Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42
  1. #31
    echoblaze is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810 View Post
    Descartes is ancient
    some of his ideas and methods still holds today though - "cogito ergo sum" and the Cartesian plane. a bit off-topic i suppose.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810 View Post
    In a nutshell, yup. Although we ARE the only species that adapts the environment to OUR needs, rather than adapting ourselves to the environment.
    can't that be argued as part of our higher intelligence though ? i'd group that - along with religion/philosophy - under intelligence

  2. #32
    martyr3810's Avatar
    martyr3810 is offline Banned Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    An Unmarked Grave
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    can't that be argued as part of our higher intelligence though ? i'd group that - along with religion/philosophy - under intelligence
    Monkeys use tools and other learned things taken from the environment like that... but they don't take it farther - and they're intelligent enough for the potential to be there... they just... don't - and never have. Which is why I listed it as another trait *Shrugs* Thats at least partially opinionated though.

    To make it a little more theoretical, to extend your thought... your saying intelligence means you feel the need to master nature. So an intelligent race can't live in harmony with nature? That seems to be taking it too far, which is why I put that under the heading of a trait of mankind. Mankind feels the need to master nature (one I totally agree with) but I don't underestimate the different potential directions intelligence can take.

  3. #33
    adonai is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810 View Post
    The problem is that we do not UTILIZE most of the potential of our brain. In fact the highest percentage "use" of the brain to my knowledge is with people who have photographic memeory... those people utilize 45-60% of their brain. The simple fact is that our brain is MORE than we need at this point in time, and I frankly don't see us evolving soon because we don't NEED to.

    Your not going to get evidence because it doesn't exist - and thats not even considering that Scientists aren't even sure we EVOLVED from Neanderthals. There is still anongoing debate whether they were a variation of homo sapiens or their own race homo neanderthalis. Brain size = More potential capability. If all you have to work with is stick and rocks and no knowledge being written down and little passed from parent to parent (no language ooh)... not gonna matter how fucking smart you are, you ain't making plastic in a day.
    We've already reached the point where we cannot physically evolve bigger brains very easily. Humans are pretty unique in how long we have to care for our young, that's because we're all born relatively underdeveloped to allow our freakishly huge heads to pass through our mother's pelvis.

    As for Neanderthals I'm pretty sure that it's been established that they're our genetic cousins, they're "human" in that we can mate with them and produce viable offspring, but no modern human is thought to have descended from them.

  4. #34
    echoblaze is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,601

    Default

    @martyr

    the way i think of it, mastering nature is more of a side effect of the more general need of spreading our progeny and expanding our species' dominance. our greater intelligence allowed us to find a new method - ie mastering nature - to do this.

    i totally see what you mean though - it's true that no other animals tame nature like we do.

    @adonai

    are humans really unique in that (re: caring for young) ? hm... i know a lot of large animals take a long time, mainly because they have very few offsprings, so they need to invest a lot of time in getting those few offsprings to survive.

    as for Neanderthals, same genus but different species, i believe. at some point in time, there were somewhere between 3 to 5 species of "humans", but only one survived. imagine what would've happened if another species beside us survived ! ethics, politics, religion... so much would've been drastically different.

  5. #35
    martyr3810's Avatar
    martyr3810 is offline Banned Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    An Unmarked Grave
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    as for Neanderthals, same genus but different species, i believe. at some point in time, there were somewhere between 3 to 5 species of "humans", but only one survived. imagine what would've happened if another species beside us survived ! ethics, politics, religion... so much would've been drastically different.
    Looking at early history, I kind of imagine one of us would have killed the other species off.

    We've already reached the point where we cannot physically evolve bigger brains very easily. Humans are pretty unique in how long we have to care for our young, that's because we're all born relatively underdeveloped to allow our freakishly huge heads to pass through our mother's pelvis.
    Umm lots of Animals spend a long time caring for their young... ESPECIALLY relative to their comparitive lifespans. It shouldn't surprise anyone that we spend a longtime taking care of our young, when we live so long and mature so slowly by comparison to other species. Heck, the average animal is fertile and able to raise offspring within a year of birth. Humans... well I believe the world record for youngest pregnancy is seven years of age. If you look at % of life spent caring for offspring, theres actually some animals that spend more time than Humans, and quite a few that spend close to as much time.

    As for Neanderthals I'm pretty sure that it's been established that they're our genetic cousins, they're "human" in that we can mate with them and produce viable offspring, but no modern human is thought to have descended from them.
    Theres still some debate about that actually, although I believe the majority believe as you've stated. I merely added it FYAI (For Your All's information).

  6. #36
    Saizou is offline Senior Member Always Around
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    1,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810 View Post
    The environment does indeed HELP to shape us. The CORE however, tends to be inherited. (I say tends because there are exceptions, but they are exceptions and FAR smaller in number than the norm).
    I'd say that our genetic makeup determines our potential and the core of our personalities, but the end result is up to the environment. Humanity is pretty unique because we can rise above our natural instincts and urges, though they strongly influence us.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    Brain size DOES mean more capability. Which is why rats can learn things like navigating mazes and stuff - but not more complex things. Whereas monkeys can learn more than rats and we can learn more than monkeys.
    It's obvious that a large brain is required for higher intelligence. However, I think that the point in question was whether the relationship is linear, i.e. that the bigger the brain the more intelligent you are. That on the other hand, is false. A whale has a damn big brain, but it's still quite dumb.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr
    The problem is that we do not UTILIZE most of the potential of our brain. In fact the highest percentage "use" of the brain to my knowledge is with people who have photographic memeory... those people utilize 45-60% of their brain. The simple fact is that our brain is MORE than we need at this point in time, and I frankly don't see us evolving soon because we don't NEED to.
    This is actually a common misconception. Every part of the brain does have a function.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    In a nutshell, yup. Although we ARE the only species that adapts the environment to OUR needs, rather than adapting ourselves to the environment.
    Indeed. In fact, that is probably the greatest evolutionary advantage of all.

  7. #37
    martyr3810's Avatar
    martyr3810 is offline Banned Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    An Unmarked Grave
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    This is actually a common misconception. Every part of the brain does have a function.
    I think before I totally blow you out of the water for that, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and ask, "what part of my statement are you calling a common misperception?"

    Also, as I recall, Whale's are quite smart - comparable to Dolphins in intelligence, their physiology is not exactly conducive to doing anything with it though. In fact, if I recall recent articles on it, Whale brains are found to be quite similar to Human brains. The important factor is brain mass to body mass (as a sizeable amount of your brain is there for nothing else but monitoring and controlling your body without conscious input). In this, if I recall correctly... Whales, as well as Dolphins, Monkeys and some other mammals, are quite close to Humans. You never called a Dolphin or Monkey stupid by animal standards did you?

    EDIT: OH look, I did remember correctly...

    http://news.softpedia.com/news/Whale...in-41158.shtml
    http://www.physorg.com/news83825654.html

  8. #38
    Saizou is offline Senior Member Always Around
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    1,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810 View Post
    I think before I totally blow you out of the water for that, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and ask, "what part of my statement are you calling a common misperception?"
    The idea that we don't use some parts of our brain, or more specifically, the often repeated claim that we only use about 10% of our brains.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    Also, as I recall, Whale's are quite smart - comparable to Dolphins in intelligence, their physiology is not exactly conducive to doing anything with it though. In fact, if I recall recent articles on it, Whale brains are found to be quite similar to Human brains. The important factor is brain mass to body mass (as a sizeable amount of your brain is there for nothing else but monitoring and controlling your body without conscious input).
    A mouse has a higher ratio of brain mass to body mass than a human does, so that's not a hard and fast rule either. See this for the numbers.

    My entire point is that while a large brain is necessary for higher intelligence, it doesn't mean that a larger brain directly implies higher intelligence. The important thing is brain structure after all.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    In this, if I recall correctly... Whales, as well as Dolphins, Monkeys and some other mammals, are quite close to Humans. You never called a Dolphin or Monkey stupid by animal standards did you?

    EDIT: OH look, I did remember correctly...

    http://news.softpedia.com/news/Whale...in-41158.shtml
    http://www.physorg.com/news83825654.html
    No I wouldn't, because as I said, a large brain is a prerequisite for higher intelligence. However, if there was a strictly linear causation, whales would be smarter than humans. THis is not the case, which proves my point that this causation doesn't exist.

  9. #39
    martyr3810's Avatar
    martyr3810 is offline Banned Community Builder
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    An Unmarked Grave
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Can's stand to be wrong eh Saizou?

    A mouse has a higher ratio of brain mass to body mass than a human does, so that's not a hard and fast rule either. See this for the numbers.

    My entire point is that while a large brain is necessary for higher intelligence, it doesn't mean that a larger brain directly implies higher intelligence. The important thing is brain structure after all.
    Oh look, you disqualified your own example - the mas thing doesn't even apply because A RAT DOESN'T HAVE A LARGE BRAIN. Needs both... Remember? Hmm?

    The idea that we don't use some parts of our brain, or more specifically, the often repeated claim that we only use about 10% of our brains.
    I never said we used only 10%... I just said we didn't use as much as we have the potential to use. And according to the latest studies (I just went over this in my psychology classes) we use, on average, only about 40% of the potential of our brain. So sorry.

    No I wouldn't, because as I said, a large brain is a prerequisite for higher intelligence. However, if there was a strictly linear causation, whales would be smarter than humans. THis is not the case, which proves my point that this causation doesn't exist.
    Its not a linear causation and I never said it was, its an if, and if, and if, then.

    If they have a large brain, and if their brain to mass ratio is above a certain position, AND if their physiology is developed to take advantage of it... then they would basically be on par with humans.

    Whales.
    Large Brain - Check
    Brain/Body Mass Ratio - Check
    No hands, no opposable thumbs - Check

    Then:
    Intelligence - Check
    Ability to do everything we do with that intelligence - No check.

    Think they're not intelligent? Let me give you a quick little quote on Humpback whales...

    HUMPBACK whales have a type of brain cell seen only in humans, the great apes, and other cetaceans such as dolphins, US researchers report.

    This might mean such whales are more intelligent than they have been given credit for, and suggests the basis for complex brains either evolved more than once, or has gone unused by most species.

    The finding may help explain some of the behaviour seen in whales, such as intricate communication skills, the formation of alliances, co-operation, cultural transmission and tool usage, the researchers reported in The Anatomical Record.
    Funny, with the BOLD there... sounds almost like things a society does, you know, one of those things we attribute to intelligent beings? (Although the tools part refers to us giving them tools and them learning how to use them themselves and then using them when they need to, A LA Whales in Captivity and such). Its entirely possible they ARE smarter than us.

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/...476132186.html

    Now stop irritating me, you seem like an intelligent guy, then LEARN don't just parrot your outdated thoughts.

  10. #40
    Saizou is offline Senior Member Always Around
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    1,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810 View Post
    Can's stand to be wrong eh Saizou?
    Pot calling kettle black.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    Oh look, you disqualified your own example - the mas thing doesn't even apply because A RAT DOESN'T HAVE A LARGE BRAIN. Needs both... Remember? Hmm?
    Well, if you want to quibble about details, the numbers also show that whales have a very, very low brain mass to body mass ratio, so your argument still doesn't hold. And in any case, I was arguing against the idea that a large brain mass/body mass ratio automatically means higher intelligence.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    I never said we used only 10%... I just said we didn't use as much as we have the potential to use. And according to the latest studies (I just went over this in my psychology classes) we use, on average, only about 40% of the potential of our brain. So sorry.
    No, but you say that we use only 40%, which is merely a variation of the basic argument. Snopes has a piece debunking this claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    Its not a linear causation and I never said it was, its an if, and if, and if, then.

    If they have a large brain, and if their brain to mass ratio is above a certain position, AND if their physiology is developed to take advantage of it... then they would basically be on par with humans.
    First you said that brain size does mean more capability. Then you said that the important thing is brain/body mass ratio. How am I supposed to know that you mean anything else than a linear causation?

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    Whales.
    Large Brain - Check
    Brain/Body Mass Ratio - Check
    No hands, no opposable thumbs - Check

    Then:
    Intelligence - Check
    Ability to do everything we do with that intelligence - No check.
    The brain/body mass ratio does most certainly not check. The numbers I posted earlier clearly show that the highest ratio among whales is 0.094% for the Killer Whale. That's about as high as a cow's.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    Think they're not intelligent? Let me give you a quick little quote on Humpback whales...
    By animal stadards, yes, I said as much in my last post. However, we are still far more intelligent than any whale can hope to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    Funny, with the BOLD there... sounds almost like things a society does, you know, one of those things we attribute to intelligent beings? (Although the tools part refers to us giving them tools and them learning how to use them themselves and then using them when they need to, A LA Whales in Captivity and such). Its entirely possible they ARE smarter than us.
    I highly doubt that whales are smarter, or even more intelligent, than humans. Do you have any studies that indicate that this may be the case?

    Quote Originally Posted by martyr3810
    Now stop irritating me, you seem like an intelligent guy, then LEARN don't just parrot your outdated thoughts.
    You know, maybe you should slow down a bit and actually try to understand what I'm trying to say. It makes it hard to have a civilized discussion with you when you're determind to act hostile all the time.

 

 
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
vBulletin Skin by: ForumThemes.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162