Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Jrook t1_itiueje wrote

I'm more inclined to think it's less of a type of intelligence, personally. It seems mechanical. Like an if/than program. Which I believe is a component to intelligence. But not inherently intelligence.

If I were to break away from the logical side, I don't believe you can have an intelligence in a creature without an organ basically dedicated to it.


nikolai_470000 t1_itji31f wrote

I’d say there’s some validity to that except that there are plenty of other species with brains that are ‘dedicated to intelligence’ that aren’t very intelligent and by some standards are barely sentient or not sentient whatsoever, depending on who you ask

It’s definitely not the same as a brain making conscious decisions, but the ability to change its reaction level in certain pathways to alter its response to different kinds of stimuli over time is very similar to what happens to our brains as we develop and learn new things, I would say that makes it a kind of intelligence that’s different from ours but still very much a real form of intelligence

There’s a big difference between general intelligence and other types but that doesn’t make one type any more or less than another

I think it’s fair to say this kind of intelligence could be considered a component of general intelligence but GI is such a broad and amorphous concept, almost anything could


spiderpig_spiderpig_ t1_itjzddx wrote

The whole "phenotype" thing really throws me for a loop. Is there really a difference between an organism that changes its reaction level / cells inside a chunk of calcium and one that changes its reaction level / activity in a bounded area of soil? Where is the boundary...?