> I know it seems implausible, but perhaps there can never be something significantly more intelligent than us. The human brain is easily overwhelmed by comple

> I know it seems implausible, but perhaps there can never be something significantly more intelligent than us. The human brain is easily overwhelmed by complexity. You can present a problem with sufficiently many interacting parts even to a very intelligent person and at some point they are completely stunned. Obviously it's difficult to judge this from a position in which you suffer from the same problem, but objectively this situation is similar to a problem one would present to an animal to test its intelligence. We can easily "see through" the complexity, but the animal just cannot even combine two or three interacting parts to find a solution to the problem. Although we have no real objective measurement for intelligence, this does not mean that there is no way to rank the intelligence of objects that are sufficiently far apart in terms of dealing with complexity. A human is clearly smarter than a dog. People have developed tools that allow us to deal with this complexity, but we are still severly limited in dealing with very complex problems simply because our brains haven't evolved to deal with complexity. Theoretically there is absolutely no reason to think that a computer or another organism that is capable of much more raw processing power and uses it in a way that is similar to how we process information, could not exist. I find it sort of arrogant to claim that we are the pinaccle of intelligence when we are so clearly limited in an ability that we understand to be one of the core components of intelligence.