Well, yes yes you are quite the clever one. However, you've answered your own question with your very well thought out answer. Unfortunately you've shot yourself in the foot.... Unless of course you were trying to be ironic. I don't think you were though.
Intelligence is a relative term, we could say Joey is smarter than Sammy, my cat is smarter than your dog because he doesn't eat his own poop, etc., and we even rate it on a scale used by pretentious groups like Mensa as a badge of honor.
However, you can be king chicken and master of eating worms and laying eggs, king chimp who can use tools and murder to get ahead... But none of these creatures regardless of how intelligent/unintelligent they are ponder their own existence. That's one difference. Not sure if it makes us better...
Well it depends on what traits you classify as intelligence. If we consider something that laughs and talks as intelligent, then a mosquito is pretty stupid. But if you want something that is able to perform a task, and do that task well (in the case of the mosquito, finding a mammal and sucking it's blood) then the mosquito is intelligent.
I think you're making a huge assumption that emotion implies intelligence. We as humans slap this tag "intelligence" on what we perceive to be logical or correct. How would Joe the robot having emotions increase his intelligence? You would say that a mosquito can perform the task of sucking blood intelligently without emotions. Emotions may give a being preferences, such as your apple example, but a mosquito that knows to suck blood to survive doesn't put emotion into it... it just does it. Interesting theory though.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, yes yes you are quite the clever one. However, you've answered your own question with your very well thought out answer. Unfortunately you've shot yourself in the foot.... Unless of course you were trying to be ironic. I don't think you were though. Intelligence is a relative term, we could say Joey is smarter than Sammy, my cat is smarter than your dog because he doesn't eat his own poop, etc., and we even rate it on a scale used by pretentious groups like Mensa as a badge of honor. However, you can be king chicken and master of eating worms and laying eggs, king chimp who can use tools and murder to get ahead... But none of these creatures regardless of how intelligent/unintelligent they are ponder their own existence. That's one difference. Not sure if it makes us better...
As I said in my post, it depends on your definition of intelligent. Your own link qualifies the definition I was using.
Well it depends on what traits you classify as intelligence. If we consider something that laughs and talks as intelligent, then a mosquito is pretty stupid. But if you want something that is able to perform a task, and do that task well (in the case of the mosquito, finding a mammal and sucking it's blood) then the mosquito is intelligent.
I think you're making a huge assumption that emotion implies intelligence. We as humans slap this tag "intelligence" on what we perceive to be logical or correct. How would Joe the robot having emotions increase his intelligence? You would say that a mosquito can perform the task of sucking blood intelligently without emotions. Emotions may give a being preferences, such as your apple example, but a mosquito that knows to suck blood to survive doesn't put emotion into it... it just does it. Interesting theory though.