|
Author
|
Topic: Why Are Humans So Intelligent
|
nobody
Member
Member # 145
|
posted 29. November 2002 12:38
Warren states:
quote:
1. Animal intelligence, I understand, is roughly proportional to brain size.
2. Brain size might explain why humans are twice as intelligent as apes, but the actual magnitude of the difference , as measured in terms of manifestations of creative intelligence is far, far greater.
1. I don't know how accurate that is. According to that idea, whales would be the most intelligent. That is not the case.
2. I agree that the magnitude of difference in intelligence is far, far greater. Merely doubling the size of a brain does not account for the difference. I believe there is a qualitative difference, not just a quantitative difference, between human brains and ape brains that accounts for our obvious differences.
More later. I'm out of time.
IP: Logged
|
|
warren_bergerson
Member
Member # 262
|
posted 30. November 2002 15:38
Nobody,
The evidence relating to human creative intelligence would suggest that
1. Human creative intelligence involves something in addition to ‘central nervous system intelligence’.
The fact that whales have larger brains than humans, but do not have our level of creative intelligence supports the ‘something more than brain processing’. Nervous system intelligence is to a large extent ‘function specific’ rather than general. There will therefore be between species in how intelligence is used. However, there is no evidence that there are any qualitative features or functional specialization which by themselves account for either the large differences in creative intelligence or the ongoing evolution of creative intelligence.
Human creative intelligence is, it seems obvious, associated with human brain function. The human nervous system in effect contains features which make human creative intelligence possible. Features such as language ability make creative intelligence possible but do not by themselves account for the differences.
2. The evolution of human creative intelligence is not logically consistent with Darwinian and genetic theories of evolutionary change.
One of the common complaints against Darwinian evolution is that major evolutionary changes can not readily observed and analyzed. In human creative intelligence, we appear to see a rather spectacular example of evolutionary change occurring ‘up close and personal’. However, because the evolution of human creative intelligence is not compatible with the currently popular theory, we go out of our way to deny it.
IP: Logged
|
|
Daniel Edington
Member
Member # 421
|
posted 01. December 2002 09:17
quote:
According to that idea, whales would be the most intelligent. That is not the case.
Try telling that to a whale! Anyway, on what basis have we determined that whales are less intelligent than humans? If you are basing your conclusion about the “creative intelligence” of whales on the fact that the species has yet to produce jet aircraft (or any other technological device for that matter,) bear in mind that the species also does not have hands with opposable thumbs, and thus irregardless of what their intelligence level is, building tools is beyond their capabilities.
There is ample evidence to suggest whale intelligence, however to what extent is highly debatable. By what criteria do you judge the intelligence of a species if tool building is not physically possible? It rules out art, technology, writing, or pretty much an physical manifestation of intelligence.
For that matter, can you accurately measure the intelligence difference between humans and apes based on technology level alone? By these same criteria are tribes of humans with primitive technology less intelligent than humans in developed nations?
Something to think about...
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic