Dasein
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2011 02:58 pm
@yul505ab,
It's obvious by Hex's response he is missing what you are saying. You only have 2 choices in the matter. 1) You can take the time to explain to him (in small bites) but if you do, your willingness to take on the project excludes the possibility of expressing frustration because your frustration will get in the way of satisfactorily completing the project or 2) click on the "Ignore User" button on his profile page.
yul505ab
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2011 03:28 pm
@HexHammer,
HH wrote: "What you basicly mean with your message is that "nature will overcome and adapt", but the way you put it is wrong, misleading and poorly argumented."

Please read this first: Google: " wikipedia intelligent design". So this idea is not that silly, it is not scientific though. Remember the thread: "Define Intelligence". The aim of my the message is to bring about discussion on the issue that intelligence exist elsewhere than in brains. I don't know where you got this idea" Nature will overcome and adapt", there is nothing to prove or disprove this, its out of our scope, not my idea.
yul505ab
 
  0  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2011 03:29 pm
@Dasein,
Dasein wrote: "It's obvious by Hex's response he is missing what you are saying. You only have 2 choices in the matter. 1) You can take the time to explain to him (in small bites) but if you do, your willingness to take on the project excludes the possibility of expressing frustration because your frustration will get in the way of satisfactorily completing the project or 2) click on the "Ignore User" button on his profile page."

Thanks!
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Feb, 2011 03:54 pm
@yul505ab,
If I understand your "Intelligent Design" from this Wiki site, it's about neo-creationism, I put it along side "Spontanious Genesis", but thanks for your input.
0 Replies
 
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 May, 2011 04:34 am
@yul505ab,
yul505ab wrote:

HH wrote: "What you basicly mean with your message is that "nature will overcome and adapt", but the way you put it is wrong, misleading and poorly argumented."

Please read this first: Google: " wikipedia intelligent design". So this idea is not that silly, it is not scientific though. Remember the thread: "Define Intelligence". The aim of my the message is to bring about discussion on the issue that intelligence exist elsewhere than in brains. I don't know where you got this idea" Nature will overcome and adapt", there is nothing to prove or disprove this, its out of our scope, not my idea.
Darwinistic theory has time and time again proved that evolution will in the long run make it's creatures overcomes problem and adapt to it's enviroment.

Look at how fish will adap to it's enviroment, either they grow large or short depending on enviroment. How te beak of bird has various shape and sizes depending on food source.

Intelligent Design was utterly debunked and proved as religion in disguise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District
0 Replies
 
room109
 
  0  
Reply Fri 12 Sep, 2014 04:28 am
@The Pentacle Queen,
1 factor of the intellect is

Pattern recognition and the exploitation of such patterns
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2014 04:33 pm
@room109,
I like your answer. Pattern recognition does seem to be a good description of intelligence.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Sep, 2014 03:09 pm
@Cyracuz,
"Pattern recognition" includes perception of relationships?
room109
 
  0  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 02:31 am
@JLNobody,
Subject: perception of relationships..

Relationships imply plurality to me. Or in a stricter sense, dual or more objects or subjects that exist with in the sphere of causes and conditions

Do you mean social relationships?

intstead a relationship between two objects or a subject and a object

or are you talking of morals?
room109
 
  0  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 02:33 am
@Cyracuz,
very well
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 08:11 am
I guess. We certainly follow patterns in our mapping of all relationships we perceive.

But now I am wondering where the 'intelligence' comes in. Is it in the pattern, or in the recognition of the pattern? I tend to think of intelligence as depth or richness of perception.
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 09:22 am
@Cyracuz,
Yes, your word "depth" might need a little exploration. Many animals could be said to recognize pattern. I suggest that degrees of intelligence involve the ability to restructure pattern. It may be that human language plays a significant part in that... a factor suggested perhaps by Chomsky's idea of competing "deep structures" to explain the ambiguity of (surface) sentences such as:
"Visiting relatives can be boring".

JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 09:33 am
@room109,
By "relationships" I refer mainly to "connections." I also see that what I mean by "inntelligence" is only loosely synonymous with "wisdom." The concept of "depth" is more characteristic of the latter and "complexity" of the former.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 12:33 pm
@JLNobody,
I know these are mere semantical manipulations but let me add "acuity" to my notion of intelligence and "breadth" to my notion of wisdom. Perhaps they will stimulate further discussion and distinctions.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 01:54 pm
@fresco,
Quote:
Yes, your word "depth" might need a little exploration.


Say a cat and a human looks at a newspaper. There is presumably more depth to human perception, and though the senses of both creatures are exposed to the same information, it is perceived in much greater detail by the human. Presumably. For all we know, cats may have some awareness we are oblivious to. Wink

I agree that many animals could be said to recognize pattern. I also think some are able to restructure pattern too, though perhaps not to the extent human language allows. Lions making an ambush on their prey, for instance, or crows dropping pebbles in water to reach a treat. They perceive relations and how to manipulate them to their advantage.

One Eyed Mind
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 03:28 pm
Intelligence is the evolution of ignorance for us, as light is the evolution of darkness in the Universe.
JLNobody
 
  0  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 06:15 pm
@One Eyed Mind,
I can buy that. Just as glass with a small amount of water has the "evolutionary potential" of containing more water, while a glass completely full has no evolutionary potential in that sense.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 06:18 pm
@Cyracuz,
Indeed, especially my cats.
0 Replies
 
One Eyed Mind
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 08:18 pm
@JLNobody,
JL, this applies to the "We know nothing." adage. When we think we know, we have no room to know more; when we know we don't know as much as we think, we can know more than what we think we know.

You seem to be catching onto my words. You have potential, friend.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2014 09:53 pm
@One Eyed Mind,
evolutionary potential? Wink
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Define Intelligence
  3. » Page 17
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/18/2024 at 02:26:31