3 ms·

I've never understood this brain size correlates with intelligence idea. I keep seeing it and it just makes me think "what? really? still?" There's dozens of e

I've never understood this brain size correlates with intelligence idea. I keep seeing it and it just makes me think "what? really? still?" There's dozens of easy non-intelligence hypothesis that can be readily tested: Maybe the skull was larger because it helped balance the weight better for swinging through trees, maybe it was more protective against impact. We can sit around and make up lots of stories to explain this. Besides, human brains are about the same weight as walruses. If size = intelligence, I'd expect to be chatting with walruses on the phone, working with them at the office... Or what about elephants? Their brains are 4 times bigger! There's no way it makes sense upon any cursory analysis. It's just a carryover from phrenology.

Juliate 5y ago
> If size = intelligence, I'd expect to … Your understanding of “intelligence” is quite anthropo-centered, of the XXth century-office-work style… Nothing ever _requires_ that intelligence has to express itself in a consistent/compatible way across species and their own environment. Perhaps, for instance, some large brain species did not “evolve” as homo sapiens did, because they were more intelligent of their surroundings.
dr_dshiv 5y ago
But brain size does correlate with intelligence, 0.3-0.4. It accounts for about 15% of variability. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-brain-size-matter1/#:~:text=In%20healthy%20volunteers%2C%20total%20brain,overall%20variability%20in%20general%20intelligence https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-brain-size-m....
- likecarter 5y ago
  Within the same species, that makes sense. Same architecture, more folds, more neurons.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- kristopolous 5y ago
  This is really sloppy journalism. They see a correlation between longevity, income, career, and cranium size and then say "welp, clearly it's the brain size" No, clearly it's the money. They go in with phrenology bias and can't really do solid science. They even use IQ numbers which have been shown to correlate with parents income more than almost anything else. They even mention the career of hedge fund managers, the classic career along with real estate and politics of dullard rich kids. As the article contributes they then point out everything that I did. I don't know if the editors wanted this style or what. It opens with paragraphs of clearly specious bullshit then says it's bullshit then has a concluding statement about how it's nonsense. Second to last paragraph > So it is not brain size, relative brain size or absolute number of neurons that distinguishes us. Perhaps our wiring has become more streamlined, our metabolism more efficient, our synapses more sophisticated. Yeah, duh, of course it's more complicated then "durr it's bigger". And of course it's all skewed by the instrument of measure. It's probably really stupid dumb things like the nuances of human emotions and our success in transmitting them. What sets is apart from other animals likely isn't what 30 year olds can do but what 30 week olds can

Juliate 5y ago

> If size = intelligence, I'd expect to … Your understanding of “intelligence” is quite anthropo-centered, of the XXth century-office-work style… Nothing ever _requires_ that intelligence has to express itself in a consistent/compatible way across species and their own environment. Perhaps, for instance, some large brain species did not “evolve” as homo sapiens did, because they were more intelligent of their surroundings.

dr_dshiv 5y ago

But brain size does correlate with intelligence, 0.3-0.4. It accounts for about 15% of variability. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-brain-size-matter1/#:~:text=In%20healthy%20volunteers%2C%20total%20brain,overall%20variability%20in%20general%20intelligence https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-brain-size-m....

likecarter 5y ago
Within the same species, that makes sense. Same architecture, more folds, more neurons.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
kristopolous 5y ago
This is really sloppy journalism. They see a correlation between longevity, income, career, and cranium size and then say "welp, clearly it's the brain size" No, clearly it's the money. They go in with phrenology bias and can't really do solid science. They even use IQ numbers which have been shown to correlate with parents income more than almost anything else. They even mention the career of hedge fund managers, the classic career along with real estate and politics of dullard rich kids. As the article contributes they then point out everything that I did. I don't know if the editors wanted this style or what. It opens with paragraphs of clearly specious bullshit then says it's bullshit then has a concluding statement about how it's nonsense. Second to last paragraph > So it is not brain size, relative brain size or absolute number of neurons that distinguishes us. Perhaps our wiring has become more streamlined, our metabolism more efficient, our synapses more sophisticated. Yeah, duh, of course it's more complicated then "durr it's bigger". And of course it's all skewed by the instrument of measure. It's probably really stupid dumb things like the nuances of human emotions and our success in transmitting them. What sets is apart from other animals likely isn't what 30 year olds can do but what 30 week olds can