Maybe Someday...

[mcnoone]

Honestly, science is completely in the dark when it comes to factual knowledge of how the brain actually works.

That statement is completely in the dark.
That is totally false. Completely misinformed statement.
Science knows more about the brain, than you do, or any other method of brain investigating you know of.
It has many decades of studies done to back that claim up.

[BertKoor]

That statement is completely in the dark.

Actually it's not. I recently spoke to someone active in that research field and bluntly asked him. On the lowest level it's zillions of neurons influencing each other, we know that for quite a while. But actually knowing how we perceive, feel, learn, remember, decide, we're far from knowing that.
From observing scans we see regions that are active while doing certain tasks. But it's mainly a guessing game what actually goes on in there. It's just too complex.

[mcnoone]

That statement is completely in the dark.

Actually it's not. I recently spoke to someone active in that research field and bluntly asked him.

Asked him what? It is not a guessing game. There are many experiments done in the neurosciences that have accomplished more than mere guessing games.
Specific regions do hold specific information that effects our behavior in specific ways that has been studied for many decades. That's not the "in the dark" idea you claim.
Not to mention I was speaking about a whole field of neurosciences. Not only about brain scanning techniques.
That information exceeds the level of knowledge that you have claimed, by a long shot.

On the lowest level it's zillions of neurons influencing each other, we know that for quite a while.

Not zillions, but trillions, and it really doesn't matter the amount. We only need to understand how one works to understand how they all do.

But actually knowing how we perceive, feel, learn, remember, decide, we're far from knowing that.

No we aren't, and we know much more about how our brains function now more than ever before thanks to science. Your anti-scientific stance on this is anti-intellectual, and used by many people who like to play down the sciences in order to put forth some other ideas that are unscientific and in no way secured by evidence.
ie; First call the other ideas "in the dark" but not my idea...said Dr. Oz.

From observing scans we see regions that are active while doing certain tasks. But it's mainly a guessing game what actually goes on in there. It's just too complex.

There is no guessing going on. Science is not guessing. Guessing is for the non-scientific ideas that you are expressing. You keep placing limits on this too.
If we just gave up on science as you clearly would. There would be no next step for which to take the guessing out of it.

[Hink]

mcnoone are you sure you're not mixing up "knowing" with "understanding"? There is still so much to understand about how the brain functions, scientists and doctors (not science) are studying this constantly with still many questions unanswered. New information is discovered often making previous scientific observations obsolete due to advanced technology, but there is still a long ways to go. Suggesting this as BertKoor did is far from giving up on science, it's really more respecting the work of scientists and the work they still have to do.

[harryupbabble]

There are loads of examples of good writers of both lyrics and music. I'm certainly not one of them. Without any brain scans or DNA tests I've figured out how my brain works btw, just from observation. Music I pay attention to, lyrics are neglected. I usually don't pay any attention to the sung words. I tried to write lyrics, but the ones I wrote completely suck. So I know what talents I have, and act accordingly.

False positives: be very afraid of that! Imagine you get some diagnosis just because you had a bad day when you had the scan. Also scans just show active parts of the brain while you do certain tasks. So you have to perform these tasks. You could have huge talent but if you have never excersized those tasks then your brain will still struggle at that, and the scan won't show your future potential. So imho this is a bad idea.

Honestly, science is completely in the dark when it comes to factual knowledge of how the brain actually works.

I presume the doctors will give you instructions on what not to do before the brain scan, just like when you go for a physical exam they instruct "do not eat anything for 12 hours", etc. Kinks are fixable. Trial and error.

Anyways, look at Bobby Fischer. At an early age he must have known he had a talent for chess. He must have been told by his parents who were both physicists "Bobby, you need to be less obsessed with chess, you need to apply your mind to scientific endeavours." To young Bobby's mind his parents must have not been convincing. But even at a young age, accurate advanced brain scan results might be more convincing than parents just saying "trust us Bobby, we know what we are talking about".

You say you know you suck at making lyrics but you have talent at making music. The thing is, what other talents do you have that are similar to making music? What if accurate advanced brain scan concludes that you could be good at a whole bunch of other things besides making music? Maybe even good enough to find cure for cancer?

All I know is that science have been amazing. It has a very good track record? I don't think that accurate brain scan used to determine people's potentials is impossible, given time. Maybe someday.

[Hink]

impossible questionable, a good idea on the other hand...I dont see it. I prefer to make my own choices, I think there is the nature vs nuture aspect and tbh I think there are some lines we should not cross. Even with our intelligence and our abilities to make scientific observations and apply them in a practical manner to improve our standard of living does not mean we need to or should control everything in the name of science.

[thecontrolcentre]

Sounds like the old eleven plus exam for grammar schools in the UK. Your life and career path was decided for you at age eleven. We got rid of it.

[Numanoid]

I started university (or college) at 19, did something I liked at the time, and ammased a substantinal student loan in the process (still paying mortage on it )

And since then I have not really had any use of that education, as I lost interest in the subject. Luckily there where some computer classes included that got me another gig.

I think it is too early to decide what you want to do for the rest of your life at 19

[fluffy_little_something]

The brain is pretty flexible. It changes for instance when you learn a new language. And it rearranges after brain injuries. Brains also change naturally over time.

What makes more sense are reliable "talent tests". But I think kids' school report cards already indicate what someone is cut out to be, and what not.

[Hink]

I started university (or college) at 19, did something I liked at the time, and ammased a substantinal student loan in the process (still paying mortage on it )

And since then I have not really had any use of that education, as I lost interest in the subject. Luckily there where some computer classes included that got me another gig.

I think it is too early to decide what you want to do for the rest of your life at 19

I joined the army and got married at 19...I agree

[harryupbabble]

If someday aptitude brain scans becomes reality and is affordable it would/should be a choice, just like it's a choice to have a yearly physical exam. Nothing would/should be forced.

Parents could ignore brain scans for their child or maybe even not have them done. You can do it at a young age or old age if you want. Suppose at 19 you found out you, okay I like the example of physicist, suppose you found out your brain is built for that or something like that? 19 might not be too late, thanks to science for extending the human life span?

[Numanoid]

If someday aptitude brain scans becomes reality and is affordable it would/should be a choice, just like it's a choice to have a yearly physical exam. Nothing would/should be forced.

How do you do a brain scan of the environment the person is coming from?

Studies have shown that children even now are likely to choose the same profession/study subject as their family/close environment.

So a kid in a upper middle class family is much more likely to try and become a doctor or lawyer, not so much because of the money in the family, but because they tell him/her to aim high.

[harryupbabble]

My guess is that, for example, Hollywood and the music biz is full of people who disobeyed their parents' wishes or lack of wishes, people who come from not so rich backgrounds. But with the internet, even people in the ghettos are becoming aware of all sorts of new tech?

Now imagine someday the kids in the ghettos and trailer parks becoming aware of "brain scans can now tell you what your brain is best suited for" (how do you keep something like that secret?) those kids would probably make effort to find out just what their brain is suited for without any help from anybody? Eminem, 50cent, Snoop Dogg, etc, persevered despite their sucky economic backgrounds?

Just because people are poor does not mean they are totally unaware of everything? If the middle class and upper class choose to bypass brain scan science (if it becomes available) it might become disadvantageous to them in the long run? Technology make dinosaurs of people who don't use it?

[fluffy_little_something]

Given our fixation on standard intelligence (the logical one most IQ tests measure), it would mean big trouble for those diagnosed as not so intelligent. Not just regarding outsiders such as HR people, but also for the person themselves regarding their self esteem.

[Numanoid]

Just because people are poor does not mean they are totally unaware of everything?

No, but staying in line with the family/community/group/environment is important for many people.

Gives a sense of belonging

I broke away somewhat and got myself a white collar, but hardly a day passes by when I don't miss farm life.