= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jonathan_Graehl comments on How inevitable was modern human civilization - data - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (103)
Larger brain of the same architecture.
That's what I'm talking about. What reason do we have for thinking that larger brains of the same architecture exhibit more general intelligence (in non human lineages)?
Also, what exactly does it mean for two brains to have the same "architecture" if they differ by a genetic mutation? It's not as if there's a separate gene coding for "brain size" that could mutate on its own.
If it doesn't help, and uses more energy, then it won't get kept unless it's an inevitable side effect of something helpful. That was my only basis for "larger (of same type) => more intelligence".
I don't really know anything about this topic. My claim is essentially a tautology that may not have much practical application.
Some trivia (not directly related to my original claim) I found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_size:
That's true. But something helpful done by the brain isn't necessarily involved with intelligence.