Future evolution of intelligence

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

If you limit it to the use of tools, then I'll say Crows. Check this out:

TED | Talks | Joshua Klein: The amazing intelligence of crows (video)




Seriously. Wow.

Crows are no doubt a contender and for more reasons than their use of tools, they also have a complex society but I wonder just how much tools can be used by an animals that cannot carry them around or hold one tool to modify another. I am almost sure too hands will be necessary to really develop a technological civilization. Crows do make me give that idea some pause.
Maybe we should make a list with the most likely at the top.

[modest]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

I hope you are wrong about robots, it would be shame if all we eventually aspire to is replaced by robots with no real motivation to do anything but exist and maybe not even that.

Yup, I've seen enough BSG to know things could turn out very badly. On the other hand, being replaced and even succeeded by something of our own creation might have some associated pride. It would all depend on the circumstances I suppose. If our downfall is not the robots' fault and the robots themselves have very human-like qualities (children of humanity we could say) then we would probably have solace knowing they live on.

If, on the other hand, they are the thing that kills us - no solace there.

Originally Posted by Moontanman

what weight did you ascribe the fish? The particular species referred to can weigh as much as a pound but the brain size is gigantic compared to other fish.

I calculated 3.1% brain mass of 1,000 grams of body mass (that's about 2.2 plounds). The calculation is:* (31 grams / 1000 grams^.66) /.13 giving about 2.5 compared to a cat which is 1.0 [see the website linked earlier for particulars]
* assuming the average mammal gives a value in parentheses of 0.13
* also assuming this particular fish is a mammal

If the average elephant nose fish had a mass of one pound then we'd get 2.04.

3.1% by mass is clearly a very large brain - especially for a fish. I'm jealous.

-modest

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by modest

Yup, I've seen enough BSG to know things could turn out very badly. On the other hand, being replaced and even succeeded by something of our own creation might have some associated pride. It would all depend on the circumstances I suppose. If our downfall is not the robots' fault and the robots themselves have very human-like qualities (children of humanity we could say) then we would probably have solace knowing they live on.

If, on the other hand, they are the thing that kills us - no solace there.



I calculated 3.1% brain mass of 1,000 grams of body mass (that's about 2.2 plounds). The calculation is:* (31 grams / 1000 grams^.66) /.13 giving about 2.5 compared to a cat which is 1.0 [see the website linked earlier for particulars]
* assuming the average mammal gives a value in parentheses of 0.13
* also assuming this particular fish is a mammal

If the average elephant nose fish had a mass of one pound then we'd get 2.04.

3.1% by mass is clearly a very large brain - especially for a fish. I'm jealous.

-modest

3.1% is very large by mass even bigger than ours, I wonder why they have such large brains, I have my suspicions but does anyone else have any ideas on this?

[Moontanman]

i am surprised no one has brought up the octopus, if they could evolve past the air water interface they would be very big contenders for future tool using intelligence. I saw a show on the science channel that showed a couple of possible ways this might be able to happen. If we Terra formed mars and brought the cephalopods with us they might some day make that leap easier on Mars than they could on the Earth. Octopus have been seen out of the water in some tropical areas catching rats..... kinda makes me glad I'm too big to be prey!

[InfiniteNow]

IIRC, when I studied this stuff over a decade ago, it wasn't so much the size of the brain, nor even the percentage of body mass which the brain composed, which matters. It was how convoluted, or how "folded" the brain matter was.

Basically, if brain size was all that mattered, then the blue whale would be the smartest animal alive.

If percentage of body mass composed by the brain were all that mattered, then the elephant nose fish would be near the top.

What matters is how that brain is organized, and how tightly wrinkled and folded it all is, as well as the number of neural connections.

You could have a brain the size of a football field, but if it only has one neuron it's not going to be all that great for processing. You could have a brain the size of a marble with more neural connections than stars in our galaxy, and despite it's small size, it would be enormously capable of processing.

Check it out. This has been a fun conversation, and convolution (or cortical folding) should play a role.


Cerebral cortex - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Mapping the Relationship between Cortical Convolution and Intelligence: Effects of Gender -- Luders et al., 10.1093/cercor/bhm227 -- Cerebral Cortex

The pronounced convolution of the human cortex may be a morphological substrate that supports some of our species’ most distinctive cognitive abilities. Therefore, individual intelligence within humans might be modulated by the degree of folding in certain cortical regions. We applied advanced methods to analyze cortical convolution at high spatial resolution and correlated those measurements with intelligence quotients. Within a large sample of healthy adult subjects (n = 65), we detected the most prominent correlations in the left medial hemisphere. More specifically, intelligence scores were positively associated with the degree of folding in the temporo-occipital lobe, particularly in the outermost section of the posterior cingulate gyrus (retrosplenial areas). Thus, this region might be an important contributor toward individual intelligence, either via modulating pathways to (pre)frontal regions or by serving as a location for the convergence of information. Prominent gender differences within the right frontal cortex were observed; females showed uncorrected significant positive correlations and males showed a nonsignificant trend toward negative correlations. It is possible that formerly described gender differences in regional convolution are associated with differences in the underlying architecture. This might lead to the development of sexually dimorphic information processing strategies and affect the relationship between intelligence and cortical convolution.

[freeztar]

Good point IN. The folds give more surface area.

[Moontanman]

It would appear just from inspecting the pictures that a cetacean brain is even more convoluted and complex than a human brain as well as being larger. It is pointed out that the cetacean brain is made of more primitive layers than other large mammal brains but an elephant brain is very complex as well. I remember seeing a show about elephants that said the elephant brain is significantly more complexly folded than the human brain. I'm not sure the complex folding of the cortex is the last word on this or even the main reason humans are smart (in our own definition of smart) or that other mammals with complex brains do not seem as smart (by our definition) as humans.

[HydrogenBond]

One of the misconceptions of human intelligence is much of what we attribute to the species does not apply to most individuals. Often a few key individuals came up with the inventions needed to allow the rest of the species to create the illusion they smarter than they really are. This illusion is due to cultural prosthesis. For example, how many humans would be driving cars if they had to develop and fabricate from scratch? Without the car to begin with, how many would know how to drive? An ape starts to look closer in intelligence when we compare them to the bare bone human without cultural prosthesis.

When we conduct animal tests these test don't begin with the same level of cultural prosthesis. A more objective test would start both at the same point, maybe allowing the animal to set test parameters since they don't have a culture to inflate them. For example, we will take a random human and have him go to a monkey's environment. This will be an adaptation test. If we didn't teach language skills to humans and gave the standard IQ tests almost all humans would be considered brain dead. I am joking with this. But cultural prosthesis allows humans to appear more advanced than the bare bone human, beneath. Protecting and evolving the prothesis is important to the bare bone human. Even if this de-evolves, it may not show, since the inflation can sort of hide this. The barebones is where natural evolution works.

This topic sort of works under the hypothetical assumption that humans mess up the earth and disrupt culture. With the cultural prosthesis gone, the assumption is another critter needs to take-over, starting at a higher level barebones, allowing evolution to continue. But another way to look at it is, if the prosthesis was disrupted, then what type of barebones humans would survive. These would have to the highest innate human intelligence apart from the prosthesis inflation. These human would begin the process of breeding, but at a higher human base level. If this group was then inflated with cultural prosthesis how would culture be different?

[Moontanman]

One of the misconceptions of human intelligence is much of what we attribute to the species does not apply to most individuals. Often a few key individuals came up with the inventions needed to allow the rest of the species to create the illusion they smarter than they really are. This illusion is due to cultural prosthesis. For example, how many humans would be driving cars if they had to develop and fabricate from scratch? Without the car to begin with, how many would know how to drive? An ape starts to look closer in intelligence when we compare them to the bare bone human without cultural prosthesis.

Agreed, since we do the tests we decide what is smart and what isn't.

When we conduct animal tests these test don't begin with the same level of cultural prosthesis. A more objective test would start both at the same point, maybe allowing the animal to set test parameters since they don't have a culture to inflate them. For example, we will take a random human and have him go to a monkey's environment. This will be an adaptation test. If we didn't teach language skills to humans and gave the standard IQ tests almost all humans would be considered brain dead. I am joking with this. But cultural prosthesis allows humans to appear more advanced than the bare bone human, beneath. Protecting and evolving the prothesis is important to the bare bone human. Even if this de-evolves, it may not show, since the inflation can sort of hide this. The barebones is where natural evolution works.

True, evolution on individual humans has all but stopped but evolution of our culture and ways of thinking go on.

This topic sort of works under the hypothetical assumption that humans mess up the earth and disrupt culture. With the cultural prosthesis gone, the assumption is another critter needs to take-over, starting at a higher level barebones, allowing evolution to continue. But another way to look at it is, if the prosthesis was disrupted, then what type of barebones humans would survive. These would have to the highest innate human intelligence apart from the prosthesis inflation. These human would begin the process of breeding, but at a higher human base level. If this group was then inflated with cultural prosthesis how would culture be different?

Actually there is no assumption that humans are forced by environmental destruction to hand over the Earth to another species. My idea was that if humans decide to leave the Earth and use it as a kind of zoological park could other animals evolve into tool using technological civilizations? If so which ones show the most promise to be at the root of such a species? Could we guide or help such a species along?

[Moontanman]

Going back to the brainy elephant nose fish, I think it has a big brain for the same reason a dolphin has a big brain. the elephant nose fish uses the electric field it maintains to get a 3D picture of it's surroundings. Elephant nose fish have very poor or even no eyesight and they live in very murky muddy black water habitats where eyes would useless anyway. The do how ever use their electric field to allow them to maneuver very easily in this dark water, to avoid predators and to find food. The also communicate with each other and keep track of each others location with these electric fields and pulses. I have seen them actually appear to take care of a sick or injured individual. Their mating behavior is also complex. So does intelligence result in a large brain or does a large brain allow intelligent behavior?