5 ms·

I wouldn't consider a measurement of a brain's mapping any different than the measurement of a person's height. Someone taller probably has a better chance of b

I wouldn't consider a measurement of a brain's mapping any different than the measurement of a person's height. Someone taller probably has a better chance of being a good basketball player, but there are plenty of basketball players who are excellent and not of exceptional height. The article makes it seem as though there are absolute measurements being made of certain elements in the brain, but it's almost more than certain to be pattern matching or machine learning that is being done. You find some people that are good at doing X and have them take a test. Then you take new people, have them perform the same test, and if their scans are similar to the scans of the initial people, then you say these new people are pre-disposed to do X well.

NickM 11y ago
I agree with you, though I'm not sure if height is even the best metaphor: our brains are remarkably changeable based on how we use them, so a better comparison might be measuring an athlete's muscle mass in different parts of the body.
- Menge 11y ago
  > our brains are remarkably changeable based on how we use them, so a better comparison might be measuring an athlete's muscle mass in different parts of the body. Yes, I immediately thought of the motor skills experiments[1] that raised brain density in the relevant regions. I think the first half of the article was too sensational and brave new world oriented given that the explanation for the differences in regional brain densities and contentedness would mostly be from the home environment of a young child. It was a bit like predicting the availability of hearing tests will lead us to build classrooms of super hearers instead of intervene to address hearing issues before children fall behind. [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18648501 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18648501
papapra 11y ago
"and not of exceptional height" but you still have to pass some mark to be competitive and I think this is important. You have to take in account that the job market is competitive, meaning that some people would have an intrinsic advantage over others.

NickM 11y ago

I agree with you, though I'm not sure if height is even the best metaphor: our brains are remarkably changeable based on how we use them, so a better comparison might be measuring an athlete's muscle mass in different parts of the body.

Menge 11y ago
> our brains are remarkably changeable based on how we use them, so a better comparison might be measuring an athlete's muscle mass in different parts of the body. Yes, I immediately thought of the motor skills experiments[1] that raised brain density in the relevant regions. I think the first half of the article was too sensational and brave new world oriented given that the explanation for the differences in regional brain densities and contentedness would mostly be from the home environment of a young child. It was a bit like predicting the availability of hearing tests will lead us to build classrooms of super hearers instead of intervene to address hearing issues before children fall behind. [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18648501 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18648501

papapra 11y ago

"and not of exceptional height" but you still have to pass some mark to be competitive and I think this is important. You have to take in account that the job market is competitive, meaning that some people would have an intrinsic advantage over others.