If you had 2 near clones, each having the same amount of brain capacity (in cc's) and if their brains were looked at, it would show equal amount of development in all areas.

but say one is bigger than the other, that person would most likely be smarter, or at least have the capacity to be. You couldn't argue a smaller brain of equal development would be smarter, right?

so is having a physically larger brain a distinct advantage?

 

Something tells me you are going somewhere with this (got an idea where) and that this is going to spiral out of control into what will be known for years as the thread of doom.

oh, and the mass of the brain isn't nearly as important as the number of "folds" in the brain.

 

i'm well aware, which is why i posted "equal development"

I'm just wondering if there is a argument for "smaller brains equal smaller synapses equal faster thinking"

and no, i don't start cute "look at my new kitty" threads. i want discussoin/debate/thinking.

 

Anthropology shows that brain size is not the total equation. For instance, Neanderthals were known to have larger average brain size in cc's than modern day homo sapiens. However, their average body size was much larger as well.

It is popular theory (isn't all science really theory anyway) that it is the ratio of brain size to body size. Therefore everything would be proportionate.

So to answer your question, assuming the body sizes are equivalent, the larger brain should have a higher IQ, according to theory.

 

they say people with smaller brains are smarter

the folds are more tightly packed together creating a smaller "looking" brain

as far as weight goes im not to sure about that one, i would think the smaller brain would weigh more due to it being more dense but.....

 

who's they, post a link or mention a study. I've not heard this, and it seems to buck rational.


I've never heard that smaller brains are more dense, or weigh more. Where'd you read this?

 

All the studies I errrrr studied reviewed brain size by cubic centimeters (cc).

 

there was a huge story on it not to long ago

as far as small brains being more dense, that should just be a given. Go outside and pack dirt, the smaller it gets the more dense it becomes.

im sure if you look on CNN or Google it you should find it

it was big news a while back

 

try looking up "big Brain Little Smarts" i think i'll try to find it when im not busy

 

Smaller = more dense is not a given for any substance. Size is only one variable to density, weight being another.

 

I don't think you can come to any firm conclusion based only on brain size or weight because humans (and most animals) only actually use a small percentage of their brain. It's not always uniform from one person to the next. I could have a smaller brain than you, but if I use 15% of mine and you use 10% of yours, I could be "smarter".

On a side note: I have assisted in several autopsies and I can tell you that the human brain is heavy!

 

That is complete, and utter pop-science horse poop. We only use a small portion at any given moment, but we do use the entire thing. Evolutionarily speaking, it makes no sense whatsoever to develop that much dead weight that requires calories (search for food) to up keep.

They do have a term for when you use 100% of your brain at the same time, it's called a Gran Mal Seizure and usually results in severe injury or death.

 

yes, this is a total myth, and as someone who says "I have assisted in several autopsies", should know better.

 

btw, I vomit in my mouth just a bit every single time I see that myth perpertrated in the media. Nothing like the dumbing down of America to make me want to hurl.

 

Uuummmm, NO. That was a rumor posed by someone around the turn of the century with no knowledge of neurology but stated it as fact. Everyone took it as such and never looked it up. It is completely unsound and has no relevance to actual fact. Frankly I'm a bit surprised that someone who has operated on cadavers would believe such a statement.

References:
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_028.html
http://www.csicop.org/si/9903/ten-percent-myth.html

Even Maxim won't propagate the myth:
"Myth 25: Humans use only 10 percent of their brains.
The truth: Duh, of course not.
“There’s no scientific basis for the claim that we use only a portion of our brain power,” according to Michael Smith, principal scientist at the San Francisco Brain Research Institute. “All of your brain is active all the time. If you stick an electrode in any brain cell at any moment, it will fire several times per second.” The 10 percent myth wasn’t even created by a scientist, but rather philosopher William James, who said that we use “only a small part of our mental resources.”"

Edit:
Wow, got ninja'd three times before I could post.

 

Just because I have assisted in autopsies doesn't make me a neurosurgeon. I simply said the brain was heavy.
The statement is misleading. We do use all of our brain, but not all at the same time. At any given moment you are using only a small portion of it. Why do you think many people suffer traumatic injuries and even lose large sections of brain and still retain full function.

 

Neurological redundancy. And not all people who suffer these injuries retain full function. This is how the study of psychology and neurology began. A part is damaged and we see what doesn't work anymore. Then you can deduce that the damaged part has something to do with that function. Look up dynamite and railroad spikes for a fun story of one of the first cases...

 

Oh and as far as brain size and number of folds, compare the human brain to that of a dolphin. There may be some mild basis for it, but it is definitely not an end all comparison.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetacean_intelligence

 

Exactly. Think about that.
Look, I could be wrong here. Like I said above, I'm not a doctor. I used to be a full-time EMT for about 6 years and as such, I used to help with occasional autopsies. I had no idea what I was doing. I was under the direct supervision of the State Forensic Pathologist. He would say, "hold this here while I cut" or "weigh this and record it". I didn't make that statement to imply that I had some higher education on the human brain. I just remember that it is heavy.
It does sound like I've always believed something that's not true. Live and learn.

 

You are not alone. The reason it keeps getting propagated is because it's so pervasive that it won't go away. We don't educate our youth in science and math, and script writting requires none of that, therefore, it's used in plot lines on the idiot box and in movies.

It's also one of the main reasons that so many Americans believe in unnatural forces such as telepathy, telekinesis, and Donald Trump's hairdon't.