3 ms·

I was just trying to make the point that as stated I wouldn't buy it. I'm sure who you paraphrased gave it some more in-depth thought though. For instance if y

I was just trying to make the point that as stated I wouldn't buy it. I'm sure who you paraphrased gave it some more in-depth thought though. For instance if you were to tell me that walking upright opened up possibilities, such as creating and using advanced tools, which required larger brains, then I'd definitely be on board with that possibility. I just choose to interpret that sentence literally and narrowly to make a point about it specifically, not about Gould's theory as a whole (which I haven't read).

the_af 7y ago
> For instance if you were to tell me that walking upright opened up possibilities, such as creating and using advanced tools, which required larger brains I can't quote him exactly because I don't have the book nearby, but Gould argued that higher brain functions (intelligence) were a byproduct of the brain development required for walking upright, no tools or opened possibilities. It's not that walking upright enabled the development of tools and this in turn helped develop intelligence; it's that the brain structure necessary for bipedal walking had the potential to be used for other things, they had "emergent properties". I think he argued the same about the body shape itself, the shape of hips, legs and arms all "enabled" the emergence of human-like intelligence. Stephen Jay Gould was a pretty well-known scientist (who sadly passed away in 2002) and, regardless of what you think of my possibly misleading summary, I urge to read his books if you have any interest at all in evolutionary science and biology.