Would we be smart without meat?

[DC]

In a debate with friends about meat, the clame came up that, would Humans not have started eating meat, we would not have evolved such a good working brain. we would not be that inteligent as we are today.
the claim was based on the premise that nothing delivered that much energy and proteins in compact form back then.

what do you think about the claim?


ps: as meat or not meat is Philosophy, i posted it in this section.

[icerat]

My original instinct was this was really a question for the science section, not philosophy, but given how so much of anthroplogy and archaeology is based on guess work and "Just so" stories - philosophy may be the right place.

There's really two separate questions -

(1) did eating meat cause (or contribute directly) to the evolution of large brains
(2) did eating meat allow for the evolution of large brains

My opinion is that (1) may have some truth with regard to fish, but not necessarily other meats and (2) may have allowed for it given the metabolic needs of a large brain, but so did the art of cooking, which releases many nutrients in plant based diets.

[Belz...]

Maybe but our meals would be less tasty.

[Beth]

My guess would be that being predators leads to more intelligence. In general, it seems that predatory animals are more intelligent than herbivores.

[Lukraak_Sisser]

At a wild guess I'd think it helped at least
We lack the natural weapons of most carnivores so in order to get larger prey animals humanity's ancestors needed to develop both extensive tool use and coordination, which probably formed the basis for language.

But I'm no expert in this at all, just guessing

[Manopolus]

Pack mentality is not the same as herd mentality. Primates and wolves are social animals in a completely different way than sheep and cows are. I have no studies for you... only my direct observation.

Also, hunting creates a complex common goal which does not exist in the herbivore world. This also suggests a need for communication of some type.

[RenaissanceBiker]

Must ... resist ... herbivore ... joke.

[aggle-rithm]

(1) did eating meat cause (or contribute directly) to the evolution of large brains
(2) did eating meat allow for the evolution of large brains



How about this:

The availability of meat created an environmental niche for large-brained primates.

[aggle-rithm]

My opinion is that (1) may have some truth with regard to fish, but not necessarily other meats and (2) may have allowed for it given the metabolic needs of a large brain, but so did the art of cooking, which releases many nutrients in plant based diets.

I've heard that cooking also led to further advances in communication, beyond the realm of pragmatic communication used in hunting and into the domain of storytelling, small talk, etc. Homonids who were able to do this around the campfire instead of bashing each other's heads in had an evolutionary advantage.

[rjh01]

To successfully kill large animals people needed
1. Complex language
2. The ability to predict what everyone else will do. This includes the potential meat.
3. Social pecking order. This means who gives orders to whom.
4. A group of 50+ people in a tribe.
5. The ability to make tools.

This required a high level of intelligence.

However I thought most primates ate meat?

edit. Also eating meat saves a lot of time. Herbivores spend a lot of time eating.

[aggle-rithm]

To successfully kill large animals people needed
1. Complex language
2. The ability to predict what everyone else will do. This includes the potential meat.
3. Social pecking order. This means who gives orders to whom.
4. A group of 50+ people in a tribe.
5. The ability to make tools.

This required a high level of intelligence.

However I thought most primates ate meat?

I think most are herbivores who eat meat when they can but live mostly on plants, which move much slower.

A group of 50 individuals would require a LOT of nearby prey to provide a primarily meaty diet.

[RenaissanceBiker]

A group of 50 individuals would require a LOT of nearby prey to provide a primarily meaty diet.

Yep, so once your group gets too big for the prey in your area, you need to migrate. Yet another opportunity for intelligence to excell.

[Cainkane1]

In a debate with friends about meat, the clame came up that, would Humans not have started eating meat, we would not have evolved such a good working brain. we would not be that inteligent as we are today.
the claim was based on the premise that nothing delivered that much energy and proteins in compact form back then.

what do you think about the claim?


ps: as meat or not meat is Philosophy, i posted it in this section.
If the developing humans had ate fish instead of red meat wed all be geniuses.

[McHrozni]

However I thought most primates ate meat?

They do, but mostly to supplement their diet.

Take Chimpanzee, for example:

They also eat many different types of insects, however termites are the most nutritionally important. Termites are collected either by hand or with tools which are modified by the chimp and specifically used for this purpose. Many zoos, including the Honolulu Zoo, have built termite mounds to simulate this natural behavior of feeding. See our termite mound enrichment. Females spend twice as much time eating insects as males do. Birds are occasionally eaten. Mammals such as monkeys, pigs and antelope are also eaten, particularly by males, but along with termites only account for about 5% of their diet.

http://www.honoluluzoo.org/chimpanzee.htm

To put it in perspective, 5% of a diet for an adult male human would be slightly more than one large glass of a soft drink (assuming 2500 kcal/day diet, that's 125 kcal). Taking Coca-Cola for example, it has 97 calories for 8 fl.oz (~250 ml), so 3 dl gets you over that.

Another telling part, from a paragraph just above this one:
They will spend many hours a day eating about 20 different species of plants (...)

It would seem the answer to the OP is a clear "nope, we wouldn't".

McHrozni

[aggle-rithm]

If the developing humans had ate fish instead of red meat wed all be geniuses.

Especially tuna. It makes you smart because it's got all those dolphins in there.

[Darth Rotor]

Must ... resist ... herbivore ... joke.
Just don't resist the herbivore, rubbed in garlic and sage, lightly coated in olive oil ... slow smoked over a coal and mesquite fire, ... and served with a nice vegan accompaniment, red whine.

Mmmmmmm

Reply to OP: concentrated protein is meat, and IIRC there is a correlation (not an expert here) related to protein in diet and brain development. Article in SCIAM some years ago, I think, is where I first saw this.

DR

[Bikewer]

Chimps hunt; they hunt and kill small game (being quite fond of monkeys, apparently) in a cooperative and coordinated manner.
It's a fair assumption that our own ancestors behaved similarly prior to any capability for attacking larger game with weapons.
As well, proto-humans would have been quite capable of scavenging.

[Marduk]

In a debate with friends about meat, the clame came up that, would Humans not have started eating meat, we would not have evolved such a good working brain. we would not be that inteligent as we are today.
the claim was based on the premise that nothing delivered that much energy and proteins in compact form back then.

what do you think about the claim?


ps: as meat or not meat is Philosophy, i posted it in this section.

we always had a good working brain, you can look at homo skulls dating back millions of years to see that, what youre talking about is the adaption of a tree/forest dwelling mostly herbivorous ape like ancestor into an upright meat eating ancestor. Thats about 8 million years ago. We learned to walk upright to enable us to survive on the plains, so its quite obvious that we must have had that brain development already, because otherwise, the hundreds of thousands of years walking around without realising we could see further standing up would have caused that ancestral line to become extinct pretty quick.

Meat may have helped the final stages of brain development, but it was already evolving way before then, this isn't a hypothetical, its a fact

Our oldest known possible ancestral species Sahelanthropus tchadensis had a brain size equivalent to that of a modern chimpanzee. This was some million years before chimpanzees split from the homo line. So they had a decent brain 7 million years ago. and this was a time when they were evolving bipedalism
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5c/SahelanthropustchadensisZICA.png/220px-SahelanthropustchadensisZICA.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahelanthropus
;)

[Fnord]

Would we be smart without meat?
.
How much intelligence does it take to stalk a blade of grass?

How much to kill and eat it?

[h.g.Whiz]

Would we be smart without meat?

Come on ya which one is it? Is it red heroin, add hominy, scarecrow, bats n witches, booty itches smelly britches needy stitches heck I can't remember them all. Does any other fellow see a fallacy ?

[DC]

thanks for the many good answers, got a lot reading to do i think :)

its a bit like the chicken and egg question.

did we hunt and eat meat because we were smart or did we get smart because we ate meat :)

[Piscivore]

If the developing humans had ate fish instead of red meat wed all be geniuses.
:cool:

[Ron_Tomkins]

Oh so just because you guys are smarter, you think that justifies the killings of cows and pigs? Oh so you think you're all a bunch of smart asses? So you think just because you're smarter than a chicken, that entitles you to go and kill it? So then you think murder and rape and pedophilia and terrorism are okay?? So you think you're smarter than Mother Nature??? ;)

[Ron_Tomkins]

thanks for the many good answers, got a lot reading to do i think :)

its a bit like the chicken and egg question.

did we hunt and eat meat because we were smart or did we get smart because we ate meat :)

I believe we needed to be smart enough to hunt an animal, but once we gained the meat diet, it enhanced even more our intelligence by becoming a higher nutrient for our brains. But I'd like some corroboration/expansion on this if possible.

[Michael Redman]

I've heard that cooking also led to further advances in communication, beyond the realm of pragmatic communication used in hunting and into the domain of storytelling, small talk, etc. Homonids who were able to do this around the campfire instead of bashing each other's heads in had an evolutionary advantage.Too bad such hominids are so rare these days.

[aggle-rithm]

Oh so just because you guys are smarter, you think that justifies the killings of cows and pigs? Oh so you think you're all a bunch of smart asses? So you think just because you're smarter than a chicken, that entitles you to go and kill it? So then you think murder and rape and pedophilia and terrorism are okay?? So you think you're smarter than Mother Nature??? ;)

For the last time, YES!

[TimCallahan]

The late Dr. Louis S. B. Leaky chased down and killed a Thomson's gazelle with his bare hands, but was unable to skin it with his teeth. He surmised from this that the first stone tools were used for skinning game. So hunting could have stimulated wider tool use, along with cooperative behavior.

Another anecdote that may have bearing on this is that Jane Goodall observed that when a dominant male chimpanzee found a less dominant male eating a choice bunch of bananas, he wouldn't hesitate to take them away from away from the less dominant chimp. However, when a less dominant male killed a small animal, the dominant male would actually beg the less dominant chimp for some of the meat. It is interesting to note that while chimp society is rigidly hierarchical, most human hunter / gatherer societies are intensely egalitarian. It is possible, therefore, that eating meat stimulated a radical change in human society. This might have helped shift selective pressure from favoring the males who were the best bullies to favoring those with greater intellect.

Of course, both of these speculations are based on anecdotal material. Thus, I offer them only as tentative hypotheses.

[Ron_Tomkins]

For the last time, YES!

Bite me :rolleyes:

[bluesjnr]

To successfully kill large animals people needed
1. Complex language
2. The ability to predict what everyone else will do. This includes the potential meat.
3. Social pecking order. This means who gives orders to whom.
4. A group of 50+ people in a tribe.
5. The ability to make tools.

I cried when I thought about the poor starving tribes of 49 people who didn't have an MDC potential tribe member.

[Bikewer]

Oh come on. We all know it was the big musical monolith and the bright idea to whack a tapir over the head with a femur...