Don't worry, we're talking at cross purposes and don't seem to be understanding the others point. Let's leave it here. Oh and btw... >If you take the purely m

Don't worry, we're talking at cross purposes and don't seem to be understanding the others point. Let's leave it here. Oh and btw... >If you take the purely metaphysical approach, there is a maximum capacity for intelligence that any one individual has. Evolutionary biology has told us, thus far to our understanding, that this is brain size. I don't think these days that it's accepted that 'brain size' necessarily determines 'maximum capacity for intelligence' for the record. My understanding is that this is a rather outdated way of thinking about the brain and intelligence. https://neuroscience.stanford.edu/news/ask-neuroscientist-does-bigger-brain-make-you-smarter https://neuroscience.stanford.edu/news/ask-neuroscientist-do... >Luckily, there is much more to a brain when you look at it under a microscope, and most neuroscientists now believe that the complexity of cellular and molecular organization of neural connections, or synapses, is what truly determines a brain’s computational capacity. This view is supported by findings that intelligence is more correlated with frontal lobe volume and volume of gray matter, which is dense in neural cell bodies and synapses, than sheer brain size. Other research comparing proteins at synapses between different species suggests that what makes up synapses at the molecular level has had a huge impact on intelligence throughout evolutionary history. So, although having a big brain is somewhat predictive of having big smarts, intelligence probably depends much more on how efficiently different parts of your brain communicate with each other.