3 ms·

I agree with almost all of your points, especially regarding humans as a fundamentally social species, however I disagree that technology really proves our inte

I agree with almost all of your points, especially regarding humans as a fundamentally social species, however I disagree that technology really proves our intellectual superiority. When we developed writing we created a way of compounding our intelligence. Without this compounding action we wouldn’t be so much better tha other animals. Our achievements are certainly far greater, but thats because our species has developed a unique organizational structure, not because we’re so much smarter. In studies chimpanzees out perform humans on not just short-term memory but game theory![1] I also think that high functioning Autistic people, who absolutely lack the sort of social cognition you seem to think set people apart, also work against your claim. Unless you really claim autistic people aren’t conscious or don’t meaningfully contribute to society. [1] https://www.science.org/content/article/chimps-best-humans-game-theory https://www.science.org/content/article/chimps-best-humans-g...

munificent 4y ago
> I also think that high functioning Autistic people, who absolutely lack the sort of social cognition you seem to think set people apart, also work against your claim. High functioning autistic people don't absolutely lack social cognition, they just aren't as strong at it as neurotypical people. I believe this reinforces my point. We are so used to our fellow humans being incredibly good at intuitive social reasoning and theory of mind that even a relatively minor reduction in that capability is perceived as a deep flaw. When someone has a shitty sense of direction or poor spatial reasoning, we don't think of them as having a mental disorder. But weaker social functioning seems more fundamental to personhood.
- DontMindit 4y ago
fleddr 4y ago
The discussion is also very meta. Our supposed superior ability, intelligence, by chance is the only way to measure...intelligence. We're unique and awesome because no other species can say otherwise in the language that we made up...for ourselves. I'd imagine that if ants could voice their idea of success, it would be about numbers. Reproductive success. Winning from the colony next door. Not intelligence, which is neither and end goal nor an ability to apply some type of "rank" to. Intelligence is an evolutionary trait to not die. The brain is a defensive organ, some 90% of our processing power (subconscious brain) is spent on that. It's not necessarily the only or the best method of defense. Nor is it a logical outcome of evolution.

munificent 4y ago

> I also think that high functioning Autistic people, who absolutely lack the sort of social cognition you seem to think set people apart, also work against your claim. High functioning autistic people don't absolutely lack social cognition, they just aren't as strong at it as neurotypical people. I believe this reinforces my point. We are so used to our fellow humans being incredibly good at intuitive social reasoning and theory of mind that even a relatively minor reduction in that capability is perceived as a deep flaw. When someone has a shitty sense of direction or poor spatial reasoning, we don't think of them as having a mental disorder. But weaker social functioning seems more fundamental to personhood.

DontMindit 4y ago

fleddr 4y ago

The discussion is also very meta. Our supposed superior ability, intelligence, by chance is the only way to measure...intelligence. We're unique and awesome because no other species can say otherwise in the language that we made up...for ourselves. I'd imagine that if ants could voice their idea of success, it would be about numbers. Reproductive success. Winning from the colony next door. Not intelligence, which is neither and end goal nor an ability to apply some type of "rank" to. Intelligence is an evolutionary trait to not die. The brain is a defensive organ, some 90% of our processing power (subconscious brain) is spent on that. It's not necessarily the only or the best method of defense. Nor is it a logical outcome of evolution.