Is the size of one’s melon significantly related to how much brain power they have? Have great minds of the past had large skulls wrapped around them?
Head size probably isn’t even relevant, but I want to ask.
I don’t think there is any good correlation. A famous French intellectual (Anatole-France, IIRC) was said to have an exceptionally small head, for example. On the other hand, I wear a size 7 7/8 hat, so maybe…
There’s a general trend of how intelligent a species is, measured by the encephalization quotient (brain size to body mass measurement, but one of the terms isn’t linear, IIRC) But within a species, the correlation isn’t very apparent.
As I recall, Stephen Jay Gould’s The Mismeasure of Man is a good read that includes this topic.
I used to work with a guy who had a 7 7/8 size head. Let’s just say he wasn’t extremely intelligent.
Hey, big containers can still hold small things.
Isn’t there a malady for babies called “water head” whereby they’re abnormally large? It’s not good.
Hydroencephaly (water on the brain). But I think this results in a a large head, not a large brain. It’s not good.
To the OP, there has been no proof that brain size in humans corrolates to intelligence. Most likely it’s brain organization, or synaptic connections that makes certain people geniuses. In fact, it’s our higher amount of the synaptic connections that makes us a lot “smarter” than other animals. That allows us to integrate knowledge and not just store it.
I recall a correlation between the “foldedness” of the brain and intelligence. Sorry to say I can’t remember details or the source, but it seemed reasonable.
I believe I’ve read about the slope of the forehead (or lack there-of to be specific) being a sign of evolutionary standing. Generally, the more sloped the forehead, the closer to our primate cousins… Not that it means anything about intelligence, but if we’re evolving towards a more intelligent species, it might have some bearing. Size of the actual brain or cranial cavity has no bearing on intelligence tho.
Einstein’s brain was perfectly average sized. Several tests to examine the synaptic relays, composition, and other physical distinctions of his grey matter returned no conclusive evidence as to what made him a genius. He just was.
That bears on the development of specific areas of the brain, which have some correlation with things like speech. Some fossils show impressions from the brain, as well as fossilized brain casts, and these can demonstrate this kind of development.
Brains tend to use up a lot of resources, so in that light, species with bigger ones had better be more intelligent or they aren’t going to survivie.
But I agree - on the level of the individual, brain size has no correlation with intelligence, AFAIK.
I learned in human biology that there’s a general size needed for a brain capable of rational thought, but once you’ve got that size, bigger doesn’t mean better. Witness whales and elephants.
But houscats simply don’t have enough room, period.
It usually results in a big head full of fluid that squashes the brain and/or stunts its growth. The extra fluid doesn’t allow for any extra brain size at best.
Except that they think we’re smarter than primitive man (australopithecus for example) because our brains are much larger. Smaller brains aren’t as developed. Missing parts that we have?