There is actually an argument that our brains are three due to the way the frontal cortex works. (not the "triune brain" which is a different idea)

The frontal part can exercise control over the two hemispheres and is about as close as we have gotten to identifying where free will comes from. Certainly, in people who have had frontal brain damage there appears to be a direct link to lack of impulse control.
Almost every serial killer in history appears to have had some manner of frontal brain trauma at some stage in their lives and the link to delinquency is fairly well documented by this stage.

The latest research suggests consciousness itself is a fractal programme running co-operatively across the brain, but it remains pretty obscure none the less. The frontal cortex is split between left and right hemispheres, but it certain appears to behave as one in healthy brains.

The best way I could describe it is that the left and right represent the animistic unconsidered side of our behaviour and desires as we see in most animals (interacting via the corpus callosum that connects them). With the frontal cortex seeming to represent the higher functions that allow us to harness the rest of our brain in more considered and abstract ways (presumably also split into left and right).

I think of it like the foreman directing the other divisions of the factory but staying largely hands off when considered decisions don't need to be made.

All of the above is a gross oversimplification though. We can guess at the basis for free will, but it remains elusive.

In anyone who doesn't have a split brain, left brain and right brain can share information through the corpus callosum. Right brain doesn't come up with the words, but it's happy to help you mash the correct keys, given a request from left brain.

I'm amazed I found exactly this question on a neuroscience blog :

http://www.neuwritewest.org/blog/2014/2/6/split-brains

No, I didn't forget agenesis of the corpus callosum. While partial absence is more common, agenesis is only present in 1/3 of cases and I can find no evidence that this is the case with the civil servant.

As usual, you conveniently misunderstand the arguments against your position. Firstly, you are the one claiming the brain is unimportant with regards to consciousness and that the case of the French civil servant is proof of this. This is clearly false, as he has all the biological faculties for not only consciousness but the faculties allowing him to lead a relatively normal life.

It's not clearly false, we don't have the medical information. But we do have evidence from other cases:

http://www.rense.com/general63/brain.htm

The subject on that page was said to be scoring 126 on IQ tests, and was about to have graduated with a degree in mathematics. He had virtually no detectable brain what so ever:

"Instead of two hemispheres filling the cranial cavity, some 4.5 centimetres deep, the student had less than 1 millimetre of cerebral tissue covering the top of his spinal column."

Secondly, the video makes no claim that someone without a textbook brain can't live a normal life. In fact the video is overwhelmingly of a larger scale - referencing humanity as a whole as opposed to individuals and individual brains. So his brain does not refute the claims of the video at all.

Lacking any hemispheres at all, how could anything in this video apply to that person? It clearly shows it up to be the fever dreaming of militant materialists.

Further, I would argue that my analogy of the circulatory system, while not perfect, makes the point I intended (which you conveniently ignore again). The heart sends and receives the blood, the brain sends and receives electrical signals and chemicals. Not only are these physical, but they can be measured. A conscious mind can be differentiated from an unconscious one with the use of medical equipment like electrocardiogram and MRI. Recent research has even come close to "seeing" conscious thoughts with fMRIs.

There are innumerable cases of people who reported being conscious during periods of unconsciousness. It is a false analogy because consciousness is not proven to be physical and is therefore not analogous to blood. Chemicals and electrical signals are also not proven to have anything to do with consciousness itself, especially considering people experience consciousness during brain death: http://www.near-death.com/evidence.html#a1.

As for your free will response, I'm not even going to bother. Free will can be explained, and explained away a hundred different ways. From Foucaultian post-modernism to Hobbes' determinism this is a problem that wont be resolved here to anybody's satisfaction.

If you want to concede the point, that is up to you. You'll note that I didn't ask you to explain it away, I asked what you believe.

>> ^Skeeve:
You forgot agenesis of the corpus callosum, which means it is only partially formed or completely absent. Which means that his brain operates much differently than normal (obviously).
I never said he couldn't have consciousness if his brain was jumbled up. I was saying that his brain does not have the structure described in this video. Since we know he was a normal guy able to hold down a job and have proper relationships, it refutes the assertions that it made.
No, I didn't forget agenesis of the corpus callosum. While partial absence is more common, agenesis is only present in 1/3 of cases and I can find no evidence that this is the case with the civil servant.
As usual, you conveniently misunderstand the arguments against your position. Firstly, you are the one claiming the brain is unimportant with regards to consciousness and that the case of the French civil servant is proof of this. This is clearly false, as he has all the biological faculties for not only consciousness but the faculties allowing him to lead a relatively normal life. Secondly, the video makes no claim that someone without a textbook brain can't live a normal life. In fact the video is overwhelmingly of a larger scale - referencing humanity as a whole as opposed to individuals and individual brains. So his brain does not refute the claims of the video at all.
Further, I would argue that my analogy of the circulatory system, while not perfect, makes the point I intended (which you conveniently ignore again). The heart sends and receives the blood, the brain sends and receives electrical signals and chemicals. Not only are these physical, but they can be measured. A conscious mind can be differentiated from an unconscious one with the use of medical equipment like electrocardiogram and MRI. Recent research has even come close to "seeing" conscious thoughts with fMRIs.
As for your free will response, I'm not even going to bother. Free will can be explained, and explained away a hundred different ways. From Foucaultian post-modernism to Hobbes' determinism this is a problem that wont be resolved here to anybody's satisfaction.

You forgot agenesis of the corpus callosum, which means it is only partially formed or completely absent. Which means that his brain operates much differently than normal (obviously).

I never said he couldn't have consciousness if his brain was jumbled up. I was saying that his brain does not have the structure described in this video. Since we know he was a normal guy able to hold down a job and have proper relationships, it refutes the assertions that it made.

No, I didn't forget agenesis of the corpus callosum. While partial absence is more common, agenesis is only present in 1/3 of cases and I can find no evidence that this is the case with the civil servant.

As usual, you conveniently misunderstand the arguments against your position. Firstly, you are the one claiming the brain is unimportant with regards to consciousness and that the case of the French civil servant is proof of this. This is clearly false, as he has all the biological faculties for not only consciousness but the faculties allowing him to lead a relatively normal life. Secondly, the video makes no claim that someone without a textbook brain can't live a normal life. In fact the video is overwhelmingly of a larger scale - referencing humanity as a whole as opposed to individuals and individual brains. So his brain does not refute the claims of the video at all.

Further, I would argue that my analogy of the circulatory system, while not perfect, makes the point I intended (which you conveniently ignore again). The heart sends and receives the blood, the brain sends and receives electrical signals and chemicals. Not only are these physical, but they can be measured. A conscious mind can be differentiated from an unconscious one with the use of medical equipment like electrocardiogram and MRI. Recent research has even come close to "seeing" conscious thoughts with fMRIs.

As for your free will response, I'm not even going to bother. Free will can be explained, and explained away a hundred different ways. From Foucaultian post-modernism to Hobbes' determinism this is a problem that wont be resolved here to anybody's satisfaction.
>> ^shinyblurry:

No, Dandy-Walker does not contradict everything taught in the video. He has (and others like him have) most of the same brain structures (especially the ones related to consciousness). For the most part, they are missing their cerebellar vermis, which controls and analyzes spatial motion. The parts that have something to do with consciousness are still there, and they are even in pretty much the same place as they would be otherwise.
You forgot agenesis of the corpus callosum, which means it is only partially formed or completely absent. Which means that his brain operates much differently than normal (obviously).
Even if the parts of their brain were jumbled up a bit, that doesn't mean they couldn't necessarily have consciousness. The body does some amazing things considering some of the biological errors that happen. People can be born with holes in their hearts, or on the wrong side of their body, and have perfectly functioning circulatory systems - that doesn't mean the circulation of their blood is transcendent from their circulatory system.
I never said he couldn't have consciousness if his brain was jumbled up. I was saying that his brain does not have the structure described in this video. Since we know he was a normal guy able to hold down a job and have proper relationships, it refutes the assertions that it made.
And there is no comparison between consciousness and the brain and the circulatory system and the blood. The blood is physical, consciousness cannot be measured.
This is a complete cop-out. I can say the same to you. If your god is
omniscient, then he knows what you are going to do before you do it.
Therefore you don't actually have free will because, no matter what,
you are going to do what god always expected you to do.
Are you suggesting what I said isn't true? If not, why? And, God knowing what I am going to do next does not limit my free will. I am not being prevented from making any choice, nor am I being forced to make one. Simply because God knows what I am going to do doesn't mean I had to make the choice I did.

No, Dandy-Walker does not contradict everything taught in the video. He has (and others like him have) most of the same brain structures (especially the ones related to consciousness). For the most part, they are missing their cerebellar vermis, which controls and analyzes spatial motion. The parts that have something to do with consciousness are still there, and they are even in pretty much the same place as they would be otherwise.

You forgot agenesis of the corpus callosum, which means it is only partially formed or completely absent. Which means that his brain operates much differently than normal (obviously).

Even if the parts of their brain were jumbled up a bit, that doesn't mean they couldn't necessarily have consciousness. The body does some amazing things considering some of the biological errors that happen. People can be born with holes in their hearts, or on the wrong side of their body, and have perfectly functioning circulatory systems - that doesn't mean the circulation of their blood is transcendent from their circulatory system.

I never said he couldn't have consciousness if his brain was jumbled up. I was saying that his brain does not have the structure described in this video. Since we know he was a normal guy able to hold down a job and have proper relationships, it refutes the assertions that it made.

And there is no comparison between consciousness and the brain and the circulatory system and the blood. The blood is physical, consciousness cannot be measured.

This is a complete cop-out. I can say the same to you. If your god is
omniscient, then he knows what you are going to do before you do it.
Therefore you don't actually have free will because, no matter what,
you are going to do what god always expected you to do.

Are you suggesting what I said isn't true? If not, why? And, God knowing what I am going to do next does not limit my free will. I am not being prevented from making any choice, nor am I being forced to make one. Simply because God knows what I am going to do doesn't mean I had to make the choice I did.

>> ^Skeeve:
The point is that his experience contradicts everything which is taught in this video. By all accounts he lived a normal life, with feelings and relationships and struggles, but did not have anything approximating the brain structure described in this video. Clearly you can see much that is being spouted here is just a materialists wet dream. The attempt to approximate all human experience into mechanistic terms.
No, Dandy-Walker does not contradict everything taught in the video. He has (and others like him have) most of the same brain structures (especially the ones related to consciousness). For the most part, they are missing their cerebellar vermis, which controls and analyzes spatial motion. The parts that have something to do with consciousness are still there, and they are even in pretty much the same place as they would be otherwise.
Even if the parts of their brain were jumbled up a bit, that doesn't mean they couldn't necessarily have consciousness. The body does some amazing things considering some of the biological errors that happen. People can be born with holes in their hearts, or on the wrong side of their body, and have perfectly functioning circulatory systems - that doesn't mean the circulation of their blood is transcendent from their circulatory system.
Let's put it this way..If you believe you're nothing more than material machinery then you don't have free will and you can't even trust your own rationality. You don't have free will because all of your choices are preceeded and caused by unconscious material processes.
This is a complete cop-out. I can say the same to you. If your god is omniscient, then he knows what you are going to do before you do it. Therefore you don't actually have free will because, no matter what, you are going to do what god always expected you to do.

Well "Girl living with only half her brain!" sounds a little more exciting than "Brain Plasticity."

I think this is absolutely fascinating. It likely has to do with the fact she was so young when the surgery was performed, but that the brain completely rewired itself so she can really do anything - it looks like one of the clips it showed of her, she was in a dance class of some sort. And they managed not to slice through the corpus callosum? That takes some serious skill. It's not like it's just floating there in the middle with nothing around it. There's really not much definition until you've already cut through into the ventricles.

I'm just so excited and astonished I can't even formulate proper sentences. I never would've imagined this possible.

there may be a link between the congenital version of this, agenesis of the corpus callosum, and being a savant