In his booklet, “What Science Can’t Discover About the Human Mind” (here). Herbert Armstrong stated that the difference between human and animal intelligence could not be explained scientifically, and that this difference was due to the spirit in man. Armstrong also claimed that humans can reason, due to the spirit in man, but that animals can operate only on instinct.
Was Armstrong right? Or can science explain the difference in intelligence between man and animals without the spirit in man?
Herbert Armstrong’s followers need to revise their views on animal intelligence after digesting the material below.
Let’s start by looking at some statements made by Herbert Armstrong (HWA) in the booklets, and my (GL) response.
HWA: “There is virtually no difference in shape and construction between animal brain and human brain.” (p. 3-4)
GL: That statement is ridiculous! There are big differences in shape, construction, size, structure, function, and quality, as we shall see.
HWA: “The brains of elephants, whales, and dolphins are larger than human brain …” (p. 4)
GL: Elephants and whales are large animals, and since the brain plays a vital role in coordination and other body functions, those animals need large brains to coordinate their large bodies. We’ll talk about dolphins later.
HWA: “… the chimp’s brain is slightly smaller [than ours].” (p. 4)
GL: To say that a chimp’s brain in only “slightly” smaller is rubbish. The chimp’s brain is only 1/3 the size of a human brain! That’s a big difference. Why would Armstrong call that only “slightly” smaller? Was Armstrong trying to prove that the difference between humans and chimps must be spiritual, since or brains are (supposedly) only slightly different? Did he intentionally minimize and ignore brain differences in order to confuse the issue?
Size does not tell us everything (as we can see from whales and elephants) but it still makes a difference. How smart would you or I be if we only had 1/3 of our brains?
The human brain has much more cerebral cortex than the chimp’s brain. That’s the part of the brain that we use to think (in particular, we think with our prefrontal cortex). An animal without legs can’t walk, and an animal without a prefrontal cortex simply can’t think. (The exception would be an animal, if any, specially equipped with some special brain region that can perform a similar function).
Continue to read article HERE.
To be fair, perhaps Herbert Armstrong was talking about his own brain which appears to be far inferior to the human brain.
Probably not much there in terms of uncommitted cerebral cortex, which is why he couldn’t manage much more than eighth grade and was a high school dropout.
If memory serves correctly (and I would have no way to know), Dr. Robert Kuhn may have been responsible for Armstrong’s error filled “research”, being that everything Herb did was a copy of someone else’s work, much like a parrot speaking words without understanding what they really mean….
Well, I say Armstrong lied, because he either did some research and lied about it, or he didn’t do any and just made stuff up. Either way, it’s lying. The BS he told us about brains is to me the simplest and most irrefutable way to prove he was a liar.
By the way, Herbert the Gollum wants the Ring back because he lusts for the Power.
The illustration is just “Precious”!
IIRC, the series of articles on the spirit of man came out in the late ’60s. Bob Kuhn had been in some of my classes at AC, and I knew he was brilliant. Since HWA had remarkably departed from his normal practices and had actually embarked on a joint project with another individual, especially someone of Bob’s caliber, I never questioned a single detail in the articles. I treated them as new, incoming knowledge. That was typically what a church member did during that naive era.
Now, as I read GL’s excerpts and comments, and with the additional knowledge which has become available from continued scientific research, I realize that HWA’s original article was preposterous bullshit. The funny thing is, at the time I read them, It was while I was disfellowshipped over details surrounding my first marriage. 1972-75 had not yet occurred, and not having learned my final lessons concerning HWA/WCG, I was studying and praying to get back into the church so that the family I was starting would not have to suffer through the tribulation. At that time, I also had a collection of very good friends in the church, and wanted them to be able to talk and visit with me again without their getting in trouble with the ministers.
We often wonder how people can remain in Armstrongism, in spite of all of the things that can be known, but are ignored. Questions go unasked, therefore never get properly addressed. It’s because people have attitudes similar to what mine was back when these articles were written. When you think about it, I was safe. I had left. All that remained was to get on with life. But, I hadn’t experienced the final eye-opening letdown quite yet, and went back. Talk about wilfully dumb!
BB
BB, it sounds like you were “very teachable” because you had “a good attitude”! Basically, that meant assuming the ministry was on our side and would lead us into the kingdom. All we had to do was read and “understand” the literature as the “spirit opened our mind”. So of course you didn’t check the facts (neither did I). We were just grateful for having our “minds opened” to “vital truth”.
Hindsight is 20/20.
I don’t know much about Robert Khun. If it was Bob Khun who actually came up with this, then maybe he was the ghost writer, or a co-conspirator in Herbert’s con.
BB, what is shown here is just a fraction of the whole article, along with a lot of supplementary material, which is on my site at the link that James provided above. If all that information doesn’t convince the Armstrongist that Herb was a liar then I don’t know what will.
Jewish thought on “the soul” in man shares some similarities with HWA’s “Spirit in Man” idea.
Stories related to HWA’s doctrine have come from a number of sources, inside and outside the WCG. I recall GTA mentioning HWA had been rethinking his assertion that a newborn child’s mind is selfish and bent on evil; he decided the mind starts as a blank slate, psychology’s “tabula rasa.”
I remember the story that HWA and Dr Robert Kuhn were independently considering the differences between the animal brain and the human brain. Dr Kuhn apparently saw “no difference” in the physical makeup of the human brain and that of higher primates, but couldn’t explain the difference in mental capacity. HWA of course had the answer, the “Spirit in Man”.
The final piece on this was an article regarding a statement made by Dr Kuhn in his post-WCG years. He apparently denied the story of the independent research, and claimed the whole thing was HWA’s idea.
So, was this a doctrine that HWA thought up himself?
Hoss and Gunlap. This blog sometimes does not approve comments. I will try to fix this error.
James, I probably just entered the captcha wrong, something like using “two” instead of “2”
Robert Khun and HWA did not have the internet to help them do research, like I did. But they still should have known better.
Dr Kuhn most likely did know better.
Eventually he fell out of favor with HWA, who blamed him for having been a bad influence on GTA.
In Dr Kuhn’s post-WCG works, at least ones I’ve seen, his Ambassador College years are conspicuously missing from his bio and credentials.
I must say I like what Kuhn has put out there. Like his series on China.