80
submitted 1 month ago by solo@piefed.social to c/til@lemmy.ca
top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 24 points 1 month ago

god damn austerity, we can't have shit these days, even our brains have to meet efficiency quotas and "rationalization".

[-] nehal3m@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 month ago

Eventually rationalization will become impossible and we’ll get our big brains back. And then it’s austerity again. Ad infinitum.

[-] Cricket@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago

Shrinkflation!

[-] ThomasWilliams@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

1-How do we eat ?

2-Why do we eat?

3-Where are we going for lunch ?

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 3 points 1 month ago

It's coincidental with the human adoption of farming. We changed the food source people have, and that impacted brain and body development. We absolutely see this modern day with malnutrition.

[-] solo@piefed.social 7 points 1 month ago

It’s coincidental with the human adoption of farming.

So far it looks like no hypothesis holds water. For example this one about farming is talking about a timeframe of 10.000 years. The shrinkage started 100.000. So there is a 90.000 years gap, that is left unexplained

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 1 month ago

via https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2021.742639

brain size has remained steady in H. sapiens until a rapid and dramatic change point only 3,000 years ago

and if we estimate farming was 10,000 years ago, we can't rule out one influenced the other.

[-] solo@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago

Yes, DeSilva published the 2021 paper you linked. In 2022 he got criticism from Villmoare and Grabowski (see: Did the transition to complex societies in the Holocene drive a reduction in brain size? A reassessment of the DeSilva et al. (2021) hypothesis). Then in 2023 DeSilva revised his argument in (link above, in the description), extending the date back, still not giving anwers about the shrinkage observed since 100.000 years ago.

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 1 month ago

Then in 2023 DeSilva revised his argument in (link above, in the description), extending the date back, still not giving anwers about the shrinkage observed since 100.000 years ago.

yeah, from the last 3,000 to within the last 10,000 years, with the sharp decline ~5,000 years ago... which does line up with widespread adoption of agriculture still.

[-] solo@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago

Of course you can choose to believe what you want.

The point I was trying to make is that there is no scientific consensus on the topic about how global the decline was, when it began and why it happened - as well as if it is related to the formation of complex societies, farming, language, dietary changes, temperature, or body size.

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 4 points 1 month ago

there is no scientific consensus on the topic

Agreed. That is why we are here speculating.

when it began and why it happened

This is what makes it a super interesting topic!

[-] Canconda@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

I bet it has to do with the development of spoken language. That had to have freed up some brainpower that was previously tasked with processing body language, smell, context, etc.

this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2026
80 points (98.8% liked)

Today I Learned (TIL)

9283 readers
205 users here now

You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?

/c/til is a community for any true knowledge that you would like to share, regardless of topic or of source.

Share your knowledge and experience!

Rules

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS