Why do humans equate physical size with power (physical and social)?

1. Why do we think that bigger things are more powerful?
   
   There are so many examples of smaller things being more powerful, and better, in terms of capacity: nutrient density, energy output, vulnerability to harm. Mobile phones, tomatoes, courgettes versus marrows – in biology, longer things often break much more easily, so why do we value this trait in humans? Is it because we reflect what we see in technology, and the things we build have not developed enough to shirk size as an indicator of capacity?
   
   Larger items of furniture – despite being heavier, often harder to fit into modern, smaller homes – are valued.

(Is it only that I am raising these questions because as numbers of humans grow, space is at a premium, and therefore it has become unfashionable to have larger things (as reflected in interior design trends)).

2. Why do we think that taller humans are better, socially?

So what’s this hang up with the size of humans, and particularly masculine ones?

Maybe we haven’t picked up that as there are more of us, smaller is much better to live through. We’ll need less food, smaller furniture, a comparatively smaller space to feel as though we have enough space.

Is it a remnant of the biological discourse writ large, that hangs around owing to some kind of developmental lag time? A product of the scientific hegemony that we’ve not quite shaken off.

… Are we seeing ourselves mirrored in the things some of us make? Using those things as a template to understand ourselves?

We have, seemingly, always gone to things bigger than us to go and feel small – the sea, the mountains, the stars. This suggests that maybe we like feeling smaller, but that’s another topic entirely.