--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" <compost1uk@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" <steve.sundur@> wrote: > > It has been suggested here, that a person does not have full brain > > development until they are 25. And I think the part of the brain > > that is not fully developed, IIRC is that part which evaluates the > > future consequences of our actions. I am just putting that out there > > as one thing to consider. > > Yes I see that has been mentioned here. There must be something > wrong with my brain though, 'cos this idea seems to me to be > off-the-wall bonkers beyond belief. Do you *really* believe this? > Really? > > Einstein published his first paper at the age of 22. It was on > "Conclusions from the Capillarity Phenomena" - But his > brain had not yet reached the stage where it "evaluates the > future consequences of our actions"?
Why would his brain have had to be fully developed to write a scientific paper? > Then again perhaps it was 23 year old war hero Frank Edward Young > (VC)'s brain that was at fault: > > "On 18 September 1918 south-east of Havrincourt, France, during > an enemy counter-attack and throughout intense enemy fire, Second > Lieutenant Young visited all posts, warned the garrisons and > encouraged the men. In the early stages of the attack he rescued > two of his men who had been captured and bombed and silenced an > enemy machine-gun. Then he fought his way back to the main > barricade and drove out a party of the enemy assembling there. > Throughout four hours of heavy fighting this officer set a fine > example and was last seen fighting hand-to-hand against a > considerable number of the enemy" Why do you think a 'not fully' developed brain is at fault?
