Men and women have different brains - say scientists

Studies of mental functions, behaviors and the nervous system.

Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#121  Postby surreptitious57 » Feb 09, 2014 3:37 pm

Matthew Shute wrote:
I don't know where the ridiculous hyperbolic thread title comes
from: not the article nor the study cited. Aren't all humans animals?

Maybe females are more human than males. But we already know males are animal and females are human so it is not actually telling us anything new. Females are also animals and males are also humans. Grass is green and sky is blue and water is wet too. I think we should be nice to him as it is his first post and mistakes are allowed at this stage. He seems
like a nice chap anyway so let us give him the benefit of the doubt now. So welcome to the forum Voltage
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 10203

Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#122  Postby Mazille » Feb 09, 2014 3:46 pm

This could be good. :popcorn:
- Pam.
- Yes?
- Get off the Pope.
User avatar
Mazille
RS Donator
 
Posts: 19741
Age: 38
Male

Austria (at)
Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#123  Postby Agrippina » Feb 09, 2014 4:09 pm

Evolving wrote:Humans are animals.


If you want to see a roomful of religious baby-boomers have a hissy fit, just say that at the canasta lunch. O-M-G! :shock:
A mind without instruction can no more bear fruit than can a field, however fertile, without cultivation. - Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BCE - 43 BCE)
User avatar
Agrippina
 
Posts: 36924
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#124  Postby Agrippina » Feb 09, 2014 4:11 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Matthew Shute wrote:
I don't know where the ridiculous hyperbolic thread title comes
from: not the article nor the study cited. Aren't all humans animals?

Maybe females are more human than males. But we already know males are animal and females are human so it is not actually telling us anything new. Females are also animals and males are also humans. Grass is green and sky is blue and water is wet too. I think we should be nice to him as it is his first post and mistakes are allowed at this stage. He seems
like a nice chap anyway so let us give him the benefit of the doubt now. So welcome to the forum Voltage


Of course, welcome Voltage. :thumbup:
A mind without instruction can no more bear fruit than can a field, however fertile, without cultivation. - Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BCE - 43 BCE)
User avatar
Agrippina
 
Posts: 36924
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#125  Postby Matthew Shute » Feb 09, 2014 4:14 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Matthew Shute wrote:
I don't know where the ridiculous hyperbolic thread title comes
from: not the article nor the study cited. Aren't all humans animals?

Maybe females are more human than males.


I don't know what you mean by that, never mind how anyone would demonstrate it.

Maybe female horses are more equine than male horses - what could it mean?

But we already know males are animal and females are human so it is not actually telling us anything new. Females are also animals and males are also humans.


Indeed, which is what makes it a pretty silly title. To say that "the study shows" this is also misleading. The study has nothing to do with determining which humans are human, whatever that might mean.

---

And, yes, welcome to the forum, Voltage. :cheers:
Last edited by Matthew Shute on Feb 09, 2014 6:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Change will preserve us. It is the lifeblood of the Isles. It will move mountains! It will mount movements!" - Sheogorath
User avatar
Matthew Shute
 
Name: Matthew Shute
Posts: 3676
Age: 45

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#126  Postby HomerJay » Feb 09, 2014 4:25 pm

High Voltage :wave:

We did this at the itme

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/news- ... 42820.html
For me, the value of a climb is the sum of three inseparable elements, all equally important: aesthetics, history, and ethics

Walter Bonatti 1930-2011

"All those who believe in psychokinesis, raise my hand" - Steven Wright
User avatar
HomerJay
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 5868
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#127  Postby Blip » Feb 09, 2014 5:03 pm


!
GENERAL MODNOTE
Merged
Evolving wrote:Blip, intrepid pilot of light aircraft and wrangler with alligators.
User avatar
Blip
Moderator
 
Posts: 21724
Female

Country: This septic isle...
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#128  Postby Voltage » Feb 09, 2014 8:05 pm

Thanks for the welcome folks. I'm sorry I didn't see there was thread about this study posted already. I will make sure to read the posts made. The animal part in the article is is animals perceives something it follows it up with a coordinated action whereas humans analyse things before taking action and they use their intuition.


Cheers!!!
Last edited by Voltage on Feb 09, 2014 8:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Voltage
Banned User
 
Name: owen
Posts: 189

Country: usa
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#129  Postby Mr.Samsa » Feb 09, 2014 8:14 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:One has to be careful about attributing characteristics to either sex as if they were absolute as that is obviously not true
Last time I said something about this I got my arse handed to me so I shall say just one thing : women in general have a greater vocabulary than men because they talk more so consequently have greater language capability. They also listen
more too apparently which sounds paradoxical but there you go. Solve that one geniuses ha ha


Do women actually talk more than men (you might be interested to know that that factoid came from a church marriage counselors pamphlet with no citation with it)? Are their language skills actually better than men in adulthood?

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:/me facepalms

We all know the way brains are "wired" (ie: connectivity) is a developmental process profoundly influenced by socialisation, right? Of course people brought up in one gender will exhibit brain connectivity similar to one another and different from those brought up in another.

This is not an inherent difference between male and female people. This is the result of socialisation.


Yeah, I'll never understand people's obsession with neurobabble. Yes, we already knew that the brains of men and women are different before we ever invented any kind of brain imagining tool because we know that men and women generally display different behaviors and attitudes.

Where else would these behaviors and attitudes come from if not the brain? If they are in the brain, then they must necessarily be physically represented in the brain in some form.

The question that people actually want answered is whether these differences are hardwired, and this study obviously does absolutely nothing to even attempt to answer it. Most problematically, it utilises a connectome method which was essentially invented to measure neural structures related to learning and changes throughout the lifetime of an individual.

igorfrankensteen wrote:
We all know the way brains are "wired" (ie: connectivity) is a developmental process profoundly influenced by socialisation, right? Of course people brought up in one gender will exhibit brain connectivity similar to one another and different from those brought up in another.

This is not an inherent difference between male and female people. This is the result of socialisation


Bollocks and nonsense. "We all know" no such thing. This statement is an example of itself, ironically enough. It has been ALLEGED, primarily for social-politics reasons, that this is so. However there is no proof that it is at all, and plenty of at least anecdotal evidence to the contrary. Human brains are far more complicated than this idea allows for, and are far less susceptible to being altered than it claims.

In short, you can bring up males or females in whatever rigidly identical way you like, and you will find that they do NOT all end up being alike.


Wait, what? Are you suggesting that we don't know that learning affects the brain? Is your argument that learning is impossible or learning takes place (somehow) outside and independently of the brain? It has to be one or the other to hold your position.
Image
Mr.Samsa
 
Posts: 11370
Age: 38

Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#130  Postby surreptitious57 » Feb 09, 2014 8:59 pm

Mr.Samsa wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:
One has to be careful about attributing characteristics to either sex as if they were absolute as that is obviously not true
Last time I said something about this I got my arse handed to me so I shall say just one thing : women in general have a greater vocabulary than men because they talk more so consequently have greater language capability. They also listen
more too apparently which sounds paradoxical but there you go. Solve that one geniuses ha ha

Do women actually talk more than men (you might be interested to know that that factoid came from a church marriage counselors pamphlet with no citation with it)? Are their language skills actually better than men in adulthood

They are according to Professor Alice Roberts who said so in a Horizon documentary here on the BBC
which is why I allowed myself the luxury of stating that knowing that if anyone asked me to provide
evidence I could do so. But from a non scientific perspective I think that women generally have more
superior language skills anyway as they are more naturally loquacious than men. Though how great the
difference is in statistical terms I cannot say just that it does exist
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 10203

Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#131  Postby Mr.Samsa » Feb 09, 2014 9:08 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
They are according to Professor Alice Roberts who said so in a Horizon documentary here on the BBC
which is why I allowed myself the luxury of stating that knowing that if anyone asked me to provide
evidence I could do so. But from a non scientific perspective I think that women generally have more
superior language skills anyway as they are more naturally loquacious than men. Though how great the
difference is in statistical terms I cannot say just that it does exist


Well we know for a fact that women don't speak more than men, as no study has ever been able to find a difference, but even with verbal ability the results are pretty mixed once you look at them past adolescence. The major differences we see in that sense are between boys and girls but this tends to disappear, or at least minimise to a great degree, as they progress through high school.
Image
Mr.Samsa
 
Posts: 11370
Age: 38

Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#132  Postby igorfrankensteen » Feb 09, 2014 9:17 pm


igorfrankensteen wrote:
We all know the way brains are "wired" (ie: connectivity) is a developmental process profoundly influenced by socialisation, right? Of course people brought up in one gender will exhibit brain connectivity similar to one another and different from those brought up in another.

This is not an inherent difference between male and female people. This is the result of socialisation


Bollocks and nonsense. "We all know" no such thing. This statement is an example of itself, ironically enough. It has been ALLEGED, primarily for social-politics reasons, that this is so. However there is no proof that it is at all, and plenty of at least anecdotal evidence to the contrary. Human brains are far more complicated than this idea allows for, and are far less susceptible to being altered than it claims.

In short, you can bring up males or females in whatever rigidly identical way you like, and you will find that they do NOT all end up being alike.


Wait, what? Are you suggesting that we don't know that learning affects the brain? Is your argument that learning is impossible or learning takes place (somehow) outside and independently of the brain? It has to be one or the other to hold your position.


Aich. Some people here just seem to avoid reading what's written, and look for things to complain about in their own heads. Reread, or rather ACTUALLY read what I said, and you will realize that you are writing nonsense.
User avatar
igorfrankensteen
 
Name: michael e munson
Posts: 2114
Age: 70
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#133  Postby Mr.Samsa » Feb 09, 2014 9:21 pm

igorfrankensteen wrote: Aich. Some people here just seem to avoid reading what's written, and look for things to complain about in their own heads. Reread, or rather ACTUALLY read what I said, and you will realize that you are writing nonsense.


Rachel stated that "we all know" that developmental processes affect the wiring of the brain and you responded by saying "we all know" no such thing.

Please rephrase your initial comment more carefully so I can better understand your position.
Image
Mr.Samsa
 
Posts: 11370
Age: 38

Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#134  Postby Beatsong » Feb 09, 2014 9:31 pm

Mr.Samsa wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:
They are according to Professor Alice Roberts who said so in a Horizon documentary here on the BBC
which is why I allowed myself the luxury of stating that knowing that if anyone asked me to provide
evidence I could do so. But from a non scientific perspective I think that women generally have more
superior language skills anyway as they are more naturally loquacious than men. Though how great the
difference is in statistical terms I cannot say just that it does exist


Well we know for a fact that women don't speak more than men, as no study has ever been able to find a difference, but even with verbal ability the results are pretty mixed once you look at them past adolescence. The major differences we see in that sense are between boys and girls but this tends to disappear, or at least minimise to a great degree, as they progress through high school.


I'm not saying I believe the superior verbal ability of girls is hardwired from birth - I really don't know enough about it to say. But doesn't what you write here appear to support that hypothesis?

Prepubescent children are subject to much less forceful gender-based socialisation than older adolescent ones. Young kids play together, change their clothes together etc. etc. with hardly a care who's a boy and who's a girl. It's precisely at adolescence that that becomes important to them, and they start reacting much more urgently to social cues, media stereotyping etc, being concerned about being attractive in terms of accepted norms, having a boyfriend/girlfriend etc.

If the difference in verbal ability actively reduces from that point through to adulthood, that seems at least one nail in the coffin of the idea that that difference is purely due to socialisation. If it were due to socialisation, the increased intensity of gender-based socialisation from that point would surely make it increase, or at least stay level.
User avatar
Beatsong
 
Posts: 7027

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#135  Postby igorfrankensteen » Feb 09, 2014 9:53 pm

Rachel stated that "we all know" that developmental processes affect the wiring of the brain and you responded by saying "we all know" no such thing.

Please rephrase your initial comment more carefully so I can better understand your position.


No. You go back and read what I wrote, and respond if you care to, to what I DID say, instead of doing as you have, and attack me for things I did NOT say. If you can't do that, then drop it.
User avatar
igorfrankensteen
 
Name: michael e munson
Posts: 2114
Age: 70
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#136  Postby Evolving » Feb 09, 2014 10:03 pm

I know nothing about neurology, have no opinion either way, and would like to learn what is what on this issue. Mr Samsa's post questioning yours criticising Rachel's made a lot of sense to me reading it. It would be most helpful if the two of you could sort out what you agree on and not get annoyed with each other!
How extremely stupid not to have thought of that - T.H. Huxley
User avatar
Evolving
 
Name: Serafina Pekkala
Posts: 12533
Female

Country: Luxembourg
Luxembourg (lu)
Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#137  Postby Evolving » Feb 09, 2014 10:19 pm

What is, in fact, the "connectivity" that is being measured? The sheer existence of neurons linking two locations; the frequency of their use; or something else?

It seems (to a lay person) farfetched to think that social influences would cause neurons to grow where there were none; but perhaps they do. Anyone here know?

Edit: or do the social influences affect which of the potential neurons that are going to develop anyway, actually develop, and which remain latent?
How extremely stupid not to have thought of that - T.H. Huxley
User avatar
Evolving
 
Name: Serafina Pekkala
Posts: 12533
Female

Country: Luxembourg
Luxembourg (lu)
Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#138  Postby igorfrankensteen » Feb 09, 2014 10:25 pm

I know nothing about neurology, have no opinion either way, and would like to learn what is what on this issue. Mr Samsa's post questioning yours criticising Rachel's made a lot of sense to me reading it. It would be most helpful if the two of you could sort out what you agree on and not get annoyed with each other!



Quite simply, I pointed out that it has NOT been established as fact, that the only reason why male and female brains scan differently, is due to socialization. That contention became popular during the sixties liberation movements, but is not supported by science. [FYI, science has ALSO not found evidence to support the idea that ALL behavioral differences between the sexes are due to biology.]

He imagined that I said that learning does not cause any changes in brains, among other things, which is something I did NOT say. Since his post was entirely based on pretending that I said things, it's not up to me to figure out why he can't address what I did say, it's up to him to go back and read what I said, and either respond or not.
User avatar
igorfrankensteen
 
Name: michael e munson
Posts: 2114
Age: 70
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: New study shows males are animals and females are humans

#139  Postby Mr.Samsa » Feb 09, 2014 11:19 pm

Beatsong wrote:
Mr.Samsa wrote:
Well we know for a fact that women don't speak more than men, as no study has ever been able to find a difference, but even with verbal ability the results are pretty mixed once you look at them past adolescence. The major differences we see in that sense are between boys and girls but this tends to disappear, or at least minimise to a great degree, as they progress through high school.


I'm not saying I believe the superior verbal ability of girls is hardwired from birth - I really don't know enough about it to say. But doesn't what you write here appear to support that hypothesis?


It potentially could be viewed in light of that explanation, but I'd argue that it's not the only (or arguably even the most likely) explanation.

Beatsong wrote:Prepubescent children are subject to much less forceful gender-based socialisation than older adolescent ones. Young kids play together, change their clothes together etc. etc. with hardly a care who's a boy and who's a girl. It's precisely at adolescence that that becomes important to them, and they start reacting much more urgently to social cues, media stereotyping etc, being concerned about being attractive in terms of accepted norms, having a boyfriend/girlfriend etc.

If the difference in verbal ability actively reduces from that point through to adulthood, that seems at least one nail in the coffin of the idea that that difference is purely due to socialisation. If it were due to socialisation, the increased intensity of gender-based socialisation from that point would surely make it increase, or at least stay level.


I disagree with practically everything you've written there. Enforcement of gender roles is very clear from very, very early on and by around 2-3 years of age boys and girls show clear awareness of gender norms - for example, it's around this age that toy preferences develop, with boys being averse to "girl toys" and girls generally showing a vague preference for "girl toys".

We also know, for example, that adults are more likely to spend time talking to girls (or babies dressed in pink) than they are with boys, so from the moment of birth they are exposed to much more language training than boys receive. In this light, it makes sense that the difference would then disappear at around high school level because they are exposed to formal language training (as well as being thrown into lots of social situations) and this could be enough to help them "catch up".

There's also the argument that the differences are simply due to differences in developmental rates, so it's not that girls are innately wired for language abilities but rather that their brains develop at a faster rate so that their language abilities develop before boys.

These issues are hugely complex though and generally I think anyone pushing too hard one way or the other is probably going to end up speaking beyond the data. We have so much data on gender and behavior, and we're still a point where we can't really confidently pick out any innate differences between the genders - not because no such differences exist but just that there are simply so many confounds that any conclusive statements are (currently) impossible to make.

igorfrankensteen wrote:
Rachel stated that "we all know" that developmental processes affect the wiring of the brain and you responded by saying "we all know" no such thing.

Please rephrase your initial comment more carefully so I can better understand your position.


No. You go back and read what I wrote, and respond if you care to, to what I DID say, instead of doing as you have, and attack me for things I did NOT say. If you can't do that, then drop it.


I read what you wrote. Rachel stated that "we all know" that developmental processes affect the wiring of the brain and you responded by saying "we all know" no such thing.

Evolving wrote:What is, in fact, the "connectivity" that is being measured? The sheer existence of neurons linking two locations; the frequency of their use; or something else?


Put simply, the connectome just displays an aggregate taken from multiple samples showing similarities of particular connections between neurons and their associative weight. It's sort of like if you were looking down from a building at a crosswalk and you recorded all of the paths that people took - there would be some variation, but generally you'll get 4 main routes appear (the crosswalk for each of the 4 roads making up the intersection). The connectome would then cancel out the "noise" (i.e. people taking atypical routes, like a guy running diagonally past speeding cars) and would tell us that the movement of pedestrians moves from one light to another.

Evolving wrote:It seems (to a lay person) farfetched to think that social influences would cause neurons to grow where there were none; but perhaps they do. Anyone here know?


I think the reason it sounds far-fetched is because intuitively we still want to accept a kind of dualism; the idea that who we are isn't entirely physical. This is why studies like this capture the imagination of so many people, where they reach the shocked conclusion of: "So you're telling me that my behaviors and thoughts can be found in my brain?!". Logically though, this shouldn't be that shocking - where else are our thoughts and behaviors going to come from? When we accept that the brain controls those things, then how else do we imagine it to work if there is no physical change representing those things?

More specifically though, as mentioned above the connectome mostly looks at the connections between neurons but there is nothing at all outlandish or controversial about the growth of new neurons in response to learning. In fact, an important component of learning is neurogenesis, which literally means the growth of new neurons.

Evolving wrote:Edit: or do the social influences affect which of the potential neurons that are going to develop anyway, actually develop, and which remain latent?


If I'm understanding you correctly, I think the process you might be looking for here is neuroplasticity.

igorfrankensteen wrote:
I know nothing about neurology, have no opinion either way, and would like to learn what is what on this issue. Mr Samsa's post questioning yours criticising Rachel's made a lot of sense to me reading it. It would be most helpful if the two of you could sort out what you agree on and not get annoyed with each other!



Quite simply, I pointed out that it has NOT been established as fact, that the only reason why male and female brains scan differently, is due to socialization. That contention became popular during the sixties liberation movements, but is not supported by science. [FYI, science has ALSO not found evidence to support the idea that ALL behavioral differences between the sexes are due to biology.]


But nobody has stated that the difference between male and female scans is entirely due to socialisation, so why would you argue against that? Rachel pointed out that learning has a profound effect on brain structure and that this effect is not an inherent difference but instead a result of socialisation.

It seems like this entire confusion could have been sorted if you had simply explained what your position was from the start, and I could have pointed out that your mistake stemmed from a misreading of Rachel's original claim.

igorfrankensteen wrote:He imagined that I said that learning does not cause any changes in brains, among other things, which is something I did NOT say. Since his post was entirely based on pretending that I said things, it's not up to me to figure out why he can't address what I did say, it's up to him to go back and read what I said, and either respond or not.


There was no "imagining" or "pretending", it was a necessary consequence of your reaction to Rachel's post. As we've now learnt though, this was due to you misreading her post and so the consequence I highlighted no longer applied.
Image
Mr.Samsa
 
Posts: 11370
Age: 38

Print view this post

Re: Men and women have different brains - say scientists

#140  Postby Evolving » Feb 09, 2014 11:36 pm

Thanks, Mr Samsa, for your responses to my questions: as ever most thought provoking.

I certainly agree that we are wholly physical and, consequently, no, I don't find the growing of neurons in response to social influences surprising because I covertly adhere to dualism. Muscle cells don't grow in response to social influences: I have to exercise to cause that to happen. (Obviously social influences can motivate me to do that, but that is another matter.) It is surprising that, in the brain, actual physical things, tissues, can come into being through social influences, directly, but if that is what happens, then, well, that is very interesting!

Actually your explanation of "connectome" sounds more like the frequency of use of existing pathways rather than the growth of new physical, organic pathways. But you go on to talk about new neurons, and googling "neuroplasticity", both seem to be the case. Question: is neuroplasticity the generally accepted view?
How extremely stupid not to have thought of that - T.H. Huxley
User avatar
Evolving
 
Name: Serafina Pekkala
Posts: 12533
Female

Country: Luxembourg
Luxembourg (lu)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Psychology & Neuroscience

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest