I figured someone would catch that and in that case I reckoned I’d counter by clarifying that brains were engineered by naturally selective processes because I really did want to capture that “honing” connotation and competitive underpinning of the word “engineered”. Our brains are definitely optimal or else they would not have won the no-holds-barred competition for survival of the fittest
I said “maybe”. Testosterone has been correlated to spacial and mathematical ability, as opposed to verbal or emotional intelligence, which may be an advantage to the philosopher. There are many more women poets than women philosophers since poetry deals more with feeling and articulation thereof into words, which men aren’t typically that skilled, possibly due to the testosterone.
Men and Women’s brains were “engineered” for social interaction.
Well, yes, but women’s moreso and it was because of the child rearing responsibilities.
Check out this documentary and observe how this primitive people functioned youtube.com/watch?v=hn8gk67s6YM
There is evidence to suggest that men and sometimes women hunted in teams to capture their prey.
The women didn’t go along on the hunts in that video, but the boys did. The girls set about learning what the women were doing. There may be some infrequent exceptions, but it doesn’t make any sense to share responsibilities when you could have two experts cooperating. The man can hunt because he doesn’t have to worry about coming home to more chores and the woman can make a nurturing home because the hunter only needs to focus on hunting (mainly). If both were sharing responsibilities, they would both go on hunts and then come home too exhausted to do anything else; leaving the family to suffer. Plus, who would watch after the kids? I doubt they had contraception and probably they had lots of kids which relegated the women to be caregivers. There were always kids who couldn’t be abandoned for the sake of egalitarianism.
I agree that men and women are no better than each other.
Exactly. Women have a natural tendency to be more adept at things that I generally find difficult and I am naturally proficient at some things that they typically aren’t and no specific attribute is any more important than any other. You are better at some things and I’m better at other things, but we’re more powerful if we work together at applying our talents rather than compete or share responsibilities. That’s probably why opposites attract.
Multitasking? The whole idea of this needs to be carefully considered - no conscious part of the mind is in a state of multitasking. The conscious mind whether male or female runs through an infinite(infinitesimal) set of states of multitasking each state joining to the next taking with it part of the previous state - evolving, culling blah blah blah. Deep stuff. All brains are multitasking at the physical levels - not discretely but continuously.
Yes you’re right, but women are better at multitasking tasks than men (typically); not that men can’t multitask nor that women can’t focus.
Should we even perhaps consider whether a man and a woman are true opposites beyond the penis and the vagina?
Not every man and every woman are opposites, but generally speaking they are opposites and because of that: complementary. People who are the same do not complement, but just add more need for a complement.
[i]The corpus callosum and its relation to sex has been a subject of debate in the scientific and lay communities for over a century. Initial research in the early 20th century claimed the corpus to be different in size between men and women. That research was in turn questioned, and ultimately gave way to more advanced imaging techniques that appeared to refute earlier correlations. However, advanced analytical techniques of computational neuroanatomy developed in the 1990s showed that sex differences were clear but confined to certain parts of the corpus callosum, and that they correlated with cognitive performance in certain tests.[4] One recent study using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) found that the midsagittal corpus callosum cross-sectional area is, after controlling brain size, on average, proportionately larger in females.[5]
Using diffusion tensor sequences on MRI machines, the rate at which molecules diffuse in and out of a specific area of tissue, anisotropy can be measured and used as an indirect measurement of anatomical connection strength. These sequences have found consistent sex differences in human corpus callosal morphology and microstructure.[6][7][8]
Morphometric analysis has also been used to study specific three-dimensional mathematical relationships with MRIs, and have found consistent and statistically significant differences across genders.[9][10] Specific algorithms have found significant differences between the two genders in over 70% of cases in one review.[11][/i] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_ca … dimorphism
And
A number of studies have reported that, “relative to brain size,” the midsagittal corpus callosum cross-sectional area (CCA) in females is on average larger than in males. However, others suggest that these may be spurious differences created in the CCA-to-brain-size ratio because brain size tends to be larger in males. To help resolve this controversy, we measured the CCA on all 316 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of normal subjects (18-94 years) in the OASIS (Open Access Series of Imaging Studies) cross-sectional dataset, and used multiple regression analysis to statistically control for the confounding effects of brain size and age to test the null hypothesis that the average CCA is not different between genders. An additional analysis was performed on a subset of 74 young adults (37 males and 37 females; 18-29 years) matched closely to brain size. Our null hypothesis was rejected in both analyses. In the entire sample (n= 316), controlling for brain size and age, the average CCA was significantly (P< 0.03) larger in females. The difference favoring females was more pronounced in the young adults cohort (P< 0.0005). These results provide strong additional evidence that the CCA is larger in females after correcting for the confounding effect of brain size. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22891036
Basically, women’s hemispheres are better-connected and it should be obvious for what reason.