Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    zanderbaxa's Avatar
    zanderbaxa Posts: 62, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #1

    Apr 12, 2012, 01:23 PM
    Is intelligence in DNA?
    If so, does it mean that intelligence is inevitable? I.e. intelligence would be a late process. In that case, intelligence may not be a final process. What would a later process be?
    The idea that intelligence is an evolutionary fluke may be wrong: because if intelligence is a process invoked on DNA, it is a method of the DNA object.
    Standalone DNA (of which we have a lot) does not form life instantaneously: this only indicates DNA is a data object. It takes a higher level process to operate on the DNA information. Our learning how to process the DNA information indicates the need for a higher level intelligent process to operate on DNA.
    ebaines's Avatar
    ebaines Posts: 12,132, Reputation: 1307
    Expert
     
    #2

    Apr 12, 2012, 02:46 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by zanderbaxa View Post
    If so, does it mean that intelligence is inevitable? I.e., intelligence would be a late process. In that case, intelligence may not be a final process. What would a later process be?
    Any genetic trait that results in more babies being born and surviving to have children of their own will be favored in the gene pool. In the stone age being "smart" meant knowing how to hunt and avoid being eaten by a saber tooth tiger and so was a trait that favored surviving long enogh to have babies. In today's society I don't think that's the case any more - innate intelligence has little to do with the quantity of offspring people have. So as humans evolve it's unlikely to be towards higher intelligence.
    zanderbaxa's Avatar
    zanderbaxa Posts: 62, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #3

    Apr 12, 2012, 03:47 PM
    That is funny! May be that is why there are not so many geniuses! In all the people who lived, there were not many, It is possible the environment criteria necessary for intelligence to be evoked has not occurred.
    ebaines's Avatar
    ebaines Posts: 12,132, Reputation: 1307
    Expert
     
    #4

    Apr 13, 2012, 06:45 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by zanderbaxa View Post
    That is funny! May be that is why there are not so many geniuses! In all the people who lived, there were not many, It is possible the environment criteria necessary for intelligence to be evoked has not occurred.
    On the contrary, the average 2-year child is "smarter" than the "smartest" of any other animal. So indeed humans have evolved intelligence to a tremendous degree. Of course there's a lot of variability in the population, and the very definition of "genius" is based on that variability - something like the top 1/100 of 1% as measured by IQ. It doesn't matter how smart the average person is - by definition there can never be more than that number of geniuses.
    zanderbaxa's Avatar
    zanderbaxa Posts: 62, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #5

    Apr 13, 2012, 07:23 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by ebaines View Post
    On the contrary, the average 2-year child is "smarter" than the "smartest" of any other animal. So indeed humans have evolved intelligence to a tremendous degree. Of course there's a lot of variability in the population, and the very definition of "genius" is based on that variability - something like the top 1/100 of 1% as measured by IQ. It doesn't matter how smart the average person is - by definition there can never be more than that number of geniuses.
    That is a statistical average based on previous data (which analysis of previous stock data shows its inadequacy.). The stock market is an example of how inept statistics is in certain areas. It is true that the sun will probably rise tomorrow (provided there is no cosmic catastrophe); but that does not take into effect reality (just because something has not happened in the past does not mean it will not happen in the future) and this in noway succumbs to the absurdity of QM. It is true that QM can predict probabilities; but when it goes meta-physical it shows how incredulous it is, over all. I can show 1=2 with algebraic consistency; but consistency does not make it true, Even though the outcome of an operation on A is similar to B does not mean A & B are equivalent. If A and B are in different environments and with slightly different initial conditions, chaos theory shows the divergence of A & B, though they may be similar,
    ebaines's Avatar
    ebaines Posts: 12,132, Reputation: 1307
    Expert
     
    #6

    Apr 13, 2012, 07:35 AM
    zanderbaxa - we were discussing the evolution of human intelligence. Not quantum mechanics. No one would argue that IQ is a flawed way of measuring intelligence, as its basic assumption that "intelligence" can be quantified as a single number is problematic. However - do you have a better definition of "genius?" You suggested that there aren't too many geniuses in the world, which implies that you agree there is some statistical definition for the word.
    zanderbaxa's Avatar
    zanderbaxa Posts: 62, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #7

    Apr 13, 2012, 03:28 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by ebaines View Post
    zanderbaxa - we were discussing the evolution of human intelligence. not quantum machanics. No one would argue that IQ is a flawed way of measuring intelligence, as its basic assumption that "intelligence" can be quantified as a single numner is problematic. However - do you have a better definition of "genius?" You suggested that there aren't too many geniuses in the world, which implies that you agree there is some statistical definition for the word.
    Statistical for predictions for the purpose of planning (our education system proves it fallacious). I do not think I was discussing QM. I believe our methodical approach to solving problems is a correlation.
    zanderbaxa's Avatar
    zanderbaxa Posts: 62, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #8

    Apr 16, 2012, 09:23 AM
    A mechanistic description of intelligence is that it is inherent in the structure of the brain, before birth.
    The idea that sentience enters the zygote at conception, is ludicrous. It cannot enter until the brain and nerve connections are made, and that does not happen until after 26 weeks, of pregnancy. In the meantime the blood from the mother maintains life, in the womb. After birth, the individual's blood,DNA and what ever the engine is that processes the DNA maintains the individual;s life.
    I.Q. is really not a measure of intelligence; but a measure of motivation. Motivation, to acquire knowledge for getting future gains, takes a myriad of forms, namely: inductrination from family, peers, educators, media, etc.). Sometimes motivation morphs into “money is power.” E.g. politicians are anti-social power mongers who masquerade as societies' benefactors.
    Intelligence is not specific to a type of or constrained to acquiring knowledge, formally and/or non-formally. Conceptually, an individual's intelligence is the ratio of applied to acquired knowledge, provided that the acquired knowledge is sufficient to understand the related event. Sufficiency, though, is very subjective (depends upon who determines sufficiency). Except, this concept, of intelligence, is flawed. Knowledge is not intelligence.
    USA's approach to standardizing sufficiency is to require standardized tests. Even though the tests are supposed to be edited by experts, it is still very subjective. The levels of intelligence (e.g. genius, normal, imbecile) are, also, highly subjective.
    Most knowledge acquired (non-formally) is methods of coping with society. Problem solving is considered applying some of that knowledge to an event (e.g. trajectory of a projectile on Earth). For the ratio to mean anything, both the numerator and denominator are knowledge related to the same event.
    Sure, frequency distribution of I.Q. data, from the past, will produce a bell-curve and probable I.Q.s can be determined. But the curve is a representation of individual motivation. That motivation is highly subjective from environmental factors.
    I.Q. does give a hint to the under-current of intelligence inherent in the brain; but does not measure it.
    zanderbaxa's Avatar
    zanderbaxa Posts: 62, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #9

    Apr 27, 2012, 06:01 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by ebaines View Post
    Any genetic trait that results in more babies being born and surviving to have children of their own will be favored in the gene pool. In the stone age being "smart" meant knowing how to hunt and avoid being eaten by a saber tooth tiger and so was a trait that favored surviving long enogh to have babies. In today's society I don't think that's the case any more - inate intelligence has little to do with the quantity of offspring people have. So as humans evolve it's unlikely to be towards higher intelligence.
    When tasks are no longer needed, the brain replaces them with new ones. It has been shown that learning new tasks create new neurons and interconnections. The new neuronal interconnections may be another level in the conscious network. The new neural-network triggers the DNA to evoke a new physiology. That physiology may be a expression of a higher level of intelligence. Intelligence is not knowledge; but how it is processed.

    More neuronal interconnections allow more knowledge to be assimilated. In other words, there are many more (multi-dimensional) perspectives of that knowledge. Intelligence is a process not the accumulation of knowledge, though intelligence enhances that accumulation. Multi-dimension does not imply physical dimensions; but mathematical convenience in conceptualizing.

    Another aspect is that what we are now, tends to let us think we are at the apex of evolution. Since we do not know exactly what DNA is or how it works, it seems incredulous to say what it isn't.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

When is dna required to change a minor name and how much is the dna? [ 0 Answers ]

Hi I am living in the state of NY, my ? Is how can I change my 2year old daughter name from my ex husband name to her biological fathers name, do we need a DNA and if yes can we do it through the court and does anyone know how much that is going to cost us?

Human dna vs pig dna [ 2 Answers ]

The internal organs of pigs i.e. brain ,liver ,kidney.. etc are almost same shape & size of human ?99% ? That is why virus or bacterias that can cause damage/kill the pig will do the same to human.Am I right that is why some religion forbidden them to consume ?

DNA, can I get my brother to do a dna test to see if we have same father? [ 13 Answers ]

:confused::confused:I need to know who is my biological father, my mum has told me but I need confirmation. Now my brother has his own father but we are doubtful if he is mines or not. If I asked my brother to do a dna test would that tell me if he is my full brother or not??

What are the differences between human DNA and pig DNA. [ 1 Answers ]

I have been trying to research the differences between human and pig DNA. I've had no luck finding any kind of information on this matter.


View more questions Search