Comments and reply

A series of comments on Mourant (See preceding abstract.), followed by a reply by the author. Krantz disputes Mourant's choice of a brain size as indicator of thought capacity, citing the fact that brains exceeding 750 cc are not the only ones capable of symbolic thought. Steklis and Raleigh contend that behavioral differences cannot be predicted on the basis of brain size alone. Wescott concurs in principle with the possibility of Mourant's hypothesis. Mourant replies that his basic intention in writing the original article was to draw attention to a cross-correlation between anthropology and psychology, with the evolution of man paralleling the development of the individual child.