Information as the catalyst to the process of evolution.

[BurnedOut]

It is quite intuitive to assume that the sole existence of 'information' is what has contributed to the conception and continuation of life itself. What differentiates various species in terms of their evolution is the amount of information they receive and not to mention the fact - acceptance threshold. This acceptance threshold is one measure of intellect itself which might explain high smart-asses have a good time trying to pursue information in form or the other. However that's not the priority for the current context.

How about we establish the rule of thumb that the availability of information exposed to individual single-cellular organic automata as ancesterial roots of every individual determines the path for evolution? The acceptance threshold might not be already prevailing but may begin prevailing in the form of 'information-gain delay' which states that :


'Given, all organic automata exists in a palatable and conducive realm like planet earth and it's rife counterparts, et al, the delay in receiving information is directly correlated to the amount of evolution they face.'


This does not make sense at first because simply many species came before humans and yet are dumb eg. Reptiles. Let's make amends to this theory.


'There exists several similar counterparts of earth on which relatively prehensile life forms exist who are able to simultaneously exist on both the realms either by the concept of dual- nature of matter or by plain physical transportation through cosmological devices.
These sentient automata, each taken independently, have a level of prehensility determined by the amount of information exposed to them.'

However there's one thing to keep in mind. Once these species successfully migrate to other realm, the level of their prehensility will again differ due to existing environmental conditions as it will directly affect/influence the information-gaining process and the level of delay faced by them to access such information.


The things we can deduce from the above theory is -

1. Intelligence is an indicator of the level of evolution a species has encountered and it's headstart towards it.

2. Intelligence is not low/high in its relative measure. It simply indicates the level of information-delay in the particular species.

3. Earth is a cosmopolitan planet, it's consisted of several 'alien' species residing together

4. The amount of information a species can readily process can directly show us the evolution level.

5. Entities of the same species with differing intellect does not mean that they are aliens to each other. It again boils down the theory of information-integration.





Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

Introspectively the brain is for the motion of the body. In humans, we can handle a bigger model of reality because a model helps with navigation. Calculating strategies will lead to new pathways. This, in fact, leads to a mirroring system that allows trial and error. So thinking is really a way to develop patterns of navigation. Causality. Learning is: if I do that then this will happen. Our memory stores all the patterns that work and do not work. So we can be faster to know when we need a new strategy or just can use an old one.

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

As far as I can tell from proposition 1, this theory assumes that all species converge to increasingly higher intelligence. I believe it has been shown that this is not true. In fact, human intelligence is not explained by survival benefits at all, but rather by sexual selection - human intelligence is a peacock's tail. This is discussed for example in The Mating Mind by Geoffrey Miller (highly recommended read btw)

Another problem is that, in terms of any trait, species don't converge to increasing complexity at all, but rather to a state of equilibrium with their environment. This is why most species are extremely primitive. In particular, the most supremely successful and numerous life form on earth is bacteria.

 

[BurnedOut]

As far as I can tell from proposition 1, this theory assumes that all species converge to increasingly higher intelligence. I believe it has been shown that this is not true. In fact, human intelligence is not explained by survival benefits at all, but rather by sexual selection - human intelligence is a peacock's tail. This is discussed for example in The Mating Mind by Geoffrey Miller (highly recommended read btw)

Another problem is that, in terms of any trait, species don't converge to increasing complexity at all, but rather to a state of equilibrium with their environment. This is why most species are extremely primitive. In particular, the most supremely successful and numerous life form on earth is bacteria.

I think the question here is about evolution, I doubt the concept of reproduction plays a role here. Evolution is advancement in the species, given that intelligence is at the apex, it can cause the whole species to rewire itself accordingly. Talking about intelligence as a measure of evolution, our ancestors were tenfold stronger than us, it's proven that we are suckers at being strong, our femoral joint's density has lowered due to constant sedentary lifestyle

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

Evolutionary pressures create selection when the organism finds advantage in places it is fit too. So if intelligence is an adaptation then the most intelligent organism or simply differentiation intelligence will find the nitch where competitors cannot take more advantageous choices to dominate the local area as they can. The ability to mentally hold more variables than competitors means it can out think them. Hold more in your head and you plan better in the given circumstances. And communicate better and coordinate better. Survival in more difficult places becomes possible.

 

[BurnedOut]

I don't think being sentient actually gives you the choice of being entirely 'sentient' per se.
I'm kind of connecting this to my deterministic theory because that's the only way I can justify how multiple life forms continues to exist despite their diverse intellect. Sure, every species is not compulsorily 'explicitly' relatively more/less intelligent but however, trace them back to their origin and analyse the net intellect, there will surely be some difference which fundamentally (although not atomically/molecularly) differentiates them.

My point is, life perhaps is itself not sentient but a conglomerate of complex carbon cohorts who generates fake sentience and operates on a much complex level similar to neural networks. How about this ?

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

 

[Black Rose]

My point is, life perhaps is itself not sentient but a conglomerate of complex carbon cohorts who generates fake sentience and operates on a much complex level similar to neural networks. How about this ?

I believe sentience goes down to the brain stem where pain originated and gave organisms an advantage to swim away from pain. On the one hand, animals perceive the world and a diversity of species mean no one animal dominates. But then it comes down to humans being metacognitively self-aware that primarily sets us apart. Humans went through many stages of cultural development and so most people had different focuses in life. Most peasants could not read at one point. No like maybe 97 percent of humans can read. That changes the culture. The internet changed the culture, think of what you have access to. I watch many philosophical videos. If I was raised by wolves I would not be as complex intellectually as I am now. Yes determinism may be a true reality but it is not something that takes away from animals perceptions but simply intellect in the human sense. A wolf can hunt deer and feel pain if eaten by a bear but again diversity of species means no top dog wins. It is only humans by what Plato and others deemed teleology that we seem to reach for a higher reality. The logos (reason). Truly remarkable that humans can understand that they understand.

To demonstrate higher realities. The prefix "meta" means self-referencing the suffix back into itself. metanoia in greek mean reflective thought since noia mean mind and prefix meta means mind of mind. The mind looking into itself. And thought about thought is termed metacognition. Metaphysics is the physics of physics. Self-referencing / self-reflection is demonstrably what produces intelligence of the sort we call human.

Information as the catalyst to the process of evolution.

Information goes back and forth in all brains (reflection) but not all information is the kind humans have. Human culture is a reflection of humans as they reflect between themselves. This is why A.I. is so hard to create. We need information to bounce around inside itself the way we get babies to amass complexity. Bouncing around information from its culture. Dogs do not have elementary, middle or high schools. The big secret is that humans bounce information reflectively in their heads and this creates more complex integrated information. Back and forth and back and forth and thinking occurs. All from culture and definitely from mom and dad. Animals have no culture to complexify their brains. They can reflect but not internally. They simply only react as animals do to environmental factors although some animals do dream. I assume that is common sense to understand that animals do not have higher thought like we do and that human civilization would be difficult for them to create. If humans go extinct it may take 50 million years before another creature creates a culture like we have. (culture in general)

 

[BurnedOut]

I read a good article on scientific American which seemed to almost blow away the amorphous line drawn between living and non living things. Read this : https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/brainwaves/why-life-does-not-really-exist/

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

Evolutionary pressures create selection when the organism finds advantage in places it is fit too. So if intelligence is an adaptation then the most intelligent organism or simply differentiation intelligence will find the nitch where competitors cannot take more advantageous choices to dominate the local area as they can. The ability to mentally hold more variables than competitors means it can out think them. Hold more in your head and you plan better in the given circumstances. And communicate better and coordinate better. Survival in more difficult places becomes possible.

The problem with this argument is that during the time when human intelligence evolved, none of its characteristic abilities – ability to create language, art, music, do mathematics, etc – deferred any survival benefit to human beings.

Obviously it evolved by evolutionary pressures, but to use "evolutionary pressures" as synonymous to adaptation to the environment is a naive reading of the theory of evolution, which, incidentally doesn't explain things like the peacock's tail. Once again – it's sexual selection, folks.