4 ms·

The size of a brain usually doesn't mean much, it sets a baseline, somewhat, but the overall structure is much more important compared to volume/size/weight. A

by tscs37 9y ago

The size of a brain usually doesn't mean much, it sets a baseline, somewhat, but the overall structure is much more important compared to volume/size/weight. A difference in brain volume of humans doesn't necessarily imply a huge difference in performance, just that the structure is different. Of course a difference in performance can still occur depending on the differences in the structure.

candiodari 9y ago
It's also a question of inputs, practice and body structure. I'm sure ravens massively outperform even the smartest of humans on landing after a jump, and their sense of what the air pressure is around them, even including localized changes that neither us nor them can see should be impeccable, despite using less and worse sensors, and much less processing capacity to do this with. But for humans there's very rarely any reason to do it at all, and so we suck at it. So this is not any stranger than the fact that most Chinese suck at writing German poetry, and vice versa.
yorwba 9y ago
The only cognitive task that I'm aware of where there is a difference in performance is mental rotation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_rotation#Gender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_rotation#Gender And this difference can be corrected by training. There should probably be a voluntary course in mental rotation for fields where spatial awareness is important (e.g. mechanical engineering). And I want to stress that recommendation for such a course should be based strictly on current ability, not gender. (I mention this because many projects of that kind only aim to decrease differences between recognized categories, instead of simply helping people who need it.)
- candiodari 9y ago
  > for such a course should be based strictly on current ability, not gender But many times it's been shown that people get really upset explicitly BECAUSE this is done. Why ? Because basing it on current ability will of course result in a rather pronounced and visible gender imbalance in the actual class.
  - yorwba 9y ago
    Well, the alternatives are to make it compulsory and waste the time of everyone who is already good at mental rotation, or to focus on only one gender, which will likely upset the same amount of people (although different ones I guess) without optimally addressing the actual problem, which is that some people are worse at mental rotation than others (some of which are male and won't benefit from a gender-segregated class).
    - candiodari 9y ago
      So politicians have a choice: 1) waste everyone's time and don't solve the problem (but appear to) but not be personally subject to criticism of sexism 2) actually solve the problem but open yourself up to criticism that you're "racist" (sexist really) We all know how this is going to go, don't we ?

by tscs37 9y ago

candiodari 9y ago

It's also a question of inputs, practice and body structure. I'm sure ravens massively outperform even the smartest of humans on landing after a jump, and their sense of what the air pressure is around them, even including localized changes that neither us nor them can see should be impeccable, despite using less and worse sensors, and much less processing capacity to do this with. But for humans there's very rarely any reason to do it at all, and so we suck at it. So this is not any stranger than the fact that most Chinese suck at writing German poetry, and vice versa.

yorwba 9y ago

The only cognitive task that I'm aware of where there is a difference in performance is mental rotation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_rotation#Gender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_rotation#Gender And this difference can be corrected by training. There should probably be a voluntary course in mental rotation for fields where spatial awareness is important (e.g. mechanical engineering). And I want to stress that recommendation for such a course should be based strictly on current ability, not gender. (I mention this because many projects of that kind only aim to decrease differences between recognized categories, instead of simply helping people who need it.)

candiodari 9y ago
> for such a course should be based strictly on current ability, not gender But many times it's been shown that people get really upset explicitly BECAUSE this is done. Why ? Because basing it on current ability will of course result in a rather pronounced and visible gender imbalance in the actual class.
- yorwba 9y ago
  Well, the alternatives are to make it compulsory and waste the time of everyone who is already good at mental rotation, or to focus on only one gender, which will likely upset the same amount of people (although different ones I guess) without optimally addressing the actual problem, which is that some people are worse at mental rotation than others (some of which are male and won't benefit from a gender-segregated class).
  - candiodari 9y ago
    So politicians have a choice: 1) waste everyone's time and don't solve the problem (but appear to) but not be personally subject to criticism of sexism 2) actually solve the problem but open yourself up to criticism that you're "racist" (sexist really) We all know how this is going to go, don't we ?