In its sense these ideas are about the fact that persons with domain intelligence were struck by persons with more developed social intelligence. Let us provide the data from S. Saveliev about the change of the volume of the skull of our ancestors (11, page 209).

As we can see about 70 thousand years ago the skull volume of our ancestors started decreasing. Let us provide the statements of the author on this matter.

“In sufficiently large groups of sapiens constant hard artificial selection for the "sociality" was taking place: reproductive benefits were received by the best adapted individuals to the existence of a group of individuals. The most socialized individuals had the reduced aggressiveness, the developed communicative and food tolerance to neighbors”.

In such conditions the primary surplus arising in brain volume was not popular, and the optimal combination of qualities was achieved in much smaller amounts. Probably a regular solution of super tasks necessary for basic survive has been replaced by the group training. In fact, there was an external method of storage and transmission of biologically important information, which has reduced the role of the individual abilities. This gradually reduced the average volume of the brain to 1330 cubic cm. Socialization and development of primary cultural traditions was not the stimulus, but the reason for the prosperity of individuals with a minimum of individual differences. The support of the existing forms of relationship and behavioral skills in a group provides benefits for individuals with mediocre abilities. Extreme individualization of behavior in the family, or the mixed flock group reduces the likelihood of reproductive success at a low dominance. In connection with this the level of socialization of group is inversely proportional to the realization of the abilities of the individuals. These phenomena are observed in modern societies. Individualized forms of behavior are not usually accepted by members of the society… These observations suggest that 50 thousand years ago socialization, development of cultural and hunting traditions contributed into the artificial selection of the less capable but more socialized individuals "[11, page 290-291].

If you take the labour tools of that period, arrange them in time, it can be clearly seen that a decrease in brain size and their improvement seems to be frozen. But what had been achieved was handed down from generation to generation for thousands of years. Public consciousness through the socialization remembered what ancestors made. The social motivators are able to maintain and transfer knowledge and experience from generation to generation. And we must agree with S. Saveliev: “The situation looks quite anecdotal. Very capable people with big brains create a complex and effective system of training and retention of knowledge for the entire population. Having taught the less capable relatives the lessons of survivals, they doom themselves to destruction. Humanity faces such situation now.” [11, page 292].

He continues: "In large but relatively closed populations, even with the obvious benefits, non-standard people are usually sacrificed in order to preserve the stability of relations. In this regard, the probability of survival and reproductive success especially in these individuals is always very low. But more socially adapted representatives of community have the opportunity to reproductive success that is much higher. There is no secret that social adaptation is often accompanied by significant intellectual limitations. These differences between individuals have become the hidden driving forces for the artificial selection". [11, page 294].

And at present time the relations between the domain experts and social motivators are the hidden force of the social and economic development. This force is hidden and powerful due to the misunderstanding of its sense, misunderstanding of its dependence from the definite system of determinants that have the property to accumulate and reveal its effect cumulatively.

Through the skulls of our ancestors, with the help of the comparison of their brain on different levels of evolution, through the comparison of the brain of monkey and human and through other methods the scientists revealed the parts of the brain that are responsible for socialization. These are the frontal areas of the brain. Along with the socialization these parts are responsible for the real-imaginative forecasting that was necessary for hunting.

Thus, there is the opinion of paleontologists that the relations between the domain experts and social motivators for thousands of years defined the main tendencies of development of our intellect, brain, our evolution. Those ancestors of people who walked not the way of the submission to circumstances of socialization, but developed their individual abilities just were extinct. The Neanderthals gave their place to Cro-Magnons.

There are facts such as the increasing of the frontal areas of the brain and decrease of the brain itself in the process of human evolution. But the mass of the female brain is always smaller than the male. These differences are not constant and depend on ethnic characteristics (see: Takahashi, Suzuki, 1961.). In addition, a large part of the evolution of the human brain was held in the period of matriarchy and it does not deny the thoughts expressed by S. Saveliev, but simply clarifies them.

Yes, women played the decisive role in the formation of a tribe and in the socialization process. They caught the slightest reaction of the child since its birth, thereby keeping him alive. Their biological function – the birth and procreation – gave them the undeniable advantages in understanding, in feeling of a human being and in the management of them not through force but through empathy, through the feeling of another person, through empathy with him or her. Woman gets used to the child, and she has the more developed ability to do this than a man. Therefore it is possible to suppose with a high degree of certainty that social motivators of that time were with the characteristics of empathic individuals.

Reducing of the weight of the brain took place also for the reason that human changed in two directions – in the direction of increasing of the frontal lobe (this is a purely male part of the brain, it is largely responsible for the success of the hunt), and towards the development of empathy, feelings of other people, for example in the direction of copying the features of the female brain. In their evolution our ancestors took the best both from men and from women. Of course, in different nations the ratio of male and female in the brain was formed in different ways. Each ethnic group has its own weight ratio of male and female brain. But in all ethnic groups the dependence can be traced: the front part of the brain is the male, and the rear is the female.