• Soup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    So the article claims that people can improve, and improvement is necessarily based on surpassing prior, personal ability, and you’re mad?

    I didn’t see anywhere that they said that a 90 year old can get the brain of a 20 year old, only that it can still be improved at that age and we don’t need to resign ourselves to a degraded mind when we’re old. If we buy a new car it’ll never be as clean as it was off the lot, but that doesn’t mean it can’t at least be repaired and kept roadworthy later into it’s life.

    • blarghly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think this is a reasonable statement to make, but I also think this study isn’t great, in that it is mostly based on self reported data

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      , only that it can still be improved at that age and we don’t need to resign ourselves to a degraded mind

      A reduced degrading is still a degrading.

      • Soup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        If they beat their scores from before that’s still an improvement. That would imply that this isn’t just slowing the degradation but it’s actually reversing it slightly. Only slowing would imply that their scores would be worse, but less worse than expected.

        You have very strong opinions about this for someone with such a fundamentally low level of reading comprehension.