[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Is braincase size _really_ indicative of Intelligence?
Subject pretty much says it; we seem to measure "smartness"
by a relationship to braincase size (or at least that's the
assumption on which my quesiton is based, so let's go with it).
At the same time, I'm aware that humans (and probably other
creatures) seem to "use" a very small part of our brain.
We assume along these lines that animals with smaller brains
are therefore proportionally "Stupider". In living animals,
it's probably possible to bear this out through testing, but
what about extinct animals.
Isn't it theoretically possible that dinosaurs had smaller
brains, but used realtively much more of them, so that they
wer much smarter than we would guess if we assume that they, too
use only a small portion of their brain.
In other words, couldn't a dinosaur with a brain 1/5 the size
of a human brain, but that uses 100% of it, be twice as
smart as a human?
Should I try to get more sleep?
* Snake--------- *
* firstname.lastname@example.org *