Brain complexity: baby brains under study (Introduction)

by dhw, Monday, January 22, 2018, 14:27 (2280 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: …two quotes I’d like to comment on:
QUOTE: "At birth, a baby knows her mother’s voice and may be able to recognize the sounds of stories her mother read to her while she was still in the womb.”
There are different theories about how much information a baby absorbs while still in the womb, but it is widely recognized that as well as positive information (the voice, music, smell) there is negative input – e.g. stress: if it can hear soothing sounds, it can also hear disturbing sounds – which will affect the baby even before it is born. Both contradict your claim that the newborn self starts from zero, but both need to be linked to the second quote:

DAVID: When a baby is born it does not recognize it is separate from the world around it. It does receive stimuli such as its Mother's voice. The recognition of her voice is imprinted, but the newborn has no understanding of what that reception means. A newborn is not aware it is aware.

Of course it isn’t. In all our discussions, we have to distinguish between consciousness and self-consciousness. But not being self-aware does not mean you start out from zero! (See below)

QUOTE: “Therefore, a child’s experiences not only determine what information enters her brain, but also influence how her brain processes information.”
DAVID: This quote is not about the newborn! But is absolutely true later in the baby's life. Please sort out the immediate newborn from what happens as time passes.

You have left out the reason why I quoted it! Even the mind of the newborn will be affected by experiences both inside and outside the womb. The researchers focus on the brain as the self (only the brain processes information), but the brain is not the only constituent of the self, even in a newborn. According to dualists like yourself, the mind is separate from the body. That is the point I have tried to make below:

DAVID’S comment: The newborn has to learn to use what it is given. It's self is a blank slate as it starts out in life.

dhw: Yes to your first comment, which applies to babies, teenagers, and even octogenarians (when confronted by information/experiences that are new to us). Your second comment is a non sequitur, though nobody knows exactly how much of the new born’s “self” is already present. You continue to ignore the ever contentious issue of how much is nature and how much is nurture. Nature is what decides how even a baby’s self will react to nurture. It may be material, as in this article, or immaterial, as in the dualism you espouse, but the claim that the newborn self is a blank slate receives no support whatsoever from any of the articles you have quoted.

DAVID: You have misread the articles as they relate to my view about the instantly newborn baby.He has received stimuli , nothing more. He does not understand how to respond. His automatic/autonomic functions work or he dies.

I don't know why you've suddenly inserted "instantly". The second it emerges from the womb and says "WAH!", I don't suppose it has much chance to show its individuality.That does not mean it starts from zero.

DAVID: Unfair criticism: My view is clearly stated through nine years of time here. A personality is 40% genetics, 40% family nurture, and 20% developed by the individual and his/her experiences.

The personality is the “self”. If you believe that 40% of the personality/self is genetics, then how can you argue that the newborn self is a blank slate?