Theory Clarification: Do We Get Better Senses When We Lose One?

[Ramster5678]

I've heard that if one of your senses go bad or is permenently gone, then one of your other senses become better in return. But I'm not too sure if that's true. I'm not sure that if some nerves go bad that some are reinforced. Can someone clarify if this theory is actually true?

 

[somasimple]

Hi,

About senses, it is true. we enhance the sensitivity of the remaining ones, "compensating" the loss.

About nerves? The question is not clear since competition already exists between neurons giving thge best response we could have. It is, in these conditions, not possible to gain, more.

 

[Ramster5678]

well, about the nerves, like, eye nerves. Like, if the eyeball's nerves were to go bad and so on with the theory. I thought that the theory was linked to nerves.

 

[somasimple]

It exist effectively some redundance in nerves. But as I said it, if the best candidate dies then the resting one will be promoted with fewer performances.
This behavior is called competition.

 

[Ramster5678]

awsome. But it also depends what kind of disability, right? Like, Myopia, for example, wouldn't work when applied to the theory since it's just light rays hitting infront of the retina.

 

[somasimple]

No,

Improving nerves will not improve the optic quality of the eye!

 

[Ramster5678]

that's not what i meant. I guess i answered my own question by asking it in the previous post