PayPal
BitCoin
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon
RSS
iTunes

DoseNation Podcast

Weekly news, talk, and interviews. More »

SUGGEST A STORY  |   CREATE AN ACCOUNT  |  
DoseNation.com

Intelligence linked to specific brain network and bandwidth

For those of you following recent breakthroughs in cognitive science, this is not exactly news, but it does usher in a new paradigm for measuring intelligence. Yes, just as we guessed, intelligence is a function of how well we remember things, how well we put those things into words, and how quickly we can move those abstract concepts around in relation to each other. This is multi-threaded multi-object network intelligence (human intelligence), as demonstrated by what is now being called the Parieto-Frontal Integration Theory (or P-FIT) which uses brain scanning techniques to identify the core brain networks used in intelligent functioning. From the release at Physorg.com:

The data suggest that some of the brain areas related to intelligence are the same areas related to attention and memory and to more complex functions like language. Haier and Jung say this possible integration of cognitive functions suggests that intelligence levels might be based on how efficient the frontal-parietal networks process information.

Some scary extrapolations of this story may be that specific intelligence "traits" -- such as memory or linguistic or relational or analytical skills -- are all targeted to specific brain areas, areas that can be genetically marked, passed on, manipulated, and/or nurtured to create more intelligent people. Bandwidth between all these areas is also a key, and there are even (gasp) differences between men and women. Although it has taken a few years for science to reach consensus on this issue, it looks like there will be more to come on this soon. A team of 19 independent researchers all agreeing on something as big as this can't be too far off the mark...

Posted By jamesk at 2007-09-11 15:57:00 permalink | comments
Facebook it! Twitter it! Digg it! Reddit! StumbleUpon It! Google Bookmark del.icio.us technorati Furl Yahoo! Bookmark
» More ways to bookmark this page


omgoleus : 2007-09-12 22:42:11
Oh boy howdy can scanners be read improperly... I do it all the time! No, seriously, interpretation of neuroimaging data is fraught with peril. FRAUGHT, I say!

OK, I admit that this particular report looks pretty reasonable.

jamesk : 2007-09-12 12:05:58
I said that "19 scientists..." thing somewhat ironically. But these scientists have scanners and stuff! Which begs the question, can scanners be read improperly, and would 19 scientists all independently make the same mistake? It is possible, however, I tend to believe that this is a technically accurate model of thinking, though still somewhat incomplete in terms of secondary forms of intelligence, which are commonly called "right brained" or creative/intuitive abstract modes of reasoning (I can't quite remember now, but I think there is a difference in striate configuration in the cortical areas that do this sort of reasoning, more longer lateral connections?). But a multi-object nodal network processor with redundant overlap of critical node specialties makes the most sense in a brain made from networked neurons. The theory isn't exactly new, it is more a zoning in on the questions of pathway, bandwidth, and function.

And in fifty years it may probably be obsolete.

omgoleus : 2007-09-11 16:45:34
Yes it can. (be far off the mark.) I just came from a seminar on the history of the classification of homosexuality as psychopathology; as recently as 1970 more than 90% of all psychiatrists believed it was psychopathology (even including the gay ones!)

A bunch of people agreeing on something doesn't prove anything except that the idea is popular...

The comments posted here do not reflect the views of the owners of this site.

HOME
COMMENTS
NEWS
ARCHIVE
EDITORS
REVIEW POLICY
SUGGEST A STORY
CREATE AN ACCOUNT
RSS | TWITTER | FACEBOOK
DIGG | REDDIT | SHARE