Intelligence & Evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, October 13, 2013, 17:14 (4058 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: The context, however, is that you 'still stick to "aware that you are aware"', plus your insistence that consciousness involves the ability to analyse concepts, formulate new theories, and think abstractly like Higgs. This shows that you do not accept that an organism is conscious unless it has a human level of self-awareness.
 
DAVID: You persist in confusing levels of the concept of being 'conscious'. Animals and perhaps plants have a conscious state. They are aware of reality and how to respond to it at basic levels. But they are not aware of being aware, they are not deeply philosophic or analytic or abstract. Once you enter that level now you are discussing consciousness.
 
Having a conscious state to me means being conscious. I am the one who keeps emphasizing that there are different levels of consciousness, whereas you insist that there is only one ... the human level! That is why I prefer the word "intelligence", in order to avoid this confusion.-dhw: I can only assume you now acknowledge that there are different types of consciousness. Presumably, then, you will accept that an organism which is capable of absorbing, processing, assessing and exchanging information, communicating with other organisms, making decisions and solving problems is conscious, though its consciousness is different from ours and does not involve self-awareness, formulating new theories, or abstract thinking like that of Higgs. -DAVID: This statement shows your confusion. I have described distinct levels of difference. The word consciousness can only be applied to the state of abstract reasoning I have referred to. [...] We are at a mental level animals don't achieve, no matter how clever the chimp or the corvid appears to be.-I have no problem accepting that we operate on a different level. But if you insist that only humans are conscious, then of course by your definition not even animals and plants can qualify, let alone cells! And yet as recently as 8 October you explained how "intelligence in my dog or me or you nestles in a consciousness which is an emergent property from the brain". I reckon your dog can perceive the environment, process and exchange information, cooperate with other organisms, make decisions etc. but I doubt if he's aware of being aware, "deeply philosophic or analytic or abstract". So I'd say he has a lesser degree of consciousness/intelligence than ourselves ... but consciousness/ intelligence he has, and even though I haven't had the pleasure of meeting him, I doubt if I'd regard him as an automaton. Some scientists tell us that exactly the same abilities are present in cells. You are free of course to conclude that these abilities are automated, but that is an opinion, not a scientific fact, and the conclusion that they have been preprogrammed by a god takes you even further away from science.
 
dhw: It is not an insistence. I offer it as an alternative hypothesis to the (equally?) dubious hypotheses of random mutations and divine preprogramming.-DAVID: I view it as grasping at straws. The best view is: if it looks designed, it might well be.-Indeed it might. And it might even have been designed by intelligent mechanisms which your God created to take their own decisions in accordance with whatever conditions they might meet. Who knows?-dhw: According to your own hypothesis, God preprogrammed every innovation, every decision, into the very first organisms, and perhaps even every environmental change (apart from the occasional dabble), and magically the cells automatically logged onto precisely the right programme (out of billions) at the right time to create legs, lungs and livers. How credible is this?-DAVID: Responded to above. Cells can't plan their own developmental future.-That is a response to the "intelligent cell" hypothesis. It is not a response to my querying the credibility of your own astonishing scenario.-dhw:.... If you really think consciousness is not possible without being "joined by" a universal consciousness (= your God), and a concealed God "creates the reality we have" (as well as "pervading everything"), you might as well say that our own consciousness is actually God's consciousness, and we are automatons capable only of thinking his thoughts. And you might also say that your God is present in every cell, taking all the necessary decisions, and therefore the cell is intelligent because, just like our own, its intelligence IS God.-DAVID: You supposition for my theory above is quite reasonable, except God has obviously given us free will as the presence of human evil shows. We are not automatons.-Free will and human evil are another subject, and I don't feel that either of us is in a position to read your God's mind. However, I'm glad you find reasonable the suggestion that he is present in every cell, and therefore the cell is intelligent because its intelligence IS God. Clearly then you are not opposed to the concept in principle, so long as we put God in there.