3 ms·
The only thing evolution by natural selection tends towards is survival of genes (by definition). In order to assume evolution was open-endedly optimizing for g
by gnode 8y ago
The only thing evolution by natural selection tends towards is survival of genes (by definition). In order to assume evolution was open-endedly optimizing for greater intelligence, one would first have to make a strong argument that such greater intelligence would result in greater genetic success.
I think many people view humans and intelligence as something evolution has always been working towards, following a gradient like a river meandering to the sea. The reality is that such intelligence satisfied a niche adaptational advantage.
- hvidgaard 8y agoIt's not a far fetched idea. At least up to a certain point, higher intelligence means a higher chance of survival and thus better chance of passing on the genes.
- gnode 8y agoThat's why I said open-endedly optimizing. Obviously some amount of intelligence is beneficial to humans' survival, procreation and protection of offspring, but only to a point. If evolution tended towards ever greater intelligence, you'd expect to see the most intelligent individuals having on average a greater number of offspring. Instead, studies generally show a negative correlation between intelligence and fertility. This would instead suggest that evolutionary pressure on intelligence was not open-ended, but in equilibrium.