Why have the evolution compromised with the brain?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gliese123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Brain Evolution
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on why brain sizes among different species, including Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, have not evolved to be more comparable. A key point raised is the belief that larger brains could enhance social and survival capabilities for species. However, it is acknowledged that there are anatomical and environmental constraints that limit brain size. The conversation also touches on the idea that evolution may not have prioritized larger brains if existing brain sizes are sufficient for species' survival and functionality. Critics of the initial perspective argue that the current human brain may not need to be larger, and they emphasize the importance of grounding discussions in scientific facts rather than speculation. The need for research and factual basis in discussions about brain evolution is highlighted as essential for meaningful dialogue.
Gliese123
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
As the thread: Why haven't the brain among different species developed in general to a size comparable to Homo Sapiens. And even though the brain among Neanderthal was considered to be bigger than Homo Sapiens, did the evolution considered that it was too "big" or too "clumsy" and the race died? Even though environmental factors and limits are definitive for the time span among species development, I think a bigger, more developed and advanced brain is both increasing social & survival aspects for a species, even though what species I'm referring to. Sure, there are limits for how big a brain can be since human anatomy demand a constant temperature , but wouldn't that "easy part" be adapted by the ambient environment? The nature has facilitated many obstacle for lifeforms around the world, why not the limitations for extended brain size? Or haven't the evolution "caught up" the time span?
/An biological Enthusiast.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Gliese123 said:
As the thread: Why haven't the brain among different species developed in general to a size comparable to Homo Sapiens. And even though the brain among Neanderthal was considered to be bigger than Homo Sapiens, did the evolution considered that it was too "big" or too "clumsy" and the race died? Even though environmental factors and limits are definitive for the time span among species development, I think a bigger, more developed and advanced brain is both increasing social & survival aspects for a species, even though what species I'm referring to. Sure, there are limits for how big a brain can be since human anatomy demand a constant temperature , but wouldn't that "easy part" be adapted by the ambient environment? The nature has facilitated many obstacle for lifeforms around the world, why not the limitations for extended brain size? Or haven't the evolution "caught up" the time span?
/An biological Enthusiast.
The brains for different species seem to function just fine, why would they need to change? What makes you think that human brains are maxed out and that they need to be bigger/more advanced?
 
Why not?
 
Please don't dispute my statement in a negative way.
 
Gliese123 said:
Please don't dispute my statement in a negative way.
You've posted idle speculation, you have provided zero scientific facts to back up anything you've said.

You don't want people to question you or point out that your thoughts lack a scientific basis?

Then there is nothing to discuss.

Obviously you did not post with a desire to learn. Do some research on brains, there is a lot you can learn if you truly have a desire. After you have some facts, then you can repost specifc questions about those facts.
 
Last edited:
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...
I use ethanol for cleaning glassware and resin 3D prints. The glassware is sometimes used for food. If possible, I'd prefer to only keep one grade of ethanol on hand. I've made sugar mash, but that is hardly the least expensive feedstock for ethanol. I had given some thought to using wheat flour, and for this I would need a source for amylase enzyme (relevant data, but not the core question). I am now considering animal feed that I have access to for 20 cents per pound. This is a...
Back
Top