N.Wells
Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
Hello, Edgar,
| Quote | | Learning in animals are instinctual learning...thus, those animals that you had enumerated don't use intelligence but instinct only. Did you get me? |
Learning is not instinct: behavior resulting from learning raises behavior above instinct, by all definitions of instinct. Anything else is humpty-dumpty-ism.
| Quote | | Show me the difference between instinct and intelligence if you dis-agree. I will asking you after that..... |
Asked and answered. Even by your own highly problematic "more solutions than problems" criteria, some animals come up with multiple creative solutions. Instinctive behavior is preprogrammed, innate, inborn behavior that cannot be modified creatively or voluntarily. A creative attempt at problem solving, even if it only produces one solution or even if that single creative attempt fails and is thus not a solution, is not instinctive.
| Quote | | Your feet (1) and your eyes (2) and your mind (3) are all your defense mechanisms to protect your life with my threat (Xo). |
That is nonsense. First, that's no different from the defense mechanisms utilized by every animal that has feet. Second, defense mechanisms in us are much more instinctive than most of our behaviors. Third, we definitely also use our hands in defense and often our teeth as well, plus we also use objects as weapons and actual weapons, which by your definition raises us well above a three to one ratio between solutions and problems, which takes us back out of intelligence. Your only reason for trying to push the ludicrous claim that animal learning is instinctive is that for you humans must be intelligent and other animals must not be, so you will twist words and concepts any way you can to create that conclusion.
| Quote | But if we apply that to the universe and Cosmos, the non-existence of universe and Cosmos are the collective problem.
The solution is the universe and Cosmos...thus, symmetrical but in the making of universe, the IA used a dual nature of particle and the IA had used an asymmetrical idea of
non-existence/existence....an asymmetrical.
If there is no IA, it is predicted that there will be no existence...
or there will always be an existence...but you will never have existence if you don't have non-existence, thus, through this, intelligence predicts that
1. IA, aka God, exists
2. IA had designed the universe and Cosmos...an intellen |
That is sheer lunacy, a word salad meaningful only to you.
| Quote | | 3. Thirsty and Drink: When you drink 100 ml soda with additional nutrients, then, you are an intellen since you are solving the problem of drinking 100 soda only with more additional healthy drink. |
Not if you overdose on micronutrients. How do you get a 1.5 ratio out of a fortified drink? Do all the micronutrient levels have to be increased by at least 150% to count as an intelligent choice? Your math is fraudulent: as shown by your listing of just three defense options, you are manipulating numbers to force your desired outcome. (Your geometry is not better than the rest of your math: your question "how do you know if a square is not a rectangle?" is spectacularly incompetent, given that a square are merely a special form of a rectangle, because a rectangle is any quadrilateral with four right angles). If your boss asks you to identify the best worker in the factory or the best of ten possible solutions, it is impossible by your definition to answer that intelligently. However, if your boss asked for a paperclip, and you gave him one plus six-tenths of another paperclip was that an intelligent response? If your boss asks generically for "some sugar", is it impossible to respond to that question intelligently (what is 1.5 times "some")? Why aren't you distinguishing between one solution applied thrice and three different solutions applied once each? Why doesn't a failed but creative solution count as intelligence (your criteria make your work non-intelligent by your definitions, by the way, given that it represents a failure rather than a solution). Is using two hands rather than one hand two solutions or one? How does one intelligently respond if your boss requests a barely subcritical mass of U-235? You have to special-plead your way through most of the cases that arise in order to generate numbers that give you the conclusion you wanted at the beginning.
Sorry, Edgar, but your ideas aren't even out of the starting gate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....dcT25ss
|
