Orcas are amazing, I still see nothing in what you wrote that indicates they'd be brighter that say 5 to 7 years old kids. Kids have culture too, use tools etc.
Evolution doesn't generally add features that aren't needed. Orcas don't have arms, don't build skyscrapers or fly to the moon. There's no need to be that bright.
But if you want to believe that they could, if they just had had arms, well why not (although I dissent).
> Humans are also some of the most if not the most violent species to ever exist. Which is more intelligent?
Those are two different dimensions. Being intelligent doesn't mean you're kind hearted or less violent. Although it can indeed be simpler to understand others (which you can use in evil ways).
> I still see nothing in what you wrote that indicates they'd be brighter that say 5 to 7 years old kids. Kids have culture too, use tools etc.
I don't really see how you can claim that. What don't you see?
But, you also sort of prove my point as well. An 8 year old is as intelligent as an adult human. It isn't as knowledgeable or socially developed but the brain is basically 95% complete in its growth by 8 years old or so.
Part of the mistake is confusing knowledge or societal integration with intelligence.
> Evolution doesn't generally add features that aren't needed. Orcas don't have arms, don't build skyscrapers or fly to the moon. There's no need to be that bright.
But orcas do require intelligence. Their prey are dolphins, tuna, blue whales, humpback whales, beluga whales, seals, rays, salmon, herring, sharks, etc. Their prey are fast and strong and several of them (i.e., the mammals) have excellent hearing, sight, and intelligence of their own. They need their intelligence to cooperate in their hunting and to teach the learned techniques. And again, there are several indications and observations that their social and emotional intelligence is greater than humans. Orcas are currently considered a single species and thus that single species and brain provides for a huge variance in prey and living environments.
Ancient human brains and intelligence are identical to modern human brains and intelligence, and they had no need or capability for skyscrapers or going to the moon. Because again, technological development doesn't necessarily relate to intelligence. Technological development of humans is a bit of evolutionary runaway process because of our dexterity and brain combination. But just because we have a lot of technology doesn't mean we are the most intelligent. It is quite clear that our technogical development exceeds our social and emotional intelligence's ability to keep up.
> Those are two different dimensions. Being intelligent doesn't mean you're kind hearted or less violent.
It does indeed relate to social and emotional intelligence. Not everything is about bits and atoms.
> > I still see nothing in what you wrote that indicates they'd be brighter that say 5 to 7 years old kid
You then:
> sort of prove my point as well. An 8 year old is as intelligent as an adult
But I said not more than 5-7. (Could be 3-5 what do I know.)
which is not the same as 8.
And kids are kids, at 8 your brain is far from finished. (Maybe volume wise 95% but not IQ wise. I found 90% at age 5, volume/weight wise in a quick websearch). IQ wise: Not until a bit past 20 years.
(Where are you getting your ideas from?)
> Ancient human brains and intelligence are identical to modern human brains and intelligence
No.
You might have a link to some book that says otherwise, if so I would look at the authors as slightly dumb related to that.
> They need their intelligence to cooperate in their hunting
Dogs and hyenas do too.
I'm unlikely to reply any further.
Btw, just one thing: when I was a teenager I had completely wildly crazy ideas about animals and their abilities, ... And, maybe in a way, I know where you're coming from. Have a nice day
> > Ancient human brains and intelligence are identical to modern human brains and intelligence
> No.
> You might have a link to some book that says otherwise, if so I would look at the authors as slightly dumb related to that.
When I said ancient himans I meant early homo sapiens. I have looked into this before and while the brain has evolved over the time of homo sapiens, it is very much the same core brain. And from what I can tell from my research, the homo sapiens brain has been relatively unchanged since about 100,000 - 200,000 years ago, well before any writing or technological developments. Again, knowledge and technology are not requirements for intelligence.
For your kid argument, you would have to argue that the last 5-10% of brain development accounts for the majority of human intelligence. I think that's a tough hill to climb.
> I'm unlikely to reply any further. Btw, just one thing: when I was a teenager I had completely wildly crazy ideas about animals and their abilities, ... And, maybe in a way, I know where you're coming from. Have a nice day
That's fine, but it's also a rather immature and childish way to have a discussion.
Who says that anything humans do is a sign of intelligence? We're assuming quite a lot about the importance of skyscrapers or of going to the moon, and we're also assuming very little about what it takes to be an Orca.
Evolution doesn't generally add features that aren't needed. Orcas don't have arms, don't build skyscrapers or fly to the moon. There's no need to be that bright.
But if you want to believe that they could, if they just had had arms, well why not (although I dissent).
> Humans are also some of the most if not the most violent species to ever exist. Which is more intelligent?
Those are two different dimensions. Being intelligent doesn't mean you're kind hearted or less violent. Although it can indeed be simpler to understand others (which you can use in evil ways).