Male Brains slightly larger than Female Brains [but not proportionately]

Richard Hall rhall at uvi.edu
Wed Aug 6 10:28:04 EST 1997

>Steve Barnard (steve at megafauna.com) wrote:
>: It's also recently been determined that men's brains have more neurons
>: that womens's -- something like four billion more, give or take a few.
>: So what?
>:       Steve Barnard

>WAH replies

>It means if dont know already that the average male brain would have more
>capacities to store more information than an average female because of
>the extra neurons.
richard hall comments:

This is an old argument that leads nowhere.

Comparative physiologists (10 male, 4 female on 16L:8D photoperiods) ,
psychologist (9 child, 6 adolescent, 43 deviant behavioralists, and one
experimentalist -a woman) , clinicians (83 MD, 13 DO, and 17 dentists), and
one twin study based on 300 samplings of random pairs (male:male,
female:female, female:male, male: female, male: other, female:other, and
other:other) that was conducted for the US Department of defense have all
concluded this issue is a no brainer.  If men are so smart, how come so
many of them get arrested and convicted?  If they were so smart, the
military would be 99% female.  Remember males have significantly less DNA
per cell so they are already information deprived.  There is no evidence
that males are smarter or less smart than females.

The variation in estimating numbers of neurons in the human brain is not a
critical parameter in estimating intelligence.   NOTE:  estimate is used
twice to emphasize the high degree of uncertainty in both parameters
.Every estimate of the numbers of neurons in the brain of mammals or other
large brained creatures is an estimate with many assumptions and variables
that are discounted.   Every measure of intelligence in humans is equally
susceptible to assumptions and variables.

Only a neuron depleted, moron would use such "evidence" to argue that the
male of a species is intellectually superior to the female of the species.
This is not a slam or flame, but a dimly conceived illustration that any
one who uses such evidence is probably neuron depleted and a moron....which
makes me equally neuron depleted and moronic ;-).

I agree with steve, So What?


More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net