The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
as if what might have happened to allow us to become so smart is to, you know, make extra copies of some of these sensory areas of the brain. And then when you have an extra copy, you're no longer so constrained, right? We don't really see or hear any better than monkeys do. So what's this extra tissue doing for us? possibility is that that we're using it to to generate these simulations and that that running these simulations is kind of what thought is
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
One theory that I like to think about a lot is a theory of thought and what is actually going on in our brains when we think. >> And this theory is that what goes on in our brains when we think might be that we're running simulations related to the thought using that sensory sensory motor infrastructure of the brain.