Intelligence

A challenge to all…

Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Euripedes, Sophocles, Archimedes, Alexander the Great…

All argueably some of the elite thinkers of allrecorded human time. Now, speaking in terms of God-given, initially born, ‘‘natural’’ inteligence… are humans today more intelligent today than they were say, 1000 years ago? 2000 years ago? since the dawn of time?

Hint: Humans today are born with a set of tools already there. They don’t have to be born, create everything that say has already (in our time) been created, and then create more. [/b]

1000 year isn’t a particularly long period for evolution, but I’m no expert, maybe it’s possible that the human brain has got bigger and is in fact, getting bigger all the time… not sure, ask an evolutionist biologist.

does the physiological state of a larger brain suggest more naturally-born intelligence?

Ask the elephant… no, I mean no. But my point stands though: the key to anwser your question is through an evolution study.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

Robertson wrote:

Yes, we are more intelligently suited for this world. We carry with us the entire human psyche of the past generations. This is what ellicits particular biological differences within individuals. These differences are a result of the individuals ancestory, in relation to the particular environment in which they were associated. We have been evolving, but not as naturally as evolution suggest. We have now began to evolve to ourselves. Our own minds. The collective past of the human mind lives with us today. Association to anything for a particular amount of time will provide adaptation. Instead of adapting to our environment alone as it seems with most animals, we adapt to our intelligence and thinking. This obviously poses a problem. With the desensitization of many negative mind patterns, we will become more easily identified as a race with these patterns, as is already evident. It appears we have contained more intelligence, but the more intelligence we attain the more further away from our source we become. It appears that if things continue, we will become immersed in the mind and allow it to fully take over our consciousness. It appears as if human beings wont survive.

Hmmm… I like your thinking ILLATIVEMINDINDEED! You’ve written down a …hypothesis… that I have been trying to sort the “knots” out of lately. Although, I will still comment on a few of your phrases:

You answer my question–yes–by proving that we already have the tools of the past human intelligent provided before us at birth. Your last sentence about biological differences does intrigue me though… Since the tools are provided I do not think that this re/de-forms the physiological state of the generations brain. Now you’re saying "uh huh…but there goes your belief in evolution, right? Evolution is defined as the change over time, particularly to an environmental or habitual action or actions. Tools of past humans provided at birth would not evolve our brains into more intelligent beings; only this would happen if every generation had to RE-make the tools of all life and then propel past the point that would have originally already been provided at birth.

I like this part of your discussion…yet I don’t agree that we (human race) will be “identified” as a “negative mind pattern” (in general)–but instead a collection of more and more diverse oppinions, perspectivies, techniques, to life.

PM Me

Robertson wrote:

Why would the generations have to re-make the tools? Each generation would be more apt at picking them up. Take language for example. Our earliest ancestors did not use language to communicate. They used symbols and signs. We later evolved to become more language prone. Psychologist now believe language to be innate. Biologically speaking some groups of people have specific differences from others. This mostly occurs from environmental differences, but I do believe it to be psychological as well. It should be obvious that a change in physical state will change mental state as well. Or very well vice versa.

I’d say probably not, but then I dig on punctuated equilibrium.

Granted, we have access to more knowledge than previous generations, but that doesn’t make us more intelligent.

I see intelligence, as much as it can ever be seen as one thing, as problem solving skill.

I don’t see us as having any more problem solving skills than we did several thousand years ago.

In fact, I’d probably go so far as to say we’re probably pretty much the same as we were around 200,000 years ago (onset of anatomically modern homo sapiens).

Then again, One could accept punctuated equilibrium but be a lumper; in which case humans would be more or less one species since, say, Homo erectus. In which case we have about 2,000,000 of time to deal with, and i’m sure we’ve gotten much smarter in that time (983 cc average brains to around 1400 cc now)

Either way, I don’t think it has changed much at all in the last 5-10,000 years.