• jol@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 hours ago

    There’s good evolutionary reasons for babies to not possess a copy of the parents brains. It allows for much better adaptation to the current surroundings, and thus better survival of the species.

    • spicy pancake@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      yeah this would probably result in a D&D Beholder type species that necessarily has to hate and be revolted by others’ presence simply to keep the species from immediately dying of disease

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Is it safe to assume that fission in a complex organism would actually transfer learning?

    I’m not confident enough in my grasp of it to say either way. That being said, the geek in me that writes fiction can see the brain duplication ending up with two newborns, or two individuals with bits and pieces of the established pathways of the parent.

  • SpikesOtherDog@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 hours ago

    We use fission+fusion! We randomly divide our genome, providing the information we have accumulate over Eons, then fuse with another to combine our knowledge. Family group animals are weird because we need to perform additional learning, vs most other animals that run mostly off instinct.