|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Nature's innate intelligence. Does it exist? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Ziko writes: Rocks, tides, etc are obeying to physical , chemical , electromagneting etc forces. These forces express their intelligence. Can we get an IQ score for gravity?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1532 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Hi Straggler, I agree with you. You just condensed what I have been thinking. If plants and humans are subject to the same physics, then it stands to reason at some level this phenomenon of intelligence appears. It seems tied to the complexity and development of a brain and nervous system. The ability to have sensory input of our surroundings. The playing field is level, we and other organisms just happen to have better evolved equipment perhaps.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
Can we get an IQ score for gravity? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Is it supposed to be a" clever" question?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1532 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Gravity IQ score = 9.8m/s/s
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Hi Straggler, I agree with you. You just condensed what I have been thinking. If plants and humans are subject to the same physics, then it stands to reason at some level this phenomenon of intelligence appears. It seems tied to the complexity and development of a brain and nervous system. The ability to have sensory input of our surroundings. The playing field is level, we and other organisms just happen to have better evolved equipment perhaps. If you look at the wiki page on "intelligence", you'll see it described as:
quote: None of those things require non-determinism, per se. But, they are things that humans do and plants do not. So there's more to the reasons that plants can not be considered intelligent while humans can than the simple 'they can't choose not to do X'... which does seem to preclude determinism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
For more honest questions you can see Message 28.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1532 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Hi Catholic Scientist, I look at things in a sort of "its all one stuff."
attitude. The carbon in sugars of plants is the same carbon we exhale as the same carbon in coal. Now all these things are distinct things with distinct properties but everything is composed of atoms and subject to the laws of physics and intitial conditions. The fact that a plant cant plan ahead and a human can means we are intelligent and they are not. It does not mean the laws of nature have a inherent "innate" intelligence. It means given the right conditions and enough time a thing called intelligence can eventually emerge. Intelligence may simply be a emergent property of matter. Maybe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I agree with you, I was kinda just springboarding off what you had said.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Rocks, tides, etc are obeying to physical , chemical , electromagneting etc forces. These forces express their intelligence. Can you describe something that is not intelligent?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
zi ko writes:
Then I think you have reduced the word "intelligence" to meaninglessness. So this thread really isn't about anything at all.Rocks, tides, etc are obeying to physical , chemical , electromagneting etc forces. These forces express their intelligence. Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
You seem to agree with above. Then can you say what is your difference with what i had been saying all the time?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
Not really.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
Hi Catholic Scientist, I look at things in a sort of "its all one stuff."
------------------------------------------------------------attitude. The carbon in sugars of plants is the same carbon we exhale as the same carbon in coal. Now all these things are distinct things with distinct properties but everything is composed of atoms and subject to the laws of physics and intitial conditions. The fact that a plant cant plan ahead and a human can means we are intelligent and they are not. It does not mean the laws of nature have a inherent "innate" intelligence. It means given the right conditions and enough time a thing called intelligence can eventually emerge. Intelligence may simply be a emergent property of matter. Maybe. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Straggler, I agree with you. You just condensed what I have been thinking. If plants and humans are subject to the same physics, then it stands to reason at some level this phenomenon of intelligence appears. It seems tied to the complexity and development of a brain and nervous system. The ability to have sensory input of our surroundings. The playing field is level, we and other organisms just happen to have better evolved equipment perhaps.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree with you, I was kinda just springboarding off what you had said. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SO if you agree withabove how can you disagree so intensely with me?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
Then I think you have reduced the word "intelligence" to meaninglessness. So this thread really isn't about anything at all.
Do you disagree with what 1.61802 says?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
OK. Then we seem to have established that your view of "intelligence" seems to require some form of dualism.
So you disagree wit Jar and me. 1.61802 agrees with you. I agree with 1.61802. DO we understand each other?I am not sure that this is much more evidentially justifiable than Ziko's notion that cells have intelligence. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024