- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,580
nope, it's never too much on TONMO.com!
Fujisawas Sake said:In The Growth of Biological Thought Dr. Ernst Mayr makes an interesting point of Aristotle's idea of Scala Naturae , or the typical evolutionary cladogram that most zoology textbooks still try to sell us as the "natural order" of life. Its like sponges to cniarians, cniarians to something else, etc.. I understand why that has been the way things were taught in the past, but unfortunately that is the way they are still being taught to this day.
Though it is a sound scientific theory, evolution is still very hard to understand given the many factors, both external and internal, that have an influence on its progression. We, as a species, have always believed that evolution was a direct-line progression; that all species wanted to be 'us'. It is the ultimate in human vertebrate phallus-waving if you ask me.
Intelligence is hard to measure by most means. Often you will hear the complaint that IQ tests are culturally biased. I would argue that most intelligence tests are Homo-biased, made for us and our own perception of intellect. Also, you made an excellent point about the idea of sensation vs. perception; octopus may not percieve mass like we do, but they may have an altogether different way of doing so.
Monty, have you ever heard of the theory that large Jurassic sauropods like Diplodicus used a "relay" of ganglion in their spines to regulate back leg function? I find that interesting, considering dinosaurian evolution in relation to the rest of the Reptilia.
chalcosoma said:So this looks like bona fide learning behavior, yet the "programs" that allow this behavior are hardwired and instinctual. I think it's a complex issue, because intelligence is always a dynamic interaction between genetically predetermined patterns and how they interact with changing situations. It is not as cut and dried as either learned, or genetically determined. Like the Nature Vs. Nurture problem, which is really BOTH interacting every step of the way.
My feeling is that more and more, it will found that human intelligence also depends on genetically hardwired programs for interaction. There's no reason I can think of that a vast system of interconnected programs couldn't lead to very complex and intelligent behavior. What do you "think"?