What bothers me about the evolution of Man

Meeting basic needs is the minimum requirement.
Without meeting basic needs you get extinction.But our brains have allowed us to progress a lot further than simply meeting our basic needs.
Technology (created with our brains) makes us far less susceptible to the vagaries of our environment.
This has, in turn, allowed us to produce more off-spring who survive longer and produce more off-spring and survive longer and... etc.Brains aren't the only way to increase reproduction and survival, but they are the way that we are currently using.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

It's called the Theory of Evolution.
Perhaps you have heard of it - even if you have never bothered learning about it?The evolution of man has been quite thoroughly researched.Do you have some evidence to show that our minds were instantly created?
Do you think that your own mind was poofed into existence?

This is only true if you redefine 'intelligence' to exclude the intelligent animals that surround us.
You could maybe argue that mankind is the most intelligent - but it would be wrong to claim that there are no other intelligent animals.If we claim to be 10 (on a 1-10 scale of intelligence) then that is simply because someone has to be.
But that ignores all of the 9.9's, 9.8's.Intelligence is used by every living creature.
Just some animals have more than others. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

There are many many animals whose language is 'higher' that a few grunts.This leaves you with an overly simplistic idea that technology is the sole identifier of intelligence.But I doubt if you want technology to be a measurement of intelligence - unless you want to claim that these people are less intelligent...

True.
But my main objection is to the claim that ("real") intelligence has not developed elsewhere in nature.(Sorry to skip so much of your post, but I am mainly in agreement with what you wrote.)

What you can't see in that photo is that they are actually queuing for a cocktail bar...

But their technology is so far behind ours (in the developed world) that their intelligence must be equally as far behind ours.
So, by your definition, they are considerably less intelligent than us in the west.Many Amazonian tribes use tools that are little more than pointed sticks, so do you think that their intelligence is on a par with chimpanzees?
Shall we put them in a zoo? You need to abandon technology as a measure of intelligence. Lack of technology does not indicate lack of intelligence.
Plato lacked most of our technology, but I am sure you would not think him any less intelligent than us. Well, since that is not what I was arguing for, I see no reason to.
Your claim that "Real" intelligence has not occurred elsewhere in nature is false. Changing it to "Close to human intelligence" does not make it true.Anywho...
Us being the most intelligent species only makes other animals less intelligent. But they are not non-intelligent.
Real intelligence has evolved throughout nature.

Please focus.
You were replying to 2 different people in one post. What is 'our kind of conscious intelligence'?
How does it differ to other animals?
(Surely you don't simply mean magnitude?!) But that is what you were claiming. Retraction accepted.
Real intelligence has evolved in many many animals. Which has no bearing on the evolution of intelligence in other animals.
We are at the top of the intelligence ladder.
That does not mean that there is no other creature on ladder with us.Real intelligence has evolved in nature countless times.

Neanderthals and gorillas.
But I'll leave this aspect of the discussion to Catholic Scientist, as he is doing a good job of showing how meaningless your argument is. This would mean that since Aristotle never used an iPad he is therefore less intelligent than you.
I think not.You really need to address the rebuttals I make rather than just repeating yourself.
Currently you think that African tribes, Plato and Aristotle are all less intelligent than you - which is clearly not true.
Shall we add Newton to that list? I am certain he never even had a TV. I never said it wasn't.
I have never claimed that we don't have a different level of intelligence.
In fact, if you had bothered to read my last post, you would see that I agree that we are the most intelligent. Are you saying that animals have no consciousness? Really?
The ability to experience or to feel? I know animals can do that.
I expect that you can't actually identify any aspect of consciousness that humans have but animals lack. Then I wonder why you are still disagreeing when I say that "Real intelligence has evolved in nature countless times".
Maybe when you say......it makes people think that since you think that human intelligence is different in both degree and kind that it is unique to humans.
I can only judge your opinions by what you write - and you have written that you think that intelligence is unique to humans (i.e. has not evolved in other animals).Real intelligence has evolved in nature countless times.

So you are not enjoying having your mistakes pointed out.
Perhaps you could try not being wrong. Well - normal people would describe him as intelligent.
You, on the other hand, would gauge his intelligence by his technology and claim that you are more intelligent because you have an iPad.

quote:

---

Technology is an excellent measure of intelligence - obviously.

---

quote:

---

I'm writing this with an iPad from the other side of the world to a machine I've never seen, by radio. So yes, technology is one method of establishing the intelligence of a species...

---

According to you: chimpanzees are not intelligent even if they use pointy sticks, but Amazonian tribesmen are intelligent even though they use pointy sticks.
You seem to be very confused about what you think. You are asking me to provide an example that passes a 'What would aliens think?' test.
Maybe you could first explain how you are performing this test and which aliens are you using?
Please be specific.Every single mammal has real intelligence.
The only person having trouble recognising it is you.
Real intelligence has evolved many many times.

Hi Moon-Ra It is definitely not how I measure intelligence. You are preaching to the choir.
But perhaps you could try to convince Tangle... This seems to be as flawed as the 'technology' argument.
In fact, the way we store and share information is mainly by using technology.
But for most of mankind's existence we have taught our young in exactly the same way that other animals do.
We may currently have very clever ways to store information, but those methods are very recent compared to the existence of humans. An interesting point.
It could almost seem to be connected to Straggler and Rahvin's discussion in 'Time and Beginning' here.

Good point.
Dirty grunting humans hiding in caves does not give the impression of intelligence that Tangle demands from other animals.
But since Tangle's test is simply a version of the Common Sense fallacy, there is no actual need to address it.

...Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

OMG!
Parents teaching children; seniors teaching juniors; society teaching society!Why has no-one mentioned this before??!!!