Humans Are Not Smarter Than Other Forms Of Life, Just Different

in #philosophy7 years ago


source

If you were an alien visiting this planet would you be able to distinguish between higher and lower intelligence animals? If so, what would the credentials entail? Will it be reproduction and maintenance of DNA? How about adaptability? Perhaps elaborate structures?

Whatever constituents one chooses, eventually the comparison would have to come down to the very physiology of a species. What makes a human, human? What makes a cat, cat? Could we possibly draw objective comparisons by creating phenomenal parallels such as to brain structure, synaptic activity of gray matter?

Humans like to take pride on themselves for being superior to other forms of life. Since we cannot understand the opinions from the opposition, let us simply assume that all other species are as justified to feel the same. There is a massive gap in communications and understanding and that should raise the first red flag when it comes to such comparisons. A cat for example would pity the human for having to build a house in order to survive. Why not just be able to sleep outside? A bear would pity us for having to create clothes. Why not grow fur? Here is another advantage they could have: They don't need to pity or compare themselves to us like we do.

In engineering and in programming one thing matters the most; efficiency. If one has to write 50 lines of code for a specific function while another fellow uses only 2 lines then the former will be inefficient and possibly laggy. In engineering, if one has to build a very complicated machine for a very simple task then it will possibly be more prone to errors and structural failure. Nature works much the same. It cares only for efficiency, not elaborate complexity. Whenever evolution falls short, it simply builds on top of what already exists. There are no do-overs. Imagine for example if you wanted to build a skyscraper but you had to use the foundations of a barn. This is pretty much what happened to our 'elaborate' and 'complicated' brains.

We like to take pride on ourselves for having such an intricate brain. The fact that we fail to understand it, makes us even more proud of it. The sour truth though is that our brain consists of the same architectural structure repeated over and over again on a very primitive foundation that all of mammals share — the reptilian cortex.

All those intestine-like folds is just a simple structural repetition for doing pretty much the same task but in different ways. It had to develop in such way because, compare to the rest of the animals, we suck at pretty much everything else. A cat will just walk and copulate with another cat. We on the other hand, create a ritual that lasts months, involving flowers, dinners, messages, phones calls and at the end the whole thing gets so complicated that we might not even accomplish the task. Your cat might indeed pity you.

Most insects communicate in mid-air over miles away. No need for cellphones. Ants are considered to be the best architects, with humans copying their structures. Moreover, they don't even have to communicate in any way to accomplish all that and yet they are extremely efficiently and organized in doing so. We constantly strive to find solutions for our lives by copying the ways of other species. No other animal even cares to do that because we are fundamentally inefficient.


Every single one of our senses is poor in comparison with most mammals. Our only weapon to defend against nature is a brain that forms complicated patterns and builds weird tools. Ever noticed how most humans cannot survive outside of what we call "civilization"? A rat, a cat or a bird in or outside our cities will learn to adopt in a gist.

Building elaborate structures such as a space station is not necessarily an intelligent thing to do. Space is pretty much an endless wasteland with not much going on anyways. Feeling the need to look up in the sky and just wonder about our place in the universe can inspire awe but also breed existential dread. In fact, historically, it overcame us in such an extent that we fought each other to death in order to decide which super deity created all these and for what reason.

When witnessing all these intricate relationships across species, one owes to be humble in order to understand what really goes behind the scenes. Humans often fail to do so because even when it comes to our own intelligence we like to compare each other based on tests.

After a century or so, we have found out that intelligence amongst humans is entirely subjective and problematic. For example, one can practice I.Q tests and raise his score. Environment plays a huge role in this. One can be smart in an office environment but rather stupid in a forest. I.Q tests are structured in a way to measure everyone based on generic constituents. I wonder though: Would it be objective to compare yourself to a leopard in regards to who can run the fastest?


source

If we cannot objectively compare ourselves to each other due to the difference in humans' environments and physiology, how could we possibly draw cross-species conclusions? Perhaps if we toned down a bit in regards to our place in the cosmos we would have come to understand that we are not all that different from each other.

Assuming a rock suddenly woke up and became conscious, it would have made the same realizations as we do. "Look at me how strong and sturdy I am", it would say. "Nothing can break me. Humans use me to hold their structures together. Animals lick me to get my essence in their bodies so they could survive. You can break me down to small pieces and I do not loose my composition. I am found everywhere. Without me, not a single planet would have existed. All these were made for me". What an arrogant piece of shit for a rock huh?

Our teleological perception about the universe jails our mind into believing that we are the most important thing that ever happened to the cosmos. We like to believe that because any other scenario makes the world way too scary. From the moment we have perceived our own demise, we felt the need to create stories that filled our existential void. In doing so, we have alienated ourselves from the rest of the world in a rather arrogant way. Most of the ills we do to each other is because we are afraid.


Our bodies consist of microbes, each deciding when we should eat, shit and reproduce. Every single thought we have is predetermined from elaborate functions that these organisms perform. Every simple infection is nothing but the battle ground of these species. Each one of us is a universe for hundreds of thousands forms of life. Much like earth, we maintain an ecosystem with things living inside and on top of us.

Earth is stranded in the middle of nowhere, looking at all the other planets. So much going on upon it, so desolate the other planets. It feels proud for being able to harbor something special as life itself. We, as humans, are not that different from this pale blue dot that is stranded in the middle of nowhere. We share similarities with all life on earth but we have to acknowledge that we are not better, or worse that the rest. Just different.









Sort:  

Not sure if I can agree with this since humans do have better problem solving skills than other animals. We won't see monkeys programming a blockchain. But indeed we are by far not better than other animals. Maybe we are much worse considering our ruthlessness, greed and destructive nature. We did evolve in a congnitive perspective maybe but our instincts are still the same as many thousand years ago.

Humans have more problem creating skills than animals

Not sure if I can agree with this since humans do have better problem solving skills than other animals.

Ask an average voter why they vote and you will take that back...

But indeed we are by far not better than other animals. Maybe we are much worse considering our ruthlessness, greed and destructive nature.

nah, cats are assholes too. they torture their pray

Animals have souls and are very smart. They are problem solvers as experimented through various challenges to various species including insects like bees. I just posted about the Cuttlefish.

The Cuttlefish change colors like a DMT/Ayahuasca neon adventure and the texture of the skin changes to the environment of their choosing. The skin membrane is like a brain 😱. If they lay on top of a rock they literally become like the rock if they choose to 😮.

Do you know how much computing it takes to do that? 🤓 image

Well it is a different type of computing. Not necessarily very complex, just different from what we are used to.

In reality I don't know what complexity of it is, but I imagine that it has to be very complex to do those things.

Well again, just a different way of going about computation. Not binary and exact.

Feedback loops and simple checkpoints can control the organic and analog oscillations. Not quire the precision of a GPU but they don't need double precision floating point calculations in animals. Different paradigms.

Yes, I agree they are smart and have awareness/souls/consciousness. That's one of the main reasons why I went vegan 😊

What is the difference with plants? They live the same life like us. Even more efficient.

I agree, they do and they are.

Me too...The main reason I went vegan 100% 😁

I'm Vegan too :)

I love you guys

Im Vegan too, following allyall!

Thanks! One love 💗

I "Identify" as vegan.

Cuttlefish are amazing. Their ability to mimic other creatures is insane.

if i could RESTEEM a Comment… this would be the one !!! YARRR !!!

i think that it requires intelligence to recognize intelligence... true intelligence of current generations could be measured in how WE prepare the next coming generations capability to interact with man and nature.

i tried to explain this to another comment. the question is simple. who is smart and more efficient. the one that has the tech build in or the one trying to copy and then apply it?

To me the animal kingdom is built more for efficiency and humanity is more for pleasure of experience.

Why then most of humanity suffer and live in misery? Not much pleasure and good experience for most of us.

Because of greed and lack of love (Which encompass compassion, harmony, consideration, ect) Specifically from leaders. Humanity is imbalanced from consciousness to physically.

That's because humanity's great ability allow us the luxury of worrying about more than immediate survival needs. At least, today. We produce a surplus that sustains us, like squirrels. (Well, they don't produce it...)

The question is simple. Who is the apex predator, and who is not? How it got there is irrelevant. Whoever is on top is axiomatically superior. Whether they are superior on all measures, or only some, is irrelevant.

In that case, the fungi kingdom. They can control all animals through the brain and effect the entire body. They have the biggest network of comunication on Earth. They can wipe Humanity out.

Look up how mold effects humans.

Fungi is not eligible for apex predator status, by definition. It's not a predator.

True but neither is humanity. Human nature is not predatory. Humans are not build to be predators.

On what do you base this assertion?

Humans are not born with natural tools to hunt. A humans does not have the strength, speed, teeth, claws to catch and eat animals nor to fight animals. Humans can barely catch a mouse. Put human in the jungles or the plains without made weapons and see what happens. Human doesn't even have intestines to digest meat properly.

If ants and bees decided to stop pollinating plants, humans would go extinct in a few months. If Cyanobacteria decided to stop making oxygen we would all be fucked

Yeah, its not a question of survival of the fittest its survival of the friendliest and most symbiotic, and the human species is very good at learning and changing. So we are really good at adapting to new symbiotic relationships in nature. The only reason we have became murderers of other species is because we had no other food source at certain points of history and have not returned to our original healthy relationship with the planet ecosystem.

Why is this relevant? Every creature can be killed by destroying the food chain.

we cannot kill them because we cannot disturb their food chain. they can because they control every single part of ours.

Do you mean should not? I think we're doing a pretty good job of killing off bees =/

Apex predators aren't necessarily smart enough to not bring about their own extinction (or avoid it), they're just the physical top dog. Our tech indisputably makes us that.

Do you mean should not? I think we're doing a pretty good job of killing off bees =/

Not really. but we are killing a lot.

Apex predators aren't necessarily smart enough to not bring about their own extinction (or avoid it), they're just the physical top dog. Our tech indisputably makes us that.

We would go extinct by way more factors much faster than they will ever do. We are already on the verge of having superbugs fuck us over for good due to anti-biotic abuse.

I think each species is smart and highly efficient in their own way. They do what they do to the best of their ability. What makes humans highly inefficient is greed. Profit over progress if you really think about it; otherwise we would be in a different reality highly evolved beyond monetary and political systems and such.

True... Also animals themselves having a soul are intelligent but all animals including humans are limited by the vehicle in possession (Body).
Example: If a dog soul were to be in human body then it would have human abilities and if a human soul is in a dog body it would be have dog abilities. The human soul in a dog body would not be able to talk because the dog body is not equipped for speech.

By the perspective of a cat, we are really inefficient. A cat grows richer fur in the winter and lighter in the summer; we have to manufacture, buy and wear clothes. A cat has sharp nails that it can choose to keep inside its palm and use only in times of need; we have to build sharp tools and carry them around. A cat can eat mice, flies, and all "dirty" animals and insects; we'd get sick and we need to prepare food in a special way to avoid it. A cat can hear better, smell better, see better in the dark. It can jump several times its height; we need lenses, mobile phones and running shoes. A cat cleans itself; we need showers with special soaps.

It's funny really if you see it from the perspective of another animal!

Cats even dominate the internet, despite not being able to use it directly. They make their owners do it on their behalf.

So basically a cat, like a spoiled brat, finds everything ready at its feet, whereas humans have to actually manufacture all of their own stuff. To put a twist to something Kyriacos said in his article (“Ever noticed how most humans cannot survive outside of what we call "civilization"? A rat, a cat or a bird in or outside our cities will learn to adopt in a gist.”): “Ever noticed how a cat cannot survive outside of what we may call its 'inherited privilege'? A man can make his own clothes, his own house, his own sharp tools, his own sound-amplifying devices, night-vision goggles, vehicles, cook the disease out of foods, etc. A cat, if you cut its nails, will have to wait for them to grow back at a snail’s pace. If you shave its fur, it will have no choice but to freeze in the cold.”

A man can make his own clothes, his own house, his own sharp tools, his own sound-amplifying devices, night-vision goggles, vehicles, cook the disease out of foods, etc.

Not all men can make all these. Only a few can make them while some others just use them. All cats though can hunt and survive.

A cat, if you cut its nails, will have to wait for them to grow back at a snail’s pace. If you shave its fur, it will have no choice but to freeze in the cold.”

If I beat the shit out of a human they would have to recover in order to make clothes.

Please keep the arguments above potato level.

The "argument" was in direct response to statements such as "Ever noticed how most humans cannot survive outside of what we call "civilization"? A rat, a cat or a bird in or outside our cities will learn to adopt in a gist." and "A cat grows richer fur in the winter and lighter in the summer; we have to manufacture, buy and wear clothes. A cat has sharp nails that it can choose to keep inside its palm and use only in times of need; we have to build sharp tools and carry them around. A cat can eat mice, flies, and all "dirty" animals and insects; we'd get sick and we need to prepare food in a special way to avoid it. A cat can hear better, smell better, see better in the dark. It can jump several times its height; we need lenses, mobile phones and running shoes. A cat cleans itself; we need showers with special soaps." And Ivanka Trump has her food served to her whereas I need to prepare all my meals myself!

I wasn't making an argument per se, I was merely reversing yours (actually mostly elemenya's) because I don't know why "civilization" has to be ranked below "inherited privilege" (as I called it) like growing fur and nails. It's not the cat doing most of the things elemenya listed, they're being done on her behalf, automatically, which is why it probably doesn't need as much consciousness as we do, it just sits back and lets nature do its work.

A cat can still live within a city and outside. A human though cannot. They need all these comforts. A cat can live outside its own yard. A human cannot.

When you and your friend are about to take an exam and you need to study, buy books, etc in order to do it while your friend instinctively is better then who is more intelligent? If you as a human has to do build all these crap around you in order to survive while a species a self-sufficient then you are less intelligent, not it.

yet again. we are different. hence why I said nobody is smarter. we are all different

Well about the 'study' example, I guess that's why we differentiate between words like 'talent' and 'intelligence'. The guy who has innate...well, talent! is just gonna fare better, just like a person might take well to learning a musical instrument, while I may need to study a lot.

In general, my personal preference would be that I would know how to do everything myself, instead of relying on nature, DNA, civilization, etc. That's how humans envisaged God in the first place: a being that is self-sufficient, knows everything, can make everything himself, etc. Being the most superior being entails being able to (consciously) do everything yourself. To even approach that, of course, we'd need substantially larger brains with much greater capacities etc. But between a cat that grows its fur unwittingly, and a person who grows fur because he made a pill that makes him hirsute, I'd say the latter is the more intelligent, because he's understood the process.

I'm aware this isn't a reply to your exact argument, I'm just expressing some thoughts that came to mind reading it.

Being the most superior being entails being able to (consciously) do everything yourself. To even approach that, of course, we'd need substantially larger brains with much greater capacities etc.

again you are comparing human deeds with another species. what a cat might call intelligence does not relate to your own term because we both have different physiologies.

But between a cat that grows its fur unwittingly, and a person who grows fur because he made a pill that makes him hirsute, I'd say the latter is the more intelligent, because he's understood the process.

Understanding the process is irrelevant. Evolution has pushed you to understand aka develop that capacity because you were inefficient to begin with. its an extra step anyway you want to see it. the harsh truth of life is survival....not understanding, not building, not being smart . if you have to measure intelligence you have to draw your parallels from this harsh cold fact.

Not everything needs to be related to survival, otherwise it's just "might makes right". I don't care how many stones a religious zealot will throw at me, it doesn't make him right just because he's overpowered me, and I would claim the same goes for "intelligence" (whatever it might turn out to be): I don't think the most intelligent creature is the one that's better at surviving. The creature that's better at surviving is just that: better at surviving. Some words are indeed bs, but there's no need to collapse the entire dictionary into this single 's' word.

To make it even plainer: you stripped the human of his civilization (something like stripping an ant of its colony), and said he won't survive in let's-call-them 'cat conditions'. So what I did was strip the cat of its fur, and said it won't be able to manufacture a coat (which is very simple: kill an animal and wear its coat; even a cat should be able to do that).

The fur comes attached, much like your assumptions of consciousness and intelligence. Civilization does not come attached. in fact, if everything was to vanish tomorrow it would take centuries to reach again the current level.

wrong parallelism.

There's lots we dont understand about other animals and plants and trees. They keep it simple we make it complicated.

indeed

Loading...

Interesting read , it is an opinion that is totally incorrect however. Humans are the apex animal on this planet by a substantial measure. No other animal comes close in its ability to think, reason, imagine , create and destroy.

It is a novel idea to make the assumption that any other animal approaches the intellectual capacity of a human adult . That's not to say that I do not think animals cannot be intelligent, or show affection for people or other animals. However their capacity to do so is very limited, and science has shown that even the smartest animals can only come close to approximating very young children.

Thanks again for the read keep up the good work.

Interesting read , it is an opinion that is totally incorrect however. Humans are the apex animal on this planet by a substantial measure. No other animal comes close in its ability to think, reason, imagine , create and destroy.

the earth went through 5 mass extinctions. In regards to creation and destruction we come nowhere close to other species.

It is a novel idea to make the assumption that any other animal approaches the intellectual capacity of a human adult . That's not to say that I do not think animals cannot be intelligent, or show affection for people or other animals.

Intelligence and emotions all all rooted to the same mechanism

However their capacity to do so is very limited, and science has shown that even the smartest animals can only come close to approximating very young children.

Are you sure that science has shown that? Read this article then

https://www.adelaide.edu.au/news/news67182.html

"the earth went through 5 mass extinctions. In regards to creation and destruction we come nowhere close to other species."

Animals were not responsible for any of those events. Humanity however has proven on more than one occasion that we are perfectly capable of not only forcing a species into extinction , but also of saving another species.

" Intelligence and emotions all all rooted to the same mechanism"

You offered nothing what so ever with this retort .. Where did I say other wise. I made the assertion that other animals are not the peers of humans. An Assertion which you are refuting.

"Are you sure that science has shown that? Read this article then"

Yes its pretty conclusive that's the case. The study you point to along with others support the idea that certain animal species have the capacity limited complex thought / reason and the use of tools. However there has been no study that has advanced the idea that an animal is capable of the same level of intellect and reason that a human being can possess. Just because a chimp can use a stick to retrieve ants to eat does not mean a chimp can repair your car, or program a computer.

Nor does a gorilla learning a very limited vocabulary in sign language make a gorilla as smart as a human which has a far greater capacity to learn. The vast majority of that research has shown the more intelligent animal species have an intellectual level approximate to a small child between 3 to 6 years of age. The difference being that human child will advance and progress as it ages while the smartest animal will not .

Animals were not responsible for any of those events. Humanity however has proven on more than one occasion that we are perfectly capable of not only forcing a species into extinction , but also of saving another specie

many where. in the Triassic period the plankton of the ocean kill most species

However there has been no study that has advanced the idea that an animal is capable of the same level of intellect and reason that a human being can possess.

again. false comparison. just because other animals don't need to perform our acts does mean they are stupid. also read this quote.

“For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.”

― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

if a dolphin started comparing your ability to learn swimming in respect to them, you will be pretty stupid.

The minute you started quoting Douglass Adams you lost the plot. I am huge fan of his writing and the man had a wicked sense of humor most are simply not capable of appreciating. However you clearly are either being obtuse now or are suffering from Witzelsucht .

Please by all means read all four books of the series, "So long and thanks for all the fish" is arguably the best of the four books because it provides some closure. If you have a little time read Dirk Gently too but try to refrain from using any of its passages to support an argument.

I answered your question. You just wrote 2 paragraphs consisting of advice in order to gain intellectual leverage.

no counter argument whatsoever.

No you really did not. You quoted a sci fi author noted for bringing humor to sci fi. He was not exactly Asimov or Clarke intellectually and I've read all of his works. Try staying on topic . You can quote all types of nonsense from a fiction author but it does nothing to support your argument . Seriously do you suffer from Witzelsucht ? it would explain a lot at this point in the discussion ...

He makes a very valid point no matter who he was. If someone has a quality already and someone else needs to work for that

who is better? is as simple as this

Yes its pretty conclusive that's the case. The study you point to along with others support the idea that certain animal species have the capacity limited complex thought / reason and the use of tools. However there has been no study that has advanced the idea that an animal is capable of the same level of intellect and reason that a human being can possess. Just because a chimp can use a stick to retrieve ants to eat does not mean a chimp can repair your car, or program a computer.

Nor does a gorilla learning a very limited vocabulary in sign language make a gorilla as smart as a human which has a far greater capacity to learn. The vast majority of that research has shown the more intelligent animal species have an intellectual level approximate to a small child between 3 to 6 years of age. The difference being that human child will advance and progress as it ages while the smartest animal will not .

The apex of animals on this planet because of the ability to think, reason, imagine , create and destroy.

Almost every animal out there is times and times stronger than us pound for pound.
The

Chimpanzees make monkeys of humans in computer game

The difference is that there aren't any qualifying factors that makes one APEX of shit, period. Apex of animals? Well great, that's nothing more than your opinion on what Apex means, because you just got offered evidence that ability to think, reason is questionable at best, and you didn't want to include Pound for Pound as a standard for the apex of animals.

Its kind of silly to call ourselves apex this or superior that from a anthropocentric standpoint. Its like saying; I am more succesfull than you because I achieved my goals and you didn't achieve 'my' goals but your own, which are not the goals that bring the 'succes' that seems to be evident from my perspective. These are the hard questions, does our experience differ from that of anything else. Is it similar? What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to see the color red? In all honesty in no language I could explain to you what or how I experience what I experience. I can refer to it in lucid ways by generalizing endlessly until it is void of meaning. I don't see how saying that we are superior or apex predators solve these problems, it just seems to deny them essentially.

Love the discussions btw<3

awesome answer. have been trying to say this to so many people in so many different ways but it doesn't seem to fly through their head

One thing:

In engineering and in programming one thing matters the most; efficiency. If one has to write 50 lines of code for a specific function while another fellow uses only 2 lines then the former will be inefficient and possibly laggy.

Judging an algorithm by length is not always a good idea. The most efficient algorithms are often fairly complicated in practice. Examples:

  • Bubblesort vs quicksort
  • Matrix multiplication. BLAS and LAPACK are humongous libraries more or less specializing in doing matrix multiplication efficiently.
  • Multiplication. Karatsuba multiplication is more efficient than the normal long multiplication taught in schools. The advantage is only noticeable with large inputs.

yeah, i seemed to have gone a little bit off there but I was hoping to get a simple message across

A naive and uneducated message would be more accurate.

Humans are uniquely different than other animals. Animals are very smart indeed however I think it is a different type of smart. not certain though if they have a soul. Thanks.

how certain you are having a soul?

Exactly. We have evolved to have a more advanced brain - that's the main difference.

In engineering and in programming one thing matters the most; efficiency.

Not so sure about that. Effectiveness matters most, efficiency is nice to have in some cases. In fact, for evolution, "good enough" is what counts to survive, not "best equipped" or "most efficient".

I suppose one could argue that we humans run the most universal computer in our heads, not necessarily the best for all purposes, ie. the "smartest" for all applications.

This has enabled our ancestors to adapt to many environments, and adapt many environments for us. I'm not so sure if those who inherited these adaptations, I mean the majority of current humans, could do the same quickly enough when there is a major change, but that may not be an inherent problem of the human brain.

i was actually thinking which word to use since I am not an engineer but u think efficiency and effectiveness could be seen as interchangeable terms in a given domain.

I use effectiveness for "does it do what it is supposed to do" and efficiency for "how much time / how many resources does it consume for doing what it does", but there are probably other definitions, always nice to have many to chose from 8-).

BTW I edited my comment after you replied, naughty of me, but I hadn't seen your reply yet.

no problem. I see what you mean

BTW Have you in any way responded to this reply to one of your articles? If you have, I'm going to read your responses, if not, not.

yeah..give me a second. i can't keep up lately

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.19
TRX 0.13
JST 0.030
BTC 60991.51
ETH 3361.38
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.48