Display:
Kim Peeks (the original Rain Man) isn't "normal" by standard criteria.  He is functional for a broad definition of "function."  

It seems there are processes during brain development that 'do their thing' with can give rise (emergent property?) to an attempt to full (?) and complete (?) status?   It seems to be true that areas of the brain have their potential function lost by adjacent areas 'moving in' if it is unstimulated at the proper time or in the proper degree.

Yet other functions - language - develop no matter if the child is stimulated by human language or not.  

Removing functions in a 'finished' adult brain can kill or put a person in a coma.  But not always.  I don't know if an adult has ever had their corpus collosum removed.  There have been cases where it has been severed, eliminating the cross-hemisphere traffic, to ameliorate epileptic attacks.  These are the basis for the Split Hemisphere studies and their well-known findings.  These people are functional but not fully functional to a "normal" level.

As I said, it's a puzzlement.

by ATinNM on Sat Oct 18th, 2008 at 08:30:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I didn't say "normal" or even "functional" but "viable".

A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Oct 19th, 2008 at 03:52:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Viable" has a group of specific meanings in Biology and is used at the organism/species level.  At that level a brain is not 'viable.'
by ATinNM on Sun Oct 19th, 2008 at 12:54:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series