Valaran wrote:Xerographica wrote:Well yeah... if we pretend that humans are the only bipeds.
The nature of our form is different from other bipedal animals, as is the nature of our evolution.
We are a lot more linvoid than other bipedal animals. This is what put greater pressure on the selection of intelligence.
Valaran wrote:Its basically called irritation. You see it from time to time on here. The snark, is as always, much appreciated.
You started replying again because you were irritated? Sorry, I'm not following. Please clarify the connection between...
A. you starting to reply again
B. irritation
But it sure doesn't feel like you've really offered strong evidence/arguments against it.
Valaran wrote:I have made several argument, including cause and effect, the presence of other factors, and have offered several alternative theories that are both more popular in the scientific community, ad have greater supporting evidence. Moreover, I have deconstructed several elements in your argument, multiple times. You have not made your case effectively enough. Instead, you merely repeated your argument like a mantra (like you do below), which becomes irritating rather than productive.
And this is what I mean, also. You would never accept any argument I give; indeed you have not even recognised that I have made any. You instead, '
feel' I haven't made any. Becuase your argument '
makes sense' to you, and that's all that matters (your phrasing, in both cases). This is not good scientific process.
Where have you deconstructed complex carrying as the fundamental selection pressure on greater intelligence?
Valaran wrote:Their survival depended on a lot more than that, and a lot of these other factors may also be relevant for development of intelligence.
So make a detailed case for these other factors putting more...
Damn! Not sure if you read this thread...
Identifying And Slaying Linvoids...
Conscentia wrote:Honestly, I'd rather just use a phrase which expresses a meaning than a word if the word is ugly - especially if I don't need to express that particular meaning often. If the phrase does become inconvenient then I'll put some effort in crafting a decent word. I prefer a well-crafted word to a portmanteau constructed by just mashing words together.
phrase/meaning = selection pressure on intelligence
This meaning is central to this thread so we need to express it quite often. But from my perspective, it's getting inconvenient to use this phrase so often. What about from your perspective?
Here's my preference...
linvoid1 = the ability to simultaneously carry different resources
linvoid2 = selection pressure on intelligence
My argument is that more linvoid1 means more linvoid2.
Valaran wrote:Their survival depended on a lot more than that, and a lot of these other factors may also be relevant for development of intelligence.
So make a detailed case for these other factors putting more linvoid2.
Valaran wrote:This is entirely irrelevant and actually goes some to attack your own point - if we developed intelligence becuase we chose to carry things, and yet so many of us would even now choose to carry the wrong thing, this doesn't suggest we have learned very much from this technique.
We developed exceptional intelligence because our exceptionally intelligent ancestors chose to carry the right things. Does this mean that we're all exceptionally intelligent? As individuals we obviously can't all have above average intelligence. But our species certainly has above average intelligence. We're a lot smarter than the average animal.
So if the SHTF... then most of us would make carrying choices that are more intelligent than the carrying choices of the smartest chimpanzee. But this really doesn't mean that every human's carrying choices would be equally intelligent. Some people's carrying choices would be a lot more intelligent than other people's carrying choices. People who made more intelligent carrying choices would have greater chances of surviving (and passing on their genetic material) than people who made less intelligent carrying choices.
Personally, I don't have a BOB prepared and ready to go. Do you? I'm guessing you don't either...
Valaran wrote:Then again, the example is absurd, and so probably counts for little either way.
Right now we're gambling that the shit won't hit the fan any time soon. But for all we know... this is a stupid gamble. It's entirely possible that it's a smart gamble to have a BOB ready to go...
I am glad there are all types of people in the world. I am glad that there are crotchety, contrarian, cynical old reporters who constantly feel like everything is hurling off the precipice into Hell, because when things are actually hurling off the precipice into Hell, these people are the first to notice. In the same way, I am glad that there are dedicated survivalists who stockpile canned food in underground shelters in case of the nuclear apocalypse, because if there is ever an actual nuclear apocalypse, these people will survive and rebuild the human race. - Scott Alexander,
Book Review: Chronicles of Wasted Time
Valaran wrote:A further issue. Its generally understood that our intelligence did not result from flight or fight or other situations of extreme pressure, becuase this would not have given much scope for physically non-useful things, like an overly large cranium, and an organ that requires more energy than needed for basic survival (the brain). A brain of this size only becomes more useful in other situations, like in larger social groups, for instance.
All organisms are confronted with fight/flight situations. It has to be the case that this results in some linvoid2... but clearly it can't be the case that it results in enough linvoid2 to produce exceptional intelligence. In order for humans to have ended up exceptionally intelligent, it's a given that our ancestors must have been subjected to exceptionally large amounts of linvoid2.
linvoid3 = exceptionally large amounts of linvoid2
You're guessing that the source of linvoid3 was larger social groups. I'm guessing that the source of linvoid3 was linvoid1.
Now we're juggling three variables...
1. linvoid1 = the ability to simultaneously carry different resources
2. linvoid2 = selection pressure on intelligence
3. linvoid3 = exceptionally large amounts of linvoid2
Do we need the third linvoid? It's not too inconvenient to say "exceptional linvoid2". And you would correctly assume that I was referring to exceptionally
large amounts of linvoid2? You wouldn't incorrectly assume that I was referring to exceptionally
small amounts of linvoid2?
Valaran wrote:But its not necessarily the carrying that made this so effective at creating intelligence. It might be that they killed more animals allowing their brains to have increased nourishment. It then becomes a self fulfilling process, but it wasn't the
linvoid that was crucial as much as the tool itself.
Walking upright turned us into more efficient killers... which provided us with more food... which allowed us to become more intelligent? I don't see linvoid2... which means that I certainly don't see linvoid3 (it was easier to write "linvoid3" than "exceptional linvoid2"). Walking upright did turn us into more efficient killers... but only because linvoid1 resulted in linvoid3.
Valaran wrote:And, once again, this ignores any other potential factor (for which numerous theories with at least some archaeological evidence exist), in favour of a simple linear process, that is, as yet, unsupported.
I perceive the existence of plenty of support. Linvoid1 was the cause of linvoid3. You have yet to argue that linvoid1 would not cause linvoid3.
Valaran wrote:From your own source:
A new analysis of the skull suggests that human brain evolution may have been shaped by changes in the female reproductive system that occurred when our ancestors stood upright.
There are other ways in which bipedalism could have led to increased brain size. It would, for example, have freed up the forelimbs, and this would likely have led to the expansion and reorganization of the sensory and motor brain areas that process sensation and control movement. Similarly, standing upright would have led to big changes in what our ancestors saw, which may have led to an expansion of the visual areas at the back of the brain.
The new findings suggest that further brain expansion, as well as reorganization of the prefrontal cortex, could have occurred as an indirect result of the pelvic modifications that followed the transition to bipedalism.
For someone who, uh 'does their homework', I'm not sure you read your source very well at all. It actually goes quite a long way to note the temporal and evolutionary links, albeit indirect, between bipedalism and brain development. Thanks, that was actually a great source!
Well... it provided some "evidence" both for and against my argument.
Here's where we're at. I don't see how...
A. becoming more efficient killers (more nourishment for larger brains)
B. using fire to cook (more nourishment for larger brains)
C. living in larger groups
... resulted in linvoid3. So either you don't think linvoid3 is necessary for exceptional intelligence... or you do perceive that these other causes did result in linvoid3. If it's the former... then we're definitely not on the same page. If it's the latter... then we are on the same page... but we're reading it very differently. So you'll have to explain in decent detail how A, B or C resulted in linvoid3.