Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
Broads.; IQ vs Pelvis Size
Topic Started: Apr 19 2011, 07:31 AM (611 Views)
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Miscellaneous/why_getting_smarter.htm
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
carl m
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
Anything over 3 lines and my ADD kicks in.
Everyone makes mistakes. I'm bound to do so myself eventually.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jodi
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
:lol2: No kidding. And no pictures. I need pictures. :lol2:
:) Jodi
my artlog ~ todayatmydesk.weebly.com
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
from the article
 
Large brains require large skulls. The skull is a rigid object that must pass through the mother's pelvis in the process of childbirth; if the fit is too tight, the process sometimes fails, resulting in the death of mother and infant.
That's the part that's presumptuous.

The presumption is that some how the brain has to be somewhat spherical and fit in a somewhat rigid spherical enclosure. You can easily imagine a thinner, longer brain that fits in an enlarged spinal column that lets more brain being developed and still doesn't stretch the pelvis that much when passing through the birth canal.

Take away that presumption and the rest of the thesis falls apart.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
His conjecture is odd, although I've heard it often enough. From an evolutionary perspective, one needs to define 'less able' and 'more able' in terms of the gene's ability to reproduce, not in terms of this or that skill or attribute of the body it constructs.
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jon-nyc
Member Avatar
Cheers
Axtremus
Apr 19 2011, 08:01 AM
from the article
 
Large brains require large skulls. The skull is a rigid object that must pass through the mother's pelvis in the process of childbirth; if the fit is too tight, the process sometimes fails, resulting in the death of mother and infant.
That's the part that's presumptuous.

The presumption is that some how the brain has to be somewhat spherical and fit in a somewhat rigid spherical enclosure. You can easily imagine a thinner, longer brain that fits in an enlarged spinal column that lets more brain being developed and still doesn't stretch the pelvis that much when passing through the birth canal.

Take away that presumption and the rest of the thesis falls apart.
You're thinking like a designer, not like an evolutionist. His thesis doesn't stand or fall on what 'one can imagine'. It stands or falls on whether babies with larger brains and skulls are be becoming more common (among other things).
In my defense, I was left unsupervised.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
Fallacious. The skull is mostly cartilaginous and the fontanelles allow it to flex, which is why newborns look like coneheads, when they first emerge.
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Also, there has never been any correlation established between brain size and intelligence.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
Exactly.
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KlavierBauer
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
What makes humans smart isn't the size of their brains, but the structure of their brains. Similarly, the difference in size between many fish brains, and an octopus brain may be comparable, but the structures are totally different, and the octopus is able to solve complex problems, while the fish can't even perceive what we'd call "pain." It's the parts of the brain and what they do that work to make smart beings, otherwise, the biggest brain on the planet belonging to the Blue Whale (6kg) would be 6 times smarter than our human brains (~1.4kg).

As I've been telling myself for years and years - size doesn't matter.
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper
"He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
My very smart kids were both born by c-section.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
The invention of iodize salt is said to be responsible for a 10 to 15 IQ point increase when taken prenatally and in early child development.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
Along with better nutrition, in general, too.
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
Axtremus
Apr 19 2011, 08:01 AM
from the article
 
Large brains require large skulls. The skull is a rigid object that must pass through the mother's pelvis in the process of childbirth; if the fit is too tight, the process sometimes fails, resulting in the death of mother and infant.
That's the part that's presumptuous.

The presumption is that some how the brain has to be somewhat spherical and fit in a somewhat rigid spherical enclosure. You can easily imagine a thinner, longer brain that fits in an enlarged spinal column that lets more brain being developed and still doesn't stretch the pelvis that much when passing through the birth canal.

Take away that presumption and the rest of the thesis falls apart.
Like this?

Posted Image
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
JBryan
Apr 19 2011, 08:25 AM
Also, there has never been any correlation established between brain size and intelligence.
Yes and no ...

While there is no correlation between absolute brain size and intelligence, it's generally recognized that species with bigger brain size relative to the body size are more intelligent. (That's not necessarily true within a species, and generally true when comparisons are made across species.)
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
jon-nyc
Apr 19 2011, 08:07 AM
His thesis doesn't stand or fall on what 'one can imagine'. It stands or falls on whether babies with larger brains and skulls are be becoming more common (among other things).
Fair point.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Horace
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
KlavierBauer
Apr 19 2011, 08:41 AM
What makes humans smart isn't the size of their brains, but the structure of their brains. Similarly, the difference in size between many fish brains, and an octopus brain may be comparable, but the structures are totally different, and the octopus is able to solve complex problems, while the fish can't even perceive what we'd call "pain." It's the parts of the brain and what they do that work to make smart beings, otherwise, the biggest brain on the planet belonging to the Blue Whale (6kg) would be 6 times smarter than our human brains (~1.4kg).

As I've been telling myself for years and years - size doesn't matter.
I think you're over-extrapolating his point. He's not saying that intelligence and brain size have a perfect linear correlation, he's only saying that there's a positive correlation. He makes some pretty good points that larger skull sizes have a lot going against them evolutionarily, so there must have been a pretty good reason for them.

I've always been struck by the massive danger of child birth throughout our evolutionary history. Mostly that was attributable to skull size ergo brain size. Nature wanted us to have bigger heads, and it must have wanted that really badly because our species paid a huge price for it. Babies and reproductive females are precious resources, but nature threw them away regularly to roll the dice on bigger skulls.

I think the author made an interesting point regarding the difference between our genotypes and phenotypes for skull size at birth. Pretty interesting to think that there's a highly advantageous trait which, if a random dice roll landed far enough on the extreme of the probability distribution, would kill the baby and/or the mother at birth.
As a good person, I implore you to do as I, a good person, do. Be good. Do NOT be bad. If you see bad, end bad. End it in yourself, and end it in others. By any means necessary, the good must conquer the bad. Good people know this. Do you know this? Are you good?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Axtremus
Apr 19 2011, 12:26 PM
JBryan
Apr 19 2011, 08:25 AM
Also, there has never been any correlation established between brain size and intelligence.
Yes and no ...

While there is no correlation between absolute brain size and intelligence, it's generally recognized that species with bigger brain size relative to the body size are more intelligent. (That's not necessarily true within a species, and generally true when comparisons are made across species.)
That really is not relevant to his point, or mine is it.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KlavierBauer
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Horace: I was responding simply to other posts in the thread - not commenting on the author's hypothesis.

Lots of things fall on their face evolutionarily, as they serve no purpose until their complexity is complete, many many generations into their evolution - so I'd agree that large skulls have more going against them, than for - and that there must be a good reason for them.
I also agree that in general there is a correlation between brain size and intelligence - but as demonstrated - size is just a part of that equation - not the determinate factor.
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper
"He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
Horace
Apr 19 2011, 01:19 PM
KlavierBauer
Apr 19 2011, 08:41 AM
What makes humans smart isn't the size of their brains, but the structure of their brains. Similarly, the difference in size between many fish brains, and an octopus brain may be comparable, but the structures are totally different, and the octopus is able to solve complex problems, while the fish can't even perceive what we'd call "pain." It's the parts of the brain and what they do that work to make smart beings, otherwise, the biggest brain on the planet belonging to the Blue Whale (6kg) would be 6 times smarter than our human brains (~1.4kg).

As I've been telling myself for years and years - size doesn't matter.
I think you're over-extrapolating his point. He's not saying that intelligence and brain size have a perfect linear correlation, he's only saying that there's a positive correlation.
I don't think it has ever been demonstrated there is a positive correlation. Indeed, the only correlation that has ever been made between some brain feature and intelligence is that brains more highly convoluted tend to indicate higher intelligence, a feature that is irrelevant to brain size.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Horace
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
JBryan
Apr 19 2011, 01:26 PM
Horace
Apr 19 2011, 01:19 PM
KlavierBauer
Apr 19 2011, 08:41 AM
What makes humans smart isn't the size of their brains, but the structure of their brains. Similarly, the difference in size between many fish brains, and an octopus brain may be comparable, but the structures are totally different, and the octopus is able to solve complex problems, while the fish can't even perceive what we'd call "pain." It's the parts of the brain and what they do that work to make smart beings, otherwise, the biggest brain on the planet belonging to the Blue Whale (6kg) would be 6 times smarter than our human brains (~1.4kg).

As I've been telling myself for years and years - size doesn't matter.
I think you're over-extrapolating his point. He's not saying that intelligence and brain size have a perfect linear correlation, he's only saying that there's a positive correlation.
I don't think it has ever been demonstrated there is a positive correlation. Indeed, the only correlation that has ever been made between some brain feature and intelligence is that brains more highly convoluted tend to indicate higher intelligence, a feature that is irrelevant to brain size.
Anecdotally, Chris Langan, one of the most measurably smart guys in the world (20/20 did something about him as did Malcolm Gladwell), has two traits that are about 5 or so standard deviations above average: IQ and head size. If those were orthogonal traits, the chances of such a human existing would be almost non-existent.

Here's some academic stuff on the issue:

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~jel/brainIQ.html
As a good person, I implore you to do as I, a good person, do. Be good. Do NOT be bad. If you see bad, end bad. End it in yourself, and end it in others. By any means necessary, the good must conquer the bad. Good people know this. Do you know this? Are you good?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
No one is suggesting they are orthogonal traits. What has been suggested is that no correlation has ever been established, anecdotal cases notwithstanding. Intelligence and lack of it has been found to exist among all brain sizes aside from the microcephalic, of course.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Frank_W
Member Avatar
Resident Misanthrope
If head size were a true correlation, there would be vast numbers of pinheads walking about in the world.
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin."
Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
The General Theory of Relativity would have been developed by Dan Blocker instead of Albert Einstein.

Of course, if Albert hadn't beat him to it by several decades.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
JBryan
Apr 19 2011, 02:23 PM
The General Theory of Relativity would have been developed by Dan Blocker instead of Albert Einstein.
I suspect that theory may have involved things you can do with actual relatives.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1