Intelligence

>>8738605
My own concept of intelligence has changed over time. When I was a kid I used to believe that people who had good grades were intelligente, then when I became a good student on my own I noticed it doesn't has much to do with having the ability to understand things easily, if we are talking about the general human population, but with habits of study and environment.

Nowadays I believe that people who are truly intelligent must be also effective, that is, they have success in whatever they do, but even then there's a lot of factors other than sheer merit.

intelligence should be described as some measurement of the amount of information an organism is able to intake from the universe.

>>8738624

I think you misunderstood the questions. They're not about smart people or stupid people, they're about the actual ability for an organism to comprehend abstract concepts. Do you think that as a species we could be limited in this aspect forever, simply because of how our brains developed, or could what we perceive as intelligence actually be something entirely different to a true intelligence?

>>8738686

Intelligence is comprehension more than knowledge, memory, or perception. Though, I will grant that perception must play a part in intelligence. As humans, we are limited to a very small spectrum of the overall amount of energy in the universe, which means we struggle to comprehend vast scales of both time and space, and are the result of evolution at a specific scale. Even if we create machines to overcome our flawed senses, we still may not have the right cognitive faculties to advance beyond a certain point. Like taking two different paths, and one leads to a dead end, while the other continues on indefinitely, we may have taken the dead end with our own intellectual evolution.

>>8738605
Why are you so concerned with semantics? Intelligence is what we define it to be, your first question is ridiculous.

>>8738605
I've always wondered about this. It's possible that other animals are more intelligent than us but we just aren't able to communicate with them to know what's really going on in their mind.

>>8738686
How do you know how much information other organisms are intaking? Your definition is flawed from a philosophical standpoint.

>>8739215
If we're looking for intelligence in the universe, we must first know what it is. Else we could completely miss it. For instance, a mountain on another planet could be alive and intelligent but we may never know.

>>8738605
Are you saying we should selectively breed ourselves to get smarter? I'm down with that.
It seems like intelligence is rather not completely understood though.

>>8739215

You've misunderstood the question. It isn't semantics, it's whether or not what we call intelligence is actually true intelligence or not. Not whether it should be named something.