Large Brains Evolved For Social Competition

[Rich Travs]

http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_science-
s/report-32083.html

Why did human ancestors evolve such large brains? While
humans have an unusual array of characteristics that
distinguish us from other species, it is our cognitive
abilities and open-ended thinking that are most remarkable.
University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found that the
ability to excel at social problem solving led human brains
to surpass other species in size, developing ecological
dominance 1.5 to 2 million years ago.

Mark Flinn and Carol Ward, associate professors of
anthropology, along with
psychology professor David Geary have integrated this new
theory of human intelligence evolution with recent
developments in the fields of paleoanthropology, cognitive
psychology and neurobiology. Through testing fossils for
brain size, body size and archaeological evidence of
behavior, along with recent comparisons of our mental
abilities to those of apes, the researchers have found
support for a theory proposed by zoologist Richard
Alexander that humans evolved large brains to negotiate and
manipulate complex social relationships.

“Most traditional theories, including that of Charles Darwin,
suggested some combination of tool use and hunting were the
key selective pressures favoring big brains, but increasing
evidence of hunting and tool use in other species such as
chimpanzees indicates our ancestors were not unique in that
regard,” Flinn said. “The most exceptional of our mental
gifts involves understanding what is going on in other
people’s minds by using skills such as empathy and
self-awareness.”

Ward says the hominid brain increased 250 percent in less
than 3 million years, particularly in the neocortex area that
controls cognitive development. She said scientific evidence
says absolute, not relative, brain size is more closely tied
to intelligence. She credits the increasing importance of
complex social coalitions with the human brain’s evolution.

“Great apes did have a lot of interaction with non-kin,
seeking subordinate leverage and depending on the good graces
of others, but hominids not only competed against other
hominids, they competed against other groups much like sports
teams do today,” Ward said. “Eventually, competing against
other hominids became the driving force and, at some point,
became a factor in ecological dominance.”

Geary said the ability to think ahead and mentally stimulate
what others might do is another reason humans achieved
dominance.

“As our ancestors gained control of other species, through
hunting and other means, the most important impediment to
their ability to survive, reproduce and thrive was the
competing interests of other people,” Geary said. “And so it
remains.” ...

[Marc Verha]

http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_science-
s/report-32083.html Why did human ancestors evolve such large
brains? While humans have an unusual array of characteristics
that distinguish us from other species, it is our cognitive
abilities and open-ended thinking that are most remarkable.
University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found that the
ability to excel at social problem solving led human brains to
surpass other species in size, developing ecological dominance
1.5 to 2 million years ago.

The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just wishful
thinking. Social competition is seen in all animals. The only
sound approach is looking at other mammals with brain
enlargement. The most social primates don't have the largest
brains (OWMs have rel.smaller brains than NWMs & apes). Brain
enlargement in mammals is seen esp. in odontocetes, seals,
otters... Note not all parts of the human brain are enhanced,
eg, we have a much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a
+-smaller portion in the pre- & postcentral areas for the
lower extremities. These are important clues often "forgotten"
by traditional PAs.

Marc Verhaegen http://www.onelist.com/community/AAT
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Verhaegen.html

[Rich Travs]

Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> >
> http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_scien-
> ces/report-32083.html Why did human ancestors evolve such
> large brains? While humans have an unusual array of
> characteristics that distinguish us from other species, it
> is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking that are
> most remarkable. University of Missouri-Columbia researchers
> found that the ability to excel at social problem solving
> led human brains to surpass other species in size,
> developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million years ago.
>
> The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just wishful
> thinking. Social competition is seen in all animals. The
> only sound approach is looking at other mammals with brain
> enlargement. The most social primates don't have the largest
> brains (OWMs have rel.smaller brains than NWMs & apes).
> Brain enlargement in mammals is seen esp. in odontocetes,
> seals, otters... Note not all parts of the human brain are
> enhanced, eg, we have a much smaller olfactory bulb than
> chimps & a +-smaller portion in the pre- & postcentral areas
> for the lower extremities. These are important clues often
> "forgotten" by traditional PAs.

The size of the brain isn't the only factor.

Besides humans and chimps, how many other primates are capable
of deceit? That certainly qualifies as social competition.

[Marc Verha]

"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> wrote in message
news:41201105.B61CDCD5@hotMOVEmail.com...

>>>
http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_science-
s/report-32083.html Why did human ancestors evolve such large
brains? While humans have an unusual array of characteristics
that distinguish us from other species, it is our cognitive
abilities and open-ended thinking that are most remarkable.
University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found that the
ability to excel at social problem solving led human brains to
surpass other species in size, developing ecological dominance
1.5 to 2 million years ago.

> > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just wishful
> > thinking. Social
competition is seen in all animals. The only sound approach is
looking at other mammals with brain enlargement. The most
social primates don't have the largest brains (OWMs have
rel.smaller brains than NWMs & apes). Brain enlargement in
mammals is seen esp. in odontocetes, seals, otters... Note not
all parts of the human brain are enhanced, eg, we have a much
smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a +-smaller portion in
the pre- & postcentral areas for the lower extremities. These
are important clues often "forgotten" by traditional PAs.

> The size of the brain isn't the only factor.

That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.

> Besides humans and chimps, how many other primates are
> capable of deceit?

1) It's not because it hasn't been investigated, that it
doesn't exist.
2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in crows & dogs.
3) If only humans & chimps are capable of deceit (as you seem
to believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for "why
did human ancestors evolve such large brains?".

> That certainly qualifies as social competition.

So? Do you believe that only spp that are capable of deceit
have social competition??

[Rich Travs]

Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> wrote in message
> news:41201105.B61CDCD5@hotMOVEmail.com...
>
> >>>
> http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_scien-
> ces/report-32083.html Why did human ancestors evolve such
> large brains? While humans have an unusual array of
> characteristics that distinguish us from other species, it
> is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking that are
> most remarkable. University of Missouri-Columbia researchers
> found that the ability to excel at social problem solving
> led human brains to surpass other species in size,
> developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million years ago.
>
> > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just wishful
> > > thinking. Social
> competition is seen in all animals. The only sound approach
> is looking at other mammals with brain enlargement. The most
> social primates don't have the largest brains (OWMs have
> rel.smaller brains than NWMs & apes). Brain enlargement in
> mammals is seen esp. in odontocetes, seals, otters... Note
> not all parts of the human brain are enhanced, eg, we have a
> much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a +-smaller
> portion in the pre- & postcentral areas for the lower
> extremities. These are important clues often "forgotten" by
> traditional PAs.
>
> > The size of the brain isn't the only factor.
>
> That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.

It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters have nothing to
do with it.

> > Besides humans and chimps, how many other primates are
> > capable of deceit?
>
> 1) It's not because it hasn't been investigated, that it
> doesn't exist.

Huh?

> 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in crows & dogs.

Those aren't primates.

> 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of deceit (as you
> seem to believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for
> "why did human ancestors evolve such large brains?".

We're only talking about primates. Don't know why you want to
bring up doggies.

> > That certainly qualifies as social competition.
>
> So? Do you believe that only spp that are capable of deceit
> have social competition??

We're only talking about primates.

[Marc Verha]

"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees doggies in
message news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...

> >
http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_science-
s/report-32083.html Why did human ancestors evolve such large
brains? While humans have an unusual array of characteristics
that distinguish us from other species, it is our cognitive
abilities and open-ended thinking that are most remarkable.
University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found that the
ability to excel at social problem solving led human brains to
surpass other species in size, developing ecological dominance
1.5 to 2 million years ago.

> > > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just wishful
> > > > thinking.
Social competition is seen in all animals. The only sound
approach is looking at other mammals with brain enlargement.
The most social primates don't have the largest brains (OWMs
have rel.smaller brains than NWMs & apes). Brain enlargement
in mammals is seen esp. in odontocetes, seals, otters...
Note not all parts of the human brain are enhanced, eg, we
have a much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a +-smaller
portion in the pre- & postcentral areas for the lower
extremities. These are important clues often "forgotten" by
traditional PAs.

> > > The size of the brain isn't the only factor.

> > That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.

> It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters have nothing
> to do with it.

I'm not interested in your opinion. facts, man.

> > > Besides humans and chimps, how many other primates are
> > > capable of
deceit?

> > 1) It's not because it hasn't been investigated, that it
> > doesn't exist.

> Huh?

Huh?

> > 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in crows & dogs.

> Those aren't primates.

Yes. And?

> > 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of deceit (as you
> > seem to
believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for "why did
human ancestors evolve such large brains?".

> We're only talking about primates. Don't know why you want
> to bring up
doggies.

Not following? Humans & chimps are primates. Do you see the
word doggies in
3)??

> > > That certainly qualifies as social competition.

> > So? Do you believe that only spp that are capable of
> > deceit have social
competition??

> We're only talking about primates.

Huh?

[Rich Travs]

Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees doggies in
> message news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...
>
> > >
> http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_scien-
> ces/report-32083.html Why did human ancestors evolve such
> large brains? While humans have an unusual array of
> characteristics that distinguish us from other species, it
> is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking that are
> most remarkable. University of Missouri-Columbia researchers
> found that the ability to excel at social problem solving
> led human brains to surpass other species in size,
> developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million years ago.
>
> > > > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just
> > > > > wishful thinking.
> Social competition is seen in all animals. The only sound
> approach is looking at other mammals with brain enlargement.
> The most social primates don't have the largest brains (OWMs
> have rel.smaller brains than NWMs & apes). Brain enlargement
> in mammals is seen esp. in odontocetes, seals, otters...
> Note not all parts of the human brain are enhanced, eg, we
> have a much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a +-smaller
> portion in the pre- & postcentral areas for the lower
> extremities. These are important clues often "forgotten" by
> traditional PAs.
>
> > > > The size of the brain isn't the only factor.
>
> > > That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.
>
> > It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters have nothing
> > to do with it.
>
> I'm not interested in your opinion. facts, man.

Seals and otters were your opinion.

> > > > Besides humans and chimps, how many other primates are
> > > > capable of
> deceit?
>
> > > 1) It's not because it hasn't been investigated, that it
> > > doesn't exist.
>
> > Huh?
>
> Huh?

What do you mean by "It's not because it hasn't been
investigated, that it doesn't exist"

> > > 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in crows & dogs.
>
> > Those aren't primates.
>
> Yes. And?

Then they're not under consideration.

> > > 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of deceit (as you
> > > seem to
> believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for "why did
> human ancestors evolve such large brains?".
>
> > We're only talking about primates. Don't know why you want
> > to bring up
> doggies.
>
> Not following? Humans & chimps are primates. Do you see the
> word doggies in
> 3)??

It's in 2)

> > > > That certainly qualifies as social competition.
>
> > > So? Do you believe that only spp that are capable of
> > > deceit have social
> competition??
>
> > We're only talking about primates.
>
> Huh?

The discussion is about primates.

[Marc Verha]

"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> denies primates are
animals in message news:41329A46.76F7F68@hotMOVEmail.com...
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees doggies in
> > message news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...
> >
> > > >
> >
http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_science-
s/report-32083.html
> > Why did human ancestors evolve such large brains? While
> > humans have an unusual array of characteristics that
> > distinguish us from other species,
it
> > is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking that
> > are most
remarkable.
> > University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found that the
> > ability to
excel
> > at social problem solving led human brains to surpass
> > other species in
size,
> > developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million
> > years ago.
> >
> > > > > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just
> > > > > > wishful thinking.
> > Social competition is seen in all animals. The only sound
> > approach is looking at other mammals with brain
> > enlargement. The most social
primates
> > don't have the largest brains (OWMs have rel.smaller
> > brains than NWMs & apes). Brain enlargement in mammals is
> > seen esp. in odontocetes, seals, otters... Note not all
> > parts of the human brain are enhanced, eg, we
have a
> > much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a +-smaller
> > portion in the
pre- &
> > postcentral areas for the lower extremities. These are
> > important clues
often
> > "forgotten" by traditional PAs.
> >
> > > > > The size of the brain isn't the only factor.
> >
> > > > That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.
> >
> > > It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters have
> > > nothing to do with
it.
> >
> > I'm not interested in your opinion. facts, man.
>
> Seals and otters were your opinion.
>
> > > > > Besides humans and chimps, how many other primates
> > > > > are capable of
> > deceit?
> >
> > > > 1) It's not because it hasn't been investigated, that
> > > > it doesn't
exist.
> >
> > > Huh?
> >
> > Huh?
>
> What do you mean by "It's not because it hasn't been
> investigated, that it doesn't exist"
>
> > > > 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in crows &
> > > > dogs.
> >
> > > Those aren't primates.
> >
> > Yes. And?
>
> Then they're not under consideration.
>
> > > > 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of deceit (as
> > > > you seem to
> > believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for "why
> > did human
ancestors
> > evolve such large brains?".
> >
> > > We're only talking about primates. Don't know why you
> > > want to bring up
> > doggies.
> >
> > Not following? Humans & chimps are primates. Do you see
> > the word doggies
in
> > 3)??
>
> It's in 2)
>
> > > > > That certainly qualifies as social competition.
> >
> > > > So? Do you believe that only spp that are capable of
> > > > deceit have
social
> > competition??
> >
> > > We're only talking about primates.
> >
> > Huh?
>
> The discussion is about primates.

[Rich Travs]

Marc Verhaegen once again confuses doggies and primates:
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> denies primates
> are animals in message
> news:41329A46.76F7F68@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees doggies
> > > in message news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
> http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_scien-
> ces/report-32083.html
> > > Why did human ancestors evolve such large brains? While
> > > humans have an unusual array of characteristics that
> > > distinguish us from other species,
> it
> > > is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking that
> > > are most
> remarkable.
> > > University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found that
> > > the ability to
> excel
> > > at social problem solving led human brains to surpass
> > > other species in
> size,
> > > developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million years
> > > ago.
> > >
> > > > > > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just
> > > > > > > wishful thinking.
> > > Social competition is seen in all animals. The only
> > > sound approach is looking at other mammals with brain
> > > enlargement. The most social
> primates
> > > don't have the largest brains (OWMs have rel.smaller
> > > brains than NWMs & apes). Brain enlargement in mammals
> > > is seen esp. in odontocetes, seals, otters... Note not
> > > all parts of the human brain are enhanced, eg, we
> have a
> > > much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a +-smaller
> > > portion in the
> pre- &
> > > postcentral areas for the lower extremities. These are
> > > important clues
> often
> > > "forgotten" by traditional PAs.
> > >
> > > > > > The size of the brain isn't the only factor.
> > >
> > > > > That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.
> > >
> > > > It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters have
> > > > nothing to do with
> it.
> > >
> > > I'm not interested in your opinion. facts, man.
> >
> > Seals and otters were your opinion.
> >
> > > > > > Besides humans and chimps, how many other primates
> > > > > > are capable of
> > > deceit?
> > >
> > > > > 1) It's not because it hasn't been investigated,
> > > > > that it doesn't
> exist.
> > >
> > > > Huh?
> > >
> > > Huh?
> >
> > What do you mean by "It's not because it hasn't been
> > investigated, that it doesn't exist"
> >
> > > > > 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in crows &
> > > > > dogs.
> > >
> > > > Those aren't primates.
> > >
> > > Yes. And?
> >
> > Then they're not under consideration.
> >
> > > > > 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of deceit (as
> > > > > you seem to
> > > believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for "why
> > > did human
> ancestors
> > > evolve such large brains?".
> > >
> > > > We're only talking about primates. Don't know why you
> > > > want to bring up
> > > doggies.
> > >
> > > Not following? Humans & chimps are primates. Do you see
> > > the word doggies
> in
> > > 3)??
> >
> > It's in 2)
> >
> > > > > > That certainly qualifies as social competition.
> > >
> > > > > So? Do you believe that only spp that are capable of
> > > > > deceit have
> social
> > > competition??
> > >
> > > > We're only talking about primates.
> > >
> > > Huh?
> >
> > The discussion is about primates.

[Darth_vers]

> > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees doggies in
> > message news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...
> >
> > > >
> > http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_sci-
> > ences/report-32083.html Why did human ancestors evolve
> > such large brains? While humans have an unusual array of
> > characteristics that distinguish us from other species, it
> > is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking that
> > are most remarkable. University of Missouri-Columbia
> > researchers found that the ability to excel at social
> > problem solving led human brains to surpass other species
> > in size, developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million
> > years ago.

Yes. This seems like a reasonable hypothesis. Maybe it would
be useful to expand on this, and explore various ideas about
just *how* our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking may
have contributed to the solving of various social problems,
and just *how* this might have led to our ancestors developing
such ecological dominance.

I think that this line of discussion might prove to be more
interesting and productive than the one going on now in
this thread.

DV

[Marc Verha]

"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> is too stupid to
realise that what is true for all mammals is also true for
primates in message news:415763C1.D6BB0F5C@hotMOVEmail.com...

> Marc Verhaegen once again confuses doggies and primates:
> >
> > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> denies primates
> > are animals
in
> > message news:41329A46.76F7F68@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees
> > > > doggies in message
> > > > news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_science-
s/report-32083.html
> > > > Why did human ancestors evolve such large brains?
> > > > While humans have
an
> > > > unusual array of characteristics that distinguish us
> > > > from other
species,
> > it
> > > > is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking
> > > > that are most
> > remarkable.
> > > > University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found that
> > > > the ability
to
> > excel
> > > > at social problem solving led human brains to surpass
> > > > other species
in
> > size,
> > > > developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million years
> > > > ago.
> > > >
> > > > > > > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just
> > > > > > > > wishful
thinking.
> > > > Social competition is seen in all animals. The only
> > > > sound approach
is
> > > > looking at other mammals with brain enlargement. The
> > > > most social
> > primates
> > > > don't have the largest brains (OWMs have rel.smaller
> > > > brains than
NWMs &
> > > > apes). Brain enlargement in mammals is seen esp. in
> > > > odontocetes,
seals,
> > > > otters... Note not all parts of the human brain are
> > > > enhanced, eg, we
> > have a
> > > > much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a +-smaller
> > > > portion in the
> > pre- &
> > > > postcentral areas for the lower extremities. These are
> > > > important
clues
> > often
> > > > "forgotten" by traditional PAs.
> > > >
> > > > > > > The size of the brain isn't the only factor.
> > > >
> > > > > > That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.
> > > >
> > > > > It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters have
> > > > > nothing to do
with
> > it.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not interested in your opinion. facts, man.
> > >
> > > Seals and otters were your opinion.
> > >
> > > > > > > Besides humans and chimps, how many other
> > > > > > > primates are capable
of
> > > > deceit?
> > > >
> > > > > > 1) It's not because it hasn't been investigated,
> > > > > > that it doesn't
> > exist.
> > > >
> > > > > Huh?
> > > >
> > > > Huh?
> > >
> > > What do you mean by "It's not because it hasn't been
> > > investigated,
that it
> > > doesn't exist"
> > >
> > > > > > 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in crows &
> > > > > > dogs.
> > > >
> > > > > Those aren't primates.
> > > >
> > > > Yes. And?
> > >
> > > Then they're not under consideration.
> > >
> > > > > > 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of deceit
> > > > > > (as you seem to
> > > > believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for "why
> > > > did human
> > ancestors
> > > > evolve such large brains?".
> > > >
> > > > > We're only talking about primates. Don't know why
> > > > > you want to
bring up
> > > > doggies.
> > > >
> > > > Not following? Humans & chimps are primates. Do you
> > > > see the word
doggies
> > in
> > > > 3)??
> > >
> > > It's in 2)
> > >
> > > > > > > That certainly qualifies as social competition.
> > > >
> > > > > > So? Do you believe that only spp that are capable
> > > > > > of deceit have
> > social
> > > > competition??
> > > >
> > > > > We're only talking about primates.
> > > >
> > > > Huh?
> > >
> > > The discussion is about primates.

[pan762]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:41:04 +0200, "Marc Verhaegen"
<fa204466@skynet.be> wrote:

> Marc Verhaegen wrote:

>http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_scienc-
>es/report-32083.html
>> Why did human ancestors evolve such large brains? While
>> humans have unusual array of characteristics that
>> distinguish us from other species, it is our cognitive
>> abilities and open-ended thinking that are most remarkable.
>> University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found that the
>> ability to exce at social problem solving led human brains
>> to surpass other species in size developing ecological
>> dominance 1.5 to 2 million years ago.

> The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just wishful
> thinking.

Before jumping to this conclusion I would want to read the
paper. I don't know Flinn or Geary but I meat Carol Ward at a
meeting at Duke

> Social competition is seen in all animals.

Only if you very losely define social competition.

> The only sound approach is looking at other mammals with
> brain enlargement. The most social primates don't have
> the largest brains (OWMs have rel.smaller brains than
> NWMs & apes).

New world monkeys are VERY social for the most part.
Additionally, Ward et. al. are not talking about sociality in
general but social competition and suggest that absolute,
rather than relative brain size is more important as an
indicater of interspecies intelligence.

Relative brain size in primates is a complicated issue. For
example, while your statement is true it does not take into
account the fact that NWM data is skewed the fact that body
size in most OWM and APES is much greater than NWM. Other
factors, such as diet (Frugivours have larger brains than
Folivores, for example, complicate things as well.

>Brain enlargement in mammals is seen esp. in odontocetes,
>seals, otters... Note not all parts of the human brain are
>enhanced, eg, we have a much smaller olfactory bulb than
>chimps & a +-smaller portion in the pre- & postcentral areas
>for the lower extremities. These are important clues often
>"forgotten" by traditional PAs.

Yes, they are important clues, so let's look at them. Brain
size in odontocetes is characterized by a dramatic enlargement
of the auditory associative cortex. You notice it right away
when you seen a dolphin's brain. It's very broad across the
middle AND has a large olfactory cortex than what we find in
most modern primates. In non-primates it is the primary and
secondary visual cortex and visual associative cortices that
account for the enlargement. In OWM and in apes, the frontal
and pre-frontal areas are also enlarged.

So, while odontocetes and primates have larger relative brain
size the differences in those areas showing the greatest
expansion is very different, so I don't think a parallel
evolution arguement is going to work.

I could suggest a way to test the whole social competition
idea, by the way. Study the amygdala and amygdala-cortical
interactions. The amygdala in particular is responsible for
tagging visual information with social cues. For example, when
you see a persons face, how you respond to that face (whether
your polite, abrupt, defferential or hostile, etc) is
controlled by the amygdala.

I had this idea when I was in graduate school but left before
I had a chance to do anything with it. I recall discussing it
with Carol Ward over some beers so I would be interested to
see if she uses any amygdala data in her paper.

By the way, Ward at least is not a PA. She is a
bio-psychologist.

[Marc Verha]

<pan762@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:usvgl0tre5c9tsqa5gj0ep07oe5uuodjdq@4ax.com...

http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_science-
s/report-32083.html

> >> Why did human ancestors evolve such large brains? While
> >> humans have
unusual array of characteristics that distinguish us from
other species, it is our cognitive abilities and open-ended
thinking that are most remarkable. University of
Missouri-Columbia researchers found that the ability to exce
at social problem solving led human brains to surpass other
species in size developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2
million years ago.

> > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence, just wishful
> > thinking.

> Before jumping to this conclusion I would want to read the
> paper. I don't
know Flinn or Geary but I meat Carol Ward at a meeting at
Duke;

OK.

> > Social competition is seen in all animals.

> Only if you very losely define social competition.

Ah?

> > The only sound approach is looking at other mammals
> > with brain
enlargement. The most social primates don't have the largest
brains (OWMs have rel.smaller brains than NWMs & apes).

> New world monkeys are VERY social for the most part.

So are OWMs & lemurs: they generally live in the largest
groups. Orangs live in smaller groups than gorillas, but have
higher EQ. Etc.

> Additionally, Ward et. al. are not talking about sociality
> in general but
social competition and suggest that absolute, rather than
relative brain size is more important as an indicater of
interspecies intelligence. Relative brain size in primates is
a complicated issue. For example, while your statement is true
it does not take into account the fact that NWM data is skewed
the fact that body size in most OWM and APES is much greater
than NWM. Other factors, such as diet (Frugivours have larger
brains than Folivores, for example, complicate things as well.

Well, these are better documented & AFAIK more important than
social factors. Generally, omnivores have rel.larger brains
than herbivores,
arboreals>ground-dwelling, aquatic>terrestrial, etc.

> >Brain enlargement in mammals is seen esp. in
> >odontocetes, seals,
otters... Note not all parts of the human brain are enhanced,
eg, we have a much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a
+-smaller portion in the pre- & postcentral areas for the
lower extremities. These are important clues often "forgotten"
by traditional PAs.

> Yes, they are important clues, so let's look at them.
> Brain size in
odontocetes is characterized by a dramatic enlargement of the
auditory associative cortex. You notice it right away when
you seen a dolphin's brain. It's very broad across the middle
AND has a large olfactory cortex than what we find in most
modern primates. In non-primates it is the primary and
secondary visual cortex and visual associative cortices that
account for the enlargement. In OWM and in apes, the frontal
and pre-frontal areas are also enlarged. So, while
odontocetes and primates have larger relative brain size the
differences in those areas showing the greatest expansion is
very different, so I don't think a parallel evolution
arguement is going to work.

Yes, as I said, we have to analyse the brain into its
components, eg, olfaction is weak or non-existent in
Cetacea, etc.

> I could suggest a way to test the whole social competition
> idea, by the
way. Study the amygdala and amygdala-cortical interactions.
The amygdala in particular is responsible for tagging visual
information with social cues. For example, when you see a
persons face, how you respond to that face (whether your
polite, abrupt, defferential or hostile, etc) is controlled by
the amygdala.

Controlled? involved, you mean? The functions of the amygdala
are still debated.

> I had this idea when I was in graduate school but left
> before I had a
chance to do anything with it. I recall discussing it with
Carol Ward over some beers so I would be interested to see if
she uses any amygdala data in her paper. By the way, Ward at
least is not a PA. She is a bio-psychologist.

Yes, but she mostly studies primates, no?

--Marc

[Rich Travs]

Marc Verhaegen is too stupid to realise that we're only
talking about primates:
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> is too stupid to
> realise that what is true for all mammals is also true for
> primates in message
> news:415763C1.D6BB0F5C@hotMOVEmail.com...
>
> > Marc Verhaegen once again confuses doggies and primates:
> > >
> > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> denies
> > > primates are animals
> in
> > > message news:41329A46.76F7F68@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees
> > > > > doggies in message
> > > > > news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_scien-
> ces/report-32083.html
> > > > > Why did human ancestors evolve such large brains?
> > > > > While humans have
> an
> > > > > unusual array of characteristics that distinguish us
> > > > > from other
> species,
> > > it
> > > > > is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking
> > > > > that are most
> > > remarkable.
> > > > > University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found
> > > > > that the ability
> to
> > > excel
> > > > > at social problem solving led human brains to
> > > > > surpass other species
> in
> > > size,
> > > > > developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million
> > > > > years ago.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence,
> > > > > > > > > just wishful
> thinking.
> > > > > Social competition is seen in all animals. The only
> > > > > sound approach
> is
> > > > > looking at other mammals with brain enlargement. The
> > > > > most social
> > > primates
> > > > > don't have the largest brains (OWMs have rel.smaller
> > > > > brains than
> NWMs &
> > > > > apes). Brain enlargement in mammals is seen esp. in
> > > > > odontocetes,
> seals,
> > > > > otters... Note not all parts of the human brain are
> > > > > enhanced, eg, we
> > > have a
> > > > > much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a
> > > > > +-smaller portion in the
> > > pre- &
> > > > > postcentral areas for the lower extremities. These
> > > > > are important
> clues
> > > often
> > > > > "forgotten" by traditional PAs.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > The size of the brain isn't the only factor.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.
> > > > >
> > > > > > It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters have
> > > > > > nothing to do
> with
> > > it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not interested in your opinion. facts, man.
> > > >
> > > > Seals and otters were your opinion.
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Besides humans and chimps, how many other
> > > > > > > > primates are capable
> of
> > > > > deceit?
> > > > >
> > > > > > > 1) It's not because it hasn't been investigated,
> > > > > > > that it doesn't
> > > exist.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Huh?
> > > > >
> > > > > Huh?
> > > >
> > > > What do you mean by "It's not because it hasn't been
> > > > investigated,
> that it
> > > > doesn't exist"
> > > >
> > > > > > > 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in crows
> > > > > > > & dogs.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Those aren't primates.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes. And?
> > > >
> > > > Then they're not under consideration.
> > > >
> > > > > > > 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of deceit
> > > > > > > (as you seem to
> > > > > believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for
> > > > > "why did human
> > > ancestors
> > > > > evolve such large brains?".
> > > > >
> > > > > > We're only talking about primates. Don't know why
> > > > > > you want to
> bring up
> > > > > doggies.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not following? Humans & chimps are primates. Do you
> > > > > see the word
> doggies
> > > in
> > > > > 3)??
> > > >
> > > > It's in 2)
> > > >
> > > > > > > > That certainly qualifies as social
> > > > > > > > competition.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > So? Do you believe that only spp that are
> > > > > > > capable of deceit have
> > > social
> > > > > competition??
> > > > >
> > > > > > We're only talking about primates.
> > > > >
> > > > > Huh?
> > > >
> > > > The discussion is about primates.

[Marc Verha]

"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> wrote in message
news:415A1431.404A176@hotMOVEmail.com...
> Marc Verhaegen is too stupid to realise that we're only
> talking about primates:
> >
> > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> is too stupid
> > to realise that what is true for all mammals is also true
> > for primates in message
> > news:415763C1.D6BB0F5C@hotMOVEmail.com...
> >
> > > Marc Verhaegen once again confuses doggies and primates:
> > > >
> > > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> denies
> > > > primates are
animals
> > in
> > > > message news:41329A46.76F7F68@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > > > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees
> > > > > > doggies in
message
> > > > > > news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_science-
s/report-32083.html
> > > > > > Why did human ancestors evolve such large brains?
> > > > > > While humans
have
> > an
> > > > > > unusual array of characteristics that distinguish
> > > > > > us from other
> > species,
> > > > it
> > > > > > is our cognitive abilities and open-ended thinking
> > > > > > that are most
> > > > remarkable.
> > > > > > University of Missouri-Columbia researchers found
> > > > > > that the
ability
> > to
> > > > excel
> > > > > > at social problem solving led human brains to
> > > > > > surpass other
species
> > in
> > > > size,
> > > > > > developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million
> > > > > > years ago.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence,
> > > > > > > > > > just wishful
> > thinking.
> > > > > > Social competition is seen in all animals. The
> > > > > > only sound
approach
> > is
> > > > > > looking at other mammals with brain enlargement.
> > > > > > The most social
> > > > primates
> > > > > > don't have the largest brains (OWMs have
> > > > > > rel.smaller brains than
> > NWMs &
> > > > > > apes). Brain enlargement in mammals is seen esp.
> > > > > > in odontocetes,
> > seals,
> > > > > > otters... Note not all parts of the human brain
> > > > > > are enhanced,
eg, we
> > > > have a
> > > > > > much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a
> > > > > > +-smaller portion in
the
> > > > pre- &
> > > > > > postcentral areas for the lower extremities. These
> > > > > > are important
> > clues
> > > > often
> > > > > > "forgotten" by traditional PAs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The size of the brain isn't the only factor.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters
> > > > > > > have nothing to
do
> > with
> > > > it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not interested in your opinion. facts, man.
> > > > >
> > > > > Seals and otters were your opinion.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Besides humans and chimps, how many other
> > > > > > > > > primates are
capable
> > of
> > > > > > deceit?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 1) It's not because it hasn't been
> > > > > > > > investigated, that it
doesn't
> > > > exist.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Huh?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Huh?
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you mean by "It's not because it hasn't been
> > > > > investigated,
> > that it
> > > > > doesn't exist"
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in
> > > > > > > > crows & dogs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Those aren't primates.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes. And?
> > > > >
> > > > > Then they're not under consideration.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of
> > > > > > > > deceit (as you
seem to
> > > > > > believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for
> > > > > > "why did human
> > > > ancestors
> > > > > > evolve such large brains?".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We're only talking about primates. Don't know
> > > > > > > why you want to
> > bring up
> > > > > > doggies.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not following? Humans & chimps are primates. Do
> > > > > > you see the word
> > doggies
> > > > in
> > > > > > 3)??
> > > > >
> > > > > It's in 2)
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > That certainly qualifies as social
> > > > > > > > > competition.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So? Do you believe that only spp that are
> > > > > > > > capable of deceit
have
> > > > social
> > > > > > competition??
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We're only talking about primates.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Huh?
> > > > >
> > > > > The discussion is about primates.

[Rich Travs]

Marc Verhaegen wrote nothing:
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> wrote in message
> news:415A1431.404A176@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > Marc Verhaegen is too stupid to realise that we're only
> > talking about primates:
> > >
> > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> is too stupid
> > > to realise that what is true for all mammals is also
> > > true for primates in message
> > > news:415763C1.D6BB0F5C@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > >
> > > > Marc Verhaegen once again confuses doggies and
> > > > primates:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> denies
> > > > > primates are
> animals
> > > in
> > > > > message news:41329A46.76F7F68@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > > > > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> sees
> > > > > > > doggies in
> message
> > > > > > > news:41297689.197BA98E@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/social_scien-
> ces/report-32083.html
> > > > > > > Why did human ancestors evolve such large
> > > > > > > brains? While humans
> have
> > > an
> > > > > > > unusual array of characteristics that
> > > > > > > distinguish us from other
> > > species,
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > is our cognitive abilities and open-ended
> > > > > > > thinking that are most
> > > > > remarkable.
> > > > > > > University of Missouri-Columbia researchers
> > > > > > > found that the
> ability
> > > to
> > > > > excel
> > > > > > > at social problem solving led human brains to
> > > > > > > surpass other
> species
> > > in
> > > > > size,
> > > > > > > developing ecological dominance 1.5 to 2 million
> > > > > > > years ago.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The usual just-so thinking: no evidence,
> > > > > > > > > > > just wishful
> > > thinking.
> > > > > > > Social competition is seen in all animals. The
> > > > > > > only sound
> approach
> > > is
> > > > > > > looking at other mammals with brain enlargement.
> > > > > > > The most social
> > > > > primates
> > > > > > > don't have the largest brains (OWMs have
> > > > > > > rel.smaller brains than
> > > NWMs &
> > > > > > > apes). Brain enlargement in mammals is seen esp.
> > > > > > > in odontocetes,
> > > seals,
> > > > > > > otters... Note not all parts of the human brain
> > > > > > > are enhanced,
> eg, we
> > > > > have a
> > > > > > > much smaller olfactory bulb than chimps & a
> > > > > > > +-smaller portion in
> the
> > > > > pre- &
> > > > > > > postcentral areas for the lower extremities.
> > > > > > > These are important
> > > clues
> > > > > often
> > > > > > > "forgotten" by traditional PAs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The size of the brain isn't the only
> > > > > > > > > > factor.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > That's what I'm saying. Please re-read.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's *the* major factor. And seals and otters
> > > > > > > > have nothing to
> do
> > > with
> > > > > it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm not interested in your opinion. facts, man.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Seals and otters were your opinion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Besides humans and chimps, how many other
> > > > > > > > > > primates are
> capable
> > > of
> > > > > > > deceit?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 1) It's not because it hasn't been
> > > > > > > > > investigated, that it
> doesn't
> > > > > exist.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Huh?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Huh?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you mean by "It's not because it hasn't
> > > > > > been investigated,
> > > that it
> > > > > > doesn't exist"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2) Deceit is seen outside Primates, eg, in
> > > > > > > > > crows & dogs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Those aren't primates.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes. And?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Then they're not under consideration.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 3) If only humans & chimps are capable of
> > > > > > > > > deceit (as you
> seem to
> > > > > > > believe??) this doesn't offer an explanation for
> > > > > > > "why did human
> > > > > ancestors
> > > > > > > evolve such large brains?".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We're only talking about primates. Don't know
> > > > > > > > why you want to
> > > bring up
> > > > > > > doggies.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Not following? Humans & chimps are primates. Do
> > > > > > > you see the word
> > > doggies
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > 3)??
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It's in 2)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > That certainly qualifies as social
> > > > > > > > > > competition.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So? Do you believe that only spp that are
> > > > > > > > > capable of deceit
> have
> > > > > social
> > > > > > > competition??
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We're only talking about primates.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Huh?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The discussion is about primates.