolved" (~commeasurately less
complex), and less ontogenetically developed, examples of "being conscious".
I am sure (almost sure) you have had some confirming experiences of having
reacted (responded behaviorally) *before* you became *humanly/cognitively
conscious* of an environmental influence (or of being at the center of a
suddenly occurred - not just 'startle reflex' inducing -situation) -- and
before you had had a chance to self-regulate, in respect of such a
situation, by means available to you at a corresponding "level" of your
neuroanatomy.
Anyway, it takes time to become conscious (i.e. ~different length of time
for different levels of consiousness). %-]
Peter F
