Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is there any indication of increased intellegence over time within the Human species?
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 76 of 99 (252405)
10-17-2005 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by today9823
10-17-2005 1:01 PM


Re: Creation Wins
Bad news for you: I took the advice of your first two words, "think rationally".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by today9823, posted 10-17-2005 1:01 PM today9823 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Carico, posted 12-12-2005 2:22 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 77 of 99 (252531)
10-17-2005 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by today9823
10-17-2005 1:01 PM


Richard fails.
Welcome to the fray Richard.
I'll thank you not to send me spam e-mails in the future, but to reply to the board directly.
... and I'll teach you ...
First show me that you have something to teach other than arrogance, dogma and a closed mind.
Show me that you have an understanding of the real world and not just propoganda.
Learn what your intellectual failings are before you presume to teach.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by today9823, posted 10-17-2005 1:01 PM today9823 has not replied

  
Carson O'Genic
Junior Member (Idle past 6112 days)
Posts: 20
From: San Francisco, CA
Joined: 08-15-2005


Message 78 of 99 (252861)
10-18-2005 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by today9823
10-17-2005 1:01 PM


Re: Creation Wins
What is a 'creative order'? Sounds like something someone created.
Either way, I disagree completely that relatively simple thngs can't come together to creat more complex things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by today9823, posted 10-17-2005 1:01 PM today9823 has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 79 of 99 (257130)
11-05-2005 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by RAZD
10-01-2005 8:19 PM


Enhanced Creativity in Schizotypes
RAZD, I just came across your post on this Vanderbilt study. Fascinating stuff.
I had previously come across studies that suggested greater creativity in relatives of schizophrenics (as opposed to the cliche of the mad artiste).
There is a broad streak of schizophrenia/bipolar disorder in my family, as well as one of musical, literary, and mechanical/engineering creativity in those not fully afflicted.
Here is a multimedia presentation of the study you quoted:
Oddball Creativity--Multimedia Report

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by RAZD, posted 10-01-2005 8:19 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by RAZD, posted 11-05-2005 6:40 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 80 of 99 (257134)
11-05-2005 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Omnivorous
11-05-2005 6:28 PM


Re: Enhanced Creativity in Schizotypes
cool.
His theory can also explain research which shows that a disproportional number of schizotypes and schizophrenics are neither right nor left hand dominant, but instead use both hands for a variety of tasks, suggesting that they recruit both sides of their brains for a variety of tasks more so than the average person.
Ambidextrous too?
Perhaps this too shows why this schizophrenia is still part of the gene-pool: an intermediate stage that is beneficial to the whole population.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Omnivorous, posted 11-05-2005 6:28 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Omnivorous, posted 11-05-2005 7:49 PM RAZD has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 81 of 99 (257153)
11-05-2005 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by RAZD
11-05-2005 6:40 PM


Re: Enhanced Creativity in Schizotypes
RAZD writes:
Ambidextrous too?
Ambidextrous in early childhood--that was knocked out of me by those who feared my sinister powers.
But I retained some unusual bimanual dexterity, including the ability to type more than 130 wpm on a qwerty keyboard by age 11. In my youth I eliminated that pesky backhand issue in tennis by switching hands--all my returns were forehand returns: drove my opponents to distraction and sometimes allowed me to defeat players of much greater overall skill; I also switch-hit in baseball. Curiously, I lack the typical left/right differential in bicep and calf muscle diameter as well.
Another interesting correlation (DISCLAIMER: anecdotal, no scientific claim implied): Women are generally credited with a more balanced use of brain hemispheres. That research is often misunderstood (via the popular press left brain/right brain mishmash).
Back in the days when I published, my manuscripts were often assumed to be the work of a woman (I used first initial/last name) when read by women editors, rarely so when read by men; one distaff editor explained that she made the assumption based on the "subtle emotional intelligence" of the work (perhaps I've changed since then... ).
Perhaps this too shows why this schizophrenia is still part of the gene-pool: an intermediate stage that is beneficial to the whole population.
I think that is precisely the case. There is some data to suggest that the progression from genetic propensity to full blown psychosis requires an environmental trigger, prenatal (viral) or otherwise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by RAZD, posted 11-05-2005 6:40 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by RAZD, posted 11-06-2005 1:46 AM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 83 by Nighttrain, posted 11-06-2005 6:14 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 82 of 99 (257222)
11-06-2005 1:46 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Omnivorous
11-05-2005 7:49 PM


Re: Enhanced Creativity in Schizotypes
... that was knocked out of me by those who feared my sinister powers.
Doncha just hate that? Jealousy is what it is.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Omnivorous, posted 11-05-2005 7:49 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 83 of 99 (257233)
11-06-2005 6:14 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Omnivorous
11-05-2005 7:49 PM


Re: Enhanced Creativity in Schizotypes
Ambidextrous in early childhood--that was knocked out of me by those who feared my sinister powers.
Another lefty? Those right-handed conformists have a lot to answer for.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Omnivorous, posted 11-05-2005 7:49 PM Omnivorous has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 84 of 99 (262213)
11-21-2005 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by jar
08-05-2005 12:32 PM


Late comer
Sorry I didn't read through the whole thread, but I like the OP and had something to say, or more accurately a question to ask
1 is there some minimal brain size needed?
2 are there certain brain areas needed?
3 is there a method of measuring intellegence based simply on brain size?
I have no clue the answers to these questions. But this question:
4 is there any evidence to show that intellegence has increased over time?
I will answer with another question.
I recently saw a special on national geographic channel about the discovery of a "wolfe boy" A boy raised by wolves. I don't remember all the specifics, but a scientist, or a psychologists took him to try and raise him, and teach him to be accepted in society. It was tough, and the boy did not respond very well. Having been raised by wolves, he did not appear intelligent at all. He was no smarter than a wolfe. Funny millions of years of evolution gone in the blink of an eye.
So my question is if we get smarter over time, and evolution, then why was this boy so "dumb"?
Is that evidence against "intelligence increasing over time"
I will add, that from watching that, I see our intelligence is based directly on what the person before has discovered, and how well it has been taught to us, which forms our "neural networks?" which allows us to take that thinking to the next level?
Our species has the ability to communicate better than any other species, which allows us to be "smarter". Is that ability the only thing, or main thing that allows us to become smarter?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jar, posted 08-05-2005 12:32 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by nwr, posted 11-21-2005 10:38 PM riVeRraT has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 85 of 99 (262219)
11-21-2005 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by riVeRraT
11-21-2005 10:05 PM


Re: Late comer
riVeRraT writes:
I recently saw a special on national geographic channel about the discovery of a "wolfe boy" A boy raised by wolves. I don't remember all the specifics, but a scientist, or a psychologists took him to try and raise him, and teach him to be accepted in society. It was tough, and the boy did not respond very well. Having been raised by wolves, he did not appear intelligent at all. He was no smarter than a wolfe. Funny millions of years of evolution gone in the blink of an eye.
This is actually a bit misleading.
There are quite a few books, research article, etc of feral children. You might want to google on "feral child" - there is probably a lot online.
It is known that if they are not exposed to language early enough, they will never be able to acquire it very will (the so-called critical age). However, they might have a lot of intelligence, but they are unable to display it in ways that we can discern.
This message has been edited by nwr, 11-21-2005 09:39 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by riVeRraT, posted 11-21-2005 10:05 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by riVeRraT, posted 11-22-2005 6:54 AM nwr has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 86 of 99 (262279)
11-22-2005 6:54 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by nwr
11-21-2005 10:38 PM


Re: Late comer
It is known that if they are not exposed to language early enough, they will never be able to acquire it very will (the so-called critical age). However, they might have a lot of intelligence, but they are unable to display it in ways that we can discern.
Which leads back to the other question I posted. Is our intellligence heavily relying on our ability to communicate.
I wold think there is 2 kinds of intelligence, natural instincts, and intelligence over time. Or intelligence carried over from generation to generation.
The boy in the show displayed intelligence, but nothing really beyond what he learned from the wolves. He started learning quickly, that is compared to a wolfe, but slowly compared to any other child.
He also had a hard time displaying affection, and was just as wild as the wolves.
I wonder if he felt there was a God, when he was in that state.
Helen Keller knew about Jesus before anyone ever taught her, she just didn't know his name.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by nwr, posted 11-21-2005 10:38 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by nwr, posted 11-22-2005 8:29 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 88 by RAZD, posted 11-24-2005 2:38 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 87 of 99 (262300)
11-22-2005 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by riVeRraT
11-22-2005 6:54 AM


Re: Late comer
Is our intellligence heavily relying on our ability to communicate.
This is going to depend on what you mean by "intelligence". We don't have very good definitions. The ways that we assess intelligence depend on the ability to communicate.
In Message 4 I commented on the Flynn effect (the rise of average IQ over time). James Flynn, who discovered that effect, does not believe that intelligence rises. Rather, he takes the rise in IQ as an indication that IQ is not actually measuring intelligence.
Many believe that IQ and other measures of intelligence are culturally biased. The wolf boy was raised in the culture of wolves. The ways that we assess intelligence are biased toward our own culture and do not adequately reflect the ways that intelligence would be expressed in a wolf culture.
I guess we are drifting a little off topic for this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by riVeRraT, posted 11-22-2005 6:54 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 88 of 99 (262804)
11-24-2005 2:38 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by riVeRraT
11-22-2005 6:54 AM


socialization
He also had a hard time displaying affection, and was just as wild as the wolves.
This could be explained by the lack of human socializing, and recognizing that he was displaying wolf socialization.
See Lifelong benefits of cuddling your baby (click) for examples of differences in socialization of humans by different human behavior.
"It may come as no surprise to parents, but cuddling your baby provides them with social benefits for years afterwards, according to scientists.
They found a clear link between love and attention in the early years and healthy emotional responses in later life. "
Not that one study is conclusive, especially given the numbers of subjects (18).
{changed subtitle, fixed display}
This message has been edited by RAZD, 11*24*2005 02:41 AM

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by riVeRraT, posted 11-22-2005 6:54 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
Carico
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 99 (266395)
12-07-2005 1:08 PM


So how is thinking we are more intelligent than people in the past not more arrogant? "He who exalts himself will be humbeled and he who humbles himself will be exalted." I hardly think that boasting is a sign of superior intelligence. It's the easiest thing in the world to do. So no, we are not only not more intelligent, we are closer to annihilating ourselves than ever before! I agree with the scientists who say we are in a state of decay which is evidenced by people who call themseves intellignet thinking that we descended from apes. That theory sadly epitomizes our degree of decay.

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Yaro, posted 12-07-2005 1:15 PM Carico has not replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6496 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 90 of 99 (266401)
12-07-2005 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Carico
12-07-2005 1:08 PM


So how is thinking we are more intelligent than people in the past not more arrogant? "He who exalts himself will be humbeled and he who humbles himself will be exalted." I hardly think that boasting is a sign of superior intelligence. It's the easiest thing in the world to do. So no, we are not only not more intelligent, we are closer to annihilating ourselves than ever before! I agree with the scientists who say we are in a state of decay which is evidenced by people who call themseves intellignet thinking that we descended from apes. That theory sadly epitomizes our degree of decay.
Which scientists?
Further, we have longer lifespans than ever before. Better medicin than ever before. Higher standards of living than ever before. We get to keep our teeth longer than ever before. More people are fed than ever before. The population is larger than ever before.
I agree that there is alot of suffering and crappyness in the world. And I agree that human stupidity combined with great power is a recipie for destruction.
But your idea that people before were "just as" smart as people today is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Open your eyes and look around you. See what mankind has accomplished and be greatfull.
Not too long ago your lifespan would have been estimated at 30.
This message has been edited by Yaro, 12-07-2005 01:16 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Carico, posted 12-07-2005 1:08 PM Carico has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Speel-yi, posted 02-11-2006 9:38 AM Yaro has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024