Why do we assume we are the apex of intelligence?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Caveat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Intelligence
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of intelligence, questioning the assumptions surrounding human intelligence in relation to other species. Participants explore whether intelligence is a relative or absolute measure, and the implications of defining intelligence in various ways. The conversation touches on philosophical, psychological, and mathematical perspectives.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the basis for assuming human intelligence is superior, suggesting it may be relative to other species.
  • There is a call for a clear definition of intelligence, as it is perceived as an ambiguous concept.
  • One viewpoint suggests that intelligence can be measured through IQ scores, but acknowledges this is just one way to define it relatively.
  • Participants discuss the idea of a spectrum of intelligence, with some arguing that if such a spectrum exists, an absolute peak of intelligence must also exist.
  • A mathematical analogy is introduced, proposing a model where intelligence can be quantified, but questions arise about the limits of this model.
  • Some participants express skepticism towards overly speculative ideas, indicating a preference for grounded discussions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of intelligence, with multiple competing views presented regarding its definition, measurement, and the implications of human superiority.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity of the term "intelligence," the lack of a universally accepted definition, and the speculative nature of some arguments presented without resolution.

Caveat
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
In fact, why do we assume we are intelligent.. AT ALL?

Relativity is a troubling thing for me imho.

We are intelligent as a species in relation to other species. Species that make us look smart when we're next to them; animals, insects etc. But some people seem to think, regardless of these creatures, we tip the scales of intellect, that we're somewhat at the higher end of the spectrum. Even to the point where we've taken up the authority to dictate what can and cannot exist (wow).

Hmm.

So, are we intelligent relatively or absolutely?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It will not hurt to start by defining what you mean by intelligence, as it is not a clear concept at all.
 
Caveat said:
In fact, why do we assume we are intelligent.. AT ALL?

We are more intelligent than low-level animals. You can't train a monkey e.g writing skill within a specific duration, but you can do that to a human baby of 5 or 6.

So, are we intelligent relatively or absolutely?
Intelligence can not be defined as a simple math formula, but it can be measured via IQ score which I think is only a sample datum among others to define one's intelligence relatively.

To me there are no intelligent people (including me), only nice and kind to be friends with.
 
Borek said:
It will not hurt to start by defining what you mean by intelligence, as it is not a clear concept at all.

If I ask you if you're more intelligent than an ant, you'd obviously answer "yes". For you to answer with "yes" means you at least have some idea of what intelligence is.

Deconstructing it brings us to the same problem. Processing power (how many functions can happen simultaneously), processing speed (how fast can these processes happen), processing capability (linear, abstract functions) etc.

1.
the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.
synonyms: intellectual capacity, mental capacity, intellect, mind, brain(s), IQ, brainpower, judgment, reasoning, understanding, comprehension...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence
 
Caveat said:
In fact, why do we assume we are intelligent.. AT ALL?
Because we have the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.


We are intelligent as a species in relation to other species. Species that make us look smart when we're next to them; animals, insects etc. But some people seem to think, regardless of these creatures, we tip the scales of intellect, that we're somewhat at the higher end of the spectrum.
We are at higher end compared to them. Why make a spectrum with only one existing element?
Even to the point where we've taken up the authority to dictate what can and cannot exist (wow).
We haven't. We are trying to find out what does and does not exist which is not synonymous with dictating.
If a scale/spectrum of intelligence exists, then an absolute level of intelligence exists - a point in which intelligence reaches it's peak
If a number line exists so does that mean a number greater than all others exist? What's the maxima of y=x ? :-p
Hmm.

So, are we intelligent relatively or absolutely?
We are intelligent as we have ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.
How intelligent? More than the other species we have seen on Earth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay, let's bring in the maths because this is getting a bit subjective/opinionated.

Consider the simplicity here, where X is intelligence and +n is the amount greater than. So;

Example: X+n
Ants: X+1
Dogs: X+2
Dolphins: X+3
Humans: X+10

Now, the question is so simple: does n have a limit? Yes or no. What is it?
 
no kurzweil woo woo

The limit then becomes a n such that the entity has all knowledge possible(probably constrained by uncertainity principle) and as much skill as possible(constrained by all physical laws).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In the words of Tonto, "What you mean we?"
 
"Nature is much smarter than we are."
- M. Kaku

Vanadium 50 said:
In the words of Tonto, "What you mean we?"

Humans.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
"Nature is much smarter than we are."
- M. Kaku
'Nature' is a bit too confining , IMO Universe fits better...but I essentially agree with its essence.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
Vanadium 50 said:
In the words of Tonto, "What you mean we?"

:smile::smile::smile:
 
  • #12
Caveat said:
Humans.

So you speak for all humans, no?

We get a number of messages of the form "Why do we believe [insert nonsense here]." Often the answer is that "we" don't believe it.
 
  • #13
This thread started off with religion and derogatory comments then went further down hill with overly speculative woo. Closed.
 

Similar threads

Do you think there are things forever beyond our grasp?
  • · Replies 79 ·
3
Replies
79
Views
8K
Treatise on Why We Will Never Make Contact, just my opinion.
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Why do we project human traits on other species?
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
Undergrad Why do we assume certain values for theta and x in trigonometric substitutions?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
How do you measure time on a tide locked planet?
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
10K
What do human beings do when they communicate?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
What colors and attributes could alien flora & fauna have?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
Graduate Why Do We Assume Ultraviolet Divergences are Physical
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Gravity - Why do we Use Radius of Earth in Calculating Surface Gravity
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
Why do so many people hate science?
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
12K