Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,259 Year: 5,516/9,624 Month: 541/323 Week: 38/143 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   What bothers me about the evolution of Man
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 88 of 142 (643387)
12-06-2011 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Tangle
12-06-2011 2:40 PM

I believe that the degree is uncontestable (a statement of the blindingly obvious, the degree of difference is so large that no other animal intelligence would get onto the same scale.)
Koko {a gorilla} has a tested IQ of between 70 and 95 on a human scale,
Chimpanzees make tools and use them to acquire foods and for social displays; they have sophisticated hunting strategies requiring cooperation, influence and rank; they are status conscious, manipulative and capable of deception; they can learn to use symbola and understand aspects of human language including some relational syntax, concepts of number and numerical sequence; and they are capable of spontaneous planning for a future state or event. source
Haven't you heard of a chimp being described as being as smart as an X year old human? Is that "on the same scale"?
The kind is more contentious and not being a neuroscientist, I can't easily defend it - but I have develeoped an amateur interest in it.
Many/most/all animals have something normally called a brain. The major difference in humans from any other animal, including modern apes and extinct hominids, is the massive over-development of the prefrontal cortex and the functions it performs. This part of the brain is responsible for our recently developed ability to reason and calculate - it's the functions developed in this are that are used to govern more ancient functions like morals and emotions.
Area 10 is one of the cortical areas of the frontal lobe involved in higher cognitive functions such as the undertaking of initiatives and the planning of future actions. It is known to form the frontal pole of the macaque and human brain, but its presence and organization in the great and lesser apes remain unclear. It is here documented that area 10 also forms the frontal pole of chimpanzee, bonobo, orangutan, and gibbon brains. Imaging techniques and stereological tools are used to characterize this area across species and provide preliminary estimates of its absolute and relative size.
Area 10 has similar cytoarchitectonic features in the hominoid brain, but aspects of its organization vary slightly across species, including the relative width of its cortical layers and the space available for connections. The cortex forming the frontal pole of the gorilla appears highly specialized, while area 10 in the gibbon occupies only the orbital sector of the frontal pole. Area 10 in the human brain is larger relative to the rest of the brain than it is in the apes, and its supragranular layers have more space available for connections with other higher-order association areas. This suggests that the neural substrates supporting cognitive functions associated with this part of the cortex enlarged and became specialized during hominid evolution. source
Its a difference of degree, not kind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Tangle, posted 12-06-2011 2:40 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Tangle, posted 12-07-2011 2:34 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 93 by Tangle, posted 12-07-2011 3:43 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 92 of 142 (643508)
12-07-2011 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Tangle
12-07-2011 2:34 PM

Re: Area 10
and yet your googled paper actually says the opposite
Really!? It says the opposite?
Specialisation is a difference in 'kind' imho
I can't agree with that. By nature of it being "specialized", implies that its a modification of something already there. Otherwise, it'd be something like "emergent" or "novel".
They had to assume that the area of the brain sectioned perform similar tasks in all their subjects but they actually have no idea whether that is true.
Yeah, and maybe the see with their noses and smell with their eyes
It does, however, tell us that the total neurones in Area 10 for humans is 254m, whilst the next nearest in a chimp is 64m.
Which means that chimps have this same thing but ours is bigger. If that's not a difference in degree rather than kind then I don't what is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Tangle, posted 12-07-2011 2:34 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Tangle, posted 12-08-2011 4:33 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 94 of 142 (643517)
12-07-2011 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Tangle
12-07-2011 3:43 PM

Re: Koko
koko is indeed QI.
Indeed, and "on the scale of humans". I've sufficiently shown your error.
Sadly, you felt the need to both quote mine and not provide the source, which is not the kind of behaviour I expected of you - i came here to discuss and learn not point score at all costs. However, I'm an atheist and a rationalist so I am capable of true forgiveness.
Here's the full paragraph
Message 83. Full paragraph and source provided. I shortened it because I was repeating it.
So Koko has been intensively trained since near birth and for 40 years by a very dedicated team of people and has learned around 2000 signs. She's been rewarded when she she gets it right and as a result has apparently achieved the language IQ level of a sub-normal human.
Unfortuantely, the team 'publish' most of their findings via the mass media - there are a few peer reviewed papers but I haven't seen any. I do know that there is a lot of controversy surrounding what she actually understands and what she's merely been conditioned respond to.
However, I did see a documentary on Koko a couple of years and I was very impressed; from watching it I'd say that she definately understood some things and is fairly obviously not clueless.
But really, she's not even on the same page as us. Not even close.
Translation: "yeah, you're right. But I'm gonna keep making my same false claim."
And its funny that you're nitpicking the fact that Koko was trained while failing to account for the fact that humans can't invent the technology you herald them for having without their own training.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Tangle, posted 12-07-2011 3:43 PM Tangle has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member

Message 108 of 142 (643578)
12-09-2011 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Moon-Ra
12-07-2011 6:46 PM

You guys are confusing things again.
I think they're conflating knowledge with intelligence.
It takes some intelligence to be able to have all that knowledge, but a huge discrepancy in knowledge does not mean a huge discrepancy in intelligence.
I wonder though, how much does increasing your knowledge increase your intelligence...
I see there's no one definition of intelligence, and that's the other source of disagreement here: we're talking past each other because we're not talking about the same things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Moon-Ra, posted 12-07-2011 6:46 PM Moon-Ra has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024