A related topic that I think worthy of investigation is what I call the “measure sense”. I find chalk and cheese differences between people in judgement of size and distance. Whether a plank will span a scaffold, or piece of furniture fit through a doorway, or picking a nut (at the first try) to match a bolt from a tray of assorted nuts.
But I am not clear what these comparisons have to do with evolution. If the skill is advantageous, how did those with lesser skill evolve? Are there non-mechanical skills (eg conceptual thinking, interpersonal or organizational ability, or whatever) that can be found in some sort of negative correlation with the mechanical aptitudes?
Also, it isn’t clear from this (admittedly brief) synopsis whether innate skill enabled some students to do well at math, or whether coaching (or just diligence) at math developed a talent for recognizing patterns in terms of the numbers that make them up.
BobSep 8th, 2008 - 10:14:37
A related topic that I think worthy of investigation is what I call the “measure sense”. I find chalk and cheese differences between people in judgement of size and distance. Whether a plank will span a scaffold, or piece of furniture fit through a doorway, or picking a nut (at the first try) to match a bolt from a tray of assorted nuts.
But I am not clear what these comparisons have to do with evolution. If the skill is advantageous, how did those with lesser skill evolve? Are there non-mechanical skills (eg conceptual thinking, interpersonal or organizational ability, or whatever) that can be found in some sort of negative correlation with the mechanical aptitudes?
Also, it isn’t clear from this (admittedly brief) synopsis whether innate skill enabled some students to do well at math, or whether coaching (or just diligence) at math developed a talent for recognizing patterns in terms of the numbers that make them up.
Report this comment