Human Evolution: The Impact of Intelligence

[Copperhead]

Regarding consciousness it is easy to make the presumption that only humans are conscious. It may be viewed that all other organisms, even the higher animals as essentially automatons,reacting mechanically to stimuli in such terms of innate or learned patterns. In principle so then,one could design a computer program to so simulate the behaviour of any organism! Humans alone are as said to be held conscious in the sense of being aware{consciousness}of themselves in addition to being aware a stimuli that as such impinge on them. One consequence of such as so then justifies the exploitation of other life forms in such they cannot suffer because they lack consciousness. Humans assume being the most intelligent organisms upon earth. But, may it not be so that all life forms have consciousness, albeit to varying degrees from human consciousness? If you take the perspective that consciousness can be in a variate of life forms, then consciousness is worth studying as a general principle. Whereas if you assume it is unique to but humans then it becomes exclusive to them and a special problem and possibly not as important as a more general understanding of the world.

 

 

Ushie ♀

Actually, we can make a pretty good case for the theory that humans are the only conscious species on earth by employing the oldest scientific method in the book--- simple observation.

 

First of all, animal behavior is essentially determined by the basic instincts common to all species---the urge to eat, the urge to avoid damage to itself, and the urge to reproduce. Human behavior, on the other hand, while strongly influenced by these same urges, is ultimately decided by our rational minds, as our minds have become advanced enough to "override" our instinctive impulses. That is why humans do not behave like any other any other species that has ever lived on the earth; we have the ability to influence and experiment with our environment, and bend it to our will. We can concieve of and plan for tommorow. We can ponder and think about our environment, and theorise about its origins, past, present and future. We can cooperate with other members of our species like no other social animal ever has.

 

Conversely, even our closest animal relatives, the great apes, have no such qualities. They cannot plan for tommorrow. They do not have the capacity to think about the universe or their environment. If they are approached by a member of their species not belonging to their pack outside of the mating season, they usually try to kill it. They are, in a word, like simple Java computer programs; their actions are determined by a basic set of commands (eat, fight, evade predator, reproduce.) that changes very little from century to century. Whereas human knowledge and technology has seen fantastic variation from generation to generation, the great apes living today are not a whit more intelligent or advanced than the great apes that lived 500 years ago. They carry on simply performing the same basic functions nature has 'programmed' them to perform.

 

(Note: I believe, incidentally, that this is why animals tend to become extinct when their habitat is destroyed--- they are not conscious of the environmental change, and continue to perform the same behaviors which were effective for survival in the ecosystem they evolved in, which naturally tend to fail in the artificially altered environment.)

Edited May 9, 2012 by Copperhead

[Ringer]

Actually, we can make a pretty good case for the theory that humans are the only conscious species on earth by employing the oldest scientific method in the book--- simple observation.

 

First of all, animal behavior is essentially determined by the basic instincts common to all species---the urge to eat, the urge to avoid damage to itself, and the urge to reproduce. Human behavior, on the other hand, while strongly influenced by these same urges, is ultimately decided by our rational minds, as our minds have become advanced enough to "override" our instinctive impulses. That is why humans do not behave like any other any other species that has ever lived on the earth; we have the ability to influence and experiment with our environment, and bend it to our will. We can concieve of and plan for tommorow. We can ponder and think about our environment, and theorise about its origins, past, present and future. We can cooperate with other members of our species like no other social animal ever has.

 

Then please explain what this has to do with instincts.

 

[Copperhead]

Then please explain what this has to do with instincts.

 

You got me there.

[Moontanman]

Actually, we can make a pretty good case for the theory that humans are the only conscious species on earth by employing the oldest scientific method in the book--- simple observation.

 

First of all, animal behavior is essentially determined by the basic instincts common to all species---the urge to eat, the urge to avoid damage to itself, and the urge to reproduce. Human behavior, on the other hand, while strongly influenced by these same urges, is ultimately decided by our rational minds, as our minds have become advanced enough to "override" our instinctive impulses. That is why humans do not behave like any other any other species that has ever lived on the earth; we have the ability to influence and experiment with our environment, and bend it to our will. We can concieve of and plan for tommorow. We can ponder and think about our environment, and theorise about its origins, past, present and future. We can cooperate with other members of our species like no other social animal ever has.

 

Conversely, even our closest animal relatives, the great apes, have no such qualities. They cannot plan for tommorrow. They do not have the capacity to think about the universe or their environment. If they are approached by a member of their species not belonging to their pack outside of the mating season, they usually try to kill it. They are, in a word, like simple Java computer programs; their actions are determined by a basic set of commands (eat, fight, evade predator, reproduce.) that changes very little from century to century. Whereas human knowledge and technology has seen fantastic variation from generation to generation, the great apes living today are not a whit more intelligent or advanced than the great apes that lived 500 years ago. They carry on simply performing the same basic functions nature has 'programmed' them to perform.

 

(Note: I believe, incidentally, that this is why animals tend to become extinct when their habitat is destroyed--- they are not conscious of the environmental change, and continue to perform the same behaviors which were effective for survival in the ecosystem they evolved in, which naturally tend to fail in the artificially altered environment.)

 

 

I have to ask, have you ever really paid attention to the behaviors of animals? Even fish are not mindless automatons...

[Copperhead]

I have to ask, have you ever really paid attention to the behaviors of animals? Even fish are not mindless automatons...

But neither are they in possesson of what might be called a conscious mind. The statement I made earlier still holds as about 80% accurate. Can fish plan for tommorrow? No. Can a fish concieve of anything other than the watery world in which it is placed? No. Can a fish recollect past experiences? Probably not.

 

And yes, I do pay attention to the behaviors of animals. I live in a rural area and have been fortunate enough to observe the behavior of many animals.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Copperhead

[Arete]

Conversely, even our closest animal relatives, the great apes, have no such qualities. They cannot plan for tommorrow.

 

 

Great Apes Think Ahead: Conclusive Evidence Of Advanced Planning Capacities

ScienceDaily (June 18, 2008) — Apes can plan for their future needs just as we humans can – by using self-control and imagining future events. Mathias and Helena Osvath’s research, from Lunds University Cognitive Science in Sweden, is the first to provide conclusive evidence of advanced planning capacities in non-human species.

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080618114602.htm

http://www.springerlink.com/content/n3t11524177737p0/?MUD=MP

[Moontanman]

But neither are they in possesson of what might be called a conscious mind. The statement I made earlier still holds as about 80% accurate.

 

None the less it is not accurate, and octopus to indeed plan ahead, they learn both from experience and from watching other octopus. I used to keep octopus and they build barricades of stone to hide in, place each and every stone in a particular place and if you move them they go into a show of emotions and put the rock back where they had it the first place. They plan ahead, I had one that stalked the family cat until one day he caught it. he planned ahead, actually lured the cat into his sphere of influence and grabbed the cat.

 

One octopus delighted in raising the lid of his tank and squirting water at people, he was very accurate, he had to take into accouut the refraction of the water.

 

 

Can fish plan for tommorrow? No. Can a fish concieve of anything other than the watery world in which it is placed? No. Can a fish recollect past experiences? Probably not.

 

Probably not? You are going to go with probably not? Some fish actually help each other, some form friendships even across species. Fish are sneaky and they plan ahead and they have personalities.

 

Whales cooperate in hunting, teach their young to hunt and have social skills, even culture.

 

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/06/whaleculture/

 

And yes, I do pay attention to the behaviors of animals. I live in a rural area and have been fortunate enough to observe the behavior of many animals.

 

Evidently not very well, crows have complex interactions, plan ahead and can be said to have culture as well. Do you have crows where you live?

 

http://www.crows.net/culture.html

[Ringer]

But neither are they in possesson of what might be called a conscious mind. The statement I made earlier still holds as about 80% accurate. Can fish plan for tommorrow? No. Can a fish concieve of anything other than the watery world in which it is placed? No. Can a fish recollect past experiences? Probably not.

 

And yes, I do pay attention to the behaviors of animals. I live in a rural area and have been fortunate enough to observe the behavior of many animals.

 

 

Before I actually get into this discussion I'm going to need you to define consciousness because without a definition it will all just be arguing semantics.

[Tres Juicy]

But neither are they in possesson of what might be called a conscious mind. The statement I made earlier still holds as about 80% accurate. Can fish plan for tommorrow? No. Can a fish concieve of anything other than the watery world in which it is placed? No. Can a fish recollect past experiences? Probably not.

 

And yes, I do pay attention to the behaviors of animals. I live in a rural area and have been fortunate enough to observe the behavior of many animals.

 

 

Lots of animals store food for the winter, this is planning for the future surely?

[CharonY]

Moreover many animals including crows, monkeys and apes show culture (i.e. transmitting learned things from generation to generation). The assumption that humans are somehow special compared to other animals is based on an anthropocentric view, rather than on hard data.

 

Not to mention the general problem in defining what consciousness is at all. How can we test other species when we are not sure of the mechanism in ourselves?

 

Finally, regarding instincts. It is unfortunately a word that has been heavily misused. In the simplest sense it refers to innate behavioral pattern. However, almost all animals show the ability to learn. Except for very simple organisms their behavior is clearly not only instinctive.

[CCWilson]

Mutations presumably are occurring at around the same rate as in the past. What changes from time to time is the speed with which physical changes occur in a species. In an environment in which survival is difficult, changes occur rapidly in comparison to times in which survival is almost universal. Today in the developed world most people live to an age at which they can reproduce, so there is not a great deal of "natural selection" going on. In fact, the underclass is having more babies than the upperclass, so theoretically the genes more widespread in the underclass will predominate in the future, at least in the developed world. But overall you would expect slow evolutionary species change where most of us live.

 

If you are fascinated by human evolution and want to see rapid changes, you have to go back to hunter-gatherer days, when life was short and not everybody lived long enough to have children. That was where the evolutionary action was! Back then any mutation which added survival skills would rapidly spread. Today that same mutation wouldn't gain a foothold, because those without it would live a normal life span and produce just as many children as those with it.

[Ringer]

I've been thinking about the movement/path/road to 'consciousness' for quite a while now, in doing so i have constructed a very easy to understand chronological path.

 

In most dictionaries 'consciousness' is defined/explained as being 'awake' although rather over simplified it is a place to start..

 

Seems to me that there are various stages of consciousness:

 

1, Non-conscious.

2, Unconscious.

3, Sub-conscious.

4, Conscious.

 

I agree with your assertion that humans are unique from other species because we are the only ones that hold the higher level consciousness.

.........................................................

 

A Q, One for the expert biologists.

 

The chronological movement/emergence of Natural selection not yet broached by science.

 

Selection = choosing. Yes?

 

The laws of physics and chemistry = the first selecting agent at work in the universe. = Non-conscious selection. Yes?

 

Cognitive selection, literately choosing emerged from NS and counts as a related advancement of NS.

 

Paul.

 

I honestly don't know what you are trying to say. Realize that we don't know what you mean when you use your personal terms for consciousness. Natural selection started when life did, it's emergence was after abiogenesis.

 

 

 

 

No doubt there are varying states of consciousness, it seems very likely that the vast majority [i'm thinking dolphins as a possible exception], if not all other animals function on the subconsciousness level, that is they do not realise that they are born.

 

Paul.

 

If they don't realize they are born why do they do things?

 

 

 

 

[jp255]

Could it not be said though that our inventions are part of us as a species and that a calculator doing our math is just as much an adaptation as a laarge beak breaking a nut? I'm saying that technology and adaptation are one in the same and that adaptation in the case of humans is not exclusively biological.

 

Externalised evolution?

The ability for us to invent is an adaption that can lead to the evolution of inventions, where as other traits like the beak and nut are relatively fixed. Testing new solutions by mutation is restricted to 20+ year generation time for human genomes, but testing new solutions for our inventions does not have this restriction and can occur outside of the genome. Externalised evolution like Tresjuicy said.

 

A comparison between the evolution of inventions and our genes/genomes might be quite interesting (and if not, fun), somehow testing the improvement yields of evolution for an invention (%improvement/year?) compared to a gene which has improved the most over the smallest number of generations. Then going more general and comparing ability to invent to other traits and comparing the relative advantage they confer? Obviously this is difficult, but to look at invention evolution vs genome evolution and exploring the relationship between the two in general might interesting.

 

I just realised this is a fairly old thread, but I guess i'll just post what I wrote anyway.

[zapatos]

Lots of animals store food for the winter, this is planning for the future surely?

In college my roommate had a dog that would take food out of its bowl and hide it around the house. Then later in the evening when the food bowl was gone, the dog would retrieve the hidden food and have a little snack. I thought it was hilarious and if that wasn't planning ahead I'd really like to know what it was.