Is truth relative?

[Zap]

Originally Posted by John Scott

You know what would be a great exercise? Detailing the differences between human and subhuman intelligence.

Excellent idea. Throw in extrahuman intelligence and we've suddenly got goals.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Zap

Excellent idea. Throw in extrahuman intelligence and we've suddenly got goals.

Oh, political correctness rears its silly head.

You better tell Mortimer J Adler and many other leading thinkers that you object to the term "subhuman intelligence" when referring to intelligence that does not reach the level of humans.

I'm sure he wouldn't mind rewriting his book, and all the other texts out there that use the term, if he wasn't dead.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by StrongInTheArm

You might be surprised at how close primates and humans are, or are not

Chimps beat people in memory task: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...iour.evolution

I don't doubt that chimps can remember. Most animals can remember. Their lives depend on memory. You'll note that memory is not creative intelligence.

Now, are apes close to humans in intelligence? Hmm. One might argue, and some have, that dogs are closer to humans in intelligence. Dogs can read human facial expressions and can manipulate humans by mimicking their emotions. Pretty smart if you ask me.

But, apes, yes, we are close to them. The ape scientists are said to be on the brink of discovering nuclear fission. Ape literature is nearing an apex that makes Homer's Iliad look like nonsense. The legal system devised by the apes to protect their interests is second to none. They truly are an inspiration to us humans.

[Zap]

Originally Posted by John Scott

Oh, political correctness rears its silly head.

Not at all.
I just thought if we're going to discuss those who are not as intelligent, a good add-on might be to discuss how much more intelligent we could be, assuming that's even possible.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Zap

Not at all.
I just thought if we're going to discuss those who are not as intelligent, a good add-on might be to discuss how much more intelligent we could be, assuming that's even possible.

You mean, actually apply the human intelligence that we have at our disposal? I think that would be the epitome of politically incorrect. Robert Swope got canned for that.

[StrongInTheArm]

Originally Posted by John Scott

I don't doubt that chimps can remember. Most animals can remember. Their lives depend on memory. You'll note that memory is not creative intelligence.

Now, are apes close to humans in intelligence? Hmm. One might argue, and some have, that dogs are closer to humans in intelligence. Dogs can read human facial expressions and can manipulate humans by mimicking their emotions. Pretty smart if you ask me.

But, apes, yes, we are close to them. The ape scientists are said to be on the brink of discovering nuclear fission. Ape literature is nearing an apex that makes Homer's Iliad look like nonsense. The legal system devised by the apes to protect their interests is second to none. They truly are an inspiration to us humans.

LOL!

It goes further than just memory for both chimps and dogs:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...nimalbehaviour

Scientists have welcomed dogs into a select club of species capable of using abstract concepts. The research showed that dogs are able to mentally sort objects into categories, a talent for abstract thought that has only been shown in birds and primates before.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by StrongInTheArm

LOL!

It goes further than just memory for both chimps and dogs:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...nimalbehaviour

Scientists have welcomed dogs into a select club of species capable of using abstract concepts. The research showed that dogs are able to mentally sort objects into categories, a talent for abstract thought that has only been shown in birds and primates before.

Surely you wouldn't reduce human intelligence to "the ability to use abstract images"?

[StrongInTheArm]

I wouldn't reduce the perception of human intelligence but I would re-evaluate how we think of primates.

Bonobos for instance have been taught to communicate using signs and pictures. Obviously at a basic level. I doubt they could contribute to this thread. But ask them what they wanted to eat and they could communicate an answer. In fact I saw one who was helping a researcher cook. She was talking to it and giving it instructions and it was doing the right things. It could be seen as a party trick but whatever it was, that animal knew what was being asked of it.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by StrongInTheArm

I wouldn't reduce the perception of human intelligence but I would re-evaluate how we think of primates.

Bonobos for instance have been taught to communicate using signs and pictures. Obviously at a basic level. I doubt they could contribute to this thread. But ask them what they wanted to eat and they could communicate an answer. In fact I saw one who was helping a researcher cook. She was talking to it and giving it instructions and it was doing the right things. It could be seen as a party trick but whatever it was, that animal knew what was being asked of it.

Oh course, the humanist trend is to downplay the huge gap in intellectual capacity between humans and animals. But it all seems to fall when you look at the sheer grandness of our achievements. Yes, animals can be taught to do party tricks. But no, they do not have anywhere near the cognitive ability of humans, they cannot reason, and they are not humans in disguise. Any more than a banana is.

[ewomack]

Animals must have a pretty good amount of intelligence: they've managed to avoid variable rate mortgages and they don't have their own ice capades. Surely that speaks well of them?

[Zap]

When's the last time a banana came to you when you called it?

True (there's that word again) enough, there's a big gap between animals and human beings but there's an equally large gap between animals and fruit.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Zap

When's the last time a banana came to you when you called it?

True (there's that word again) enough, there's a big gap between animals and human beings but there's an equally large gap between animals and fruit.

I trained a banana to do just that. I call "banana" and the banana has been trained to sit very still while I approach it.

[Atom]

If apes were smarter than us but couldn't prove that to us, they wouldn't be smarter than us.

[StrongInTheArm]

How about a kind of Turing Test.

Stick a chimpanzee in front of a computer and ask him to communicate anonymously via the internet with, oh I don't know, let's say, Zap on this forum. Then do the same with a human being with a very low intelligence, perhaps no schooling or education, perhaps a person that we would not recognise as having a detectable intelligence.

The question; can Zap tell the difference if he has no indication which he/she is communicating with.

I wonder what this would tell us about the gap in intelligence? Perhaps nothing!

John: I don't know about bananas, but most animals can reason, depending on how you are defining the term 'reason'. Give a chimp the choice of a stick and banana, most will choose the banana me thinks.

[Atom]

The day an ape proves to me that it is smarter than me, without my help, is the day that I will believe that it is smarter than me.