-
In total there are 12 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 12 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 871 on Fri Apr 19, 2024 12:00 am
Ch. 5 - The Pros and Cons of Our Evolutionary Heritage
- Chris OConnor
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 17025
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 2:43 pm
- 21
- Location: Florida
- Has thanked: 3514 times
- Been thanked: 1309 times
- Gender:
- Contact:
Ch. 5 - The Pros and Cons of Our Evolutionary Heritage
Ch. 5 - The Pros and Cons of Our Evolutionary Heritage
- geo
-
- pets endangered by possible book avalanche
- Posts: 4780
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
- 15
- Location: NC
- Has thanked: 2198 times
- Been thanked: 2201 times
That checkered shadow illusion . . .
http://web.mit.edu/persci/people/adelso ... demos.html
There's some animated sequences that demonstrate the same thing.
http://web.mit.edu/persci/people/adelso ... demos.html
There's some animated sequences that demonstrate the same thing.
-Geo
Question everything
Question everything
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
- DWill
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 6966
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
- 16
- Location: Luray, Virginia
- Has thanked: 2262 times
- Been thanked: 2470 times
This will seem like either a naive viewpoint or a quibble about semantics, but I don't necessarily see any cons to our evolutionary heritage. I mean the fact that we have such and such abilities and not others is just the way it had to be for us to adapt for survival. That our 'design' is not in every way so intelligent doesn't mean that, for example, our spinal structure is a 'con.' It obviously served a purpose in creatures like us succeeding. It's much the same for visual perception inconsistencies and cognitive biases. They exist, but unless we can realistically expect that a 'perfect' creature could come about, the only criterion we should use to evaluate our evolutionary heritage is whether our kind survived, which we did in spades. We have what we could call weaknesses (such as our cognitive biases), but since we wouldn't have (would we?) the cognitive strengths without them, it doesn't seem that pro/con is the way to look at what we are.
Well, maybe at some far future point if our numbers decrease drastically due to our own actions (or inactions), we'll then be able to accuse some trait of being a culprit.
Well, maybe at some far future point if our numbers decrease drastically due to our own actions (or inactions), we'll then be able to accuse some trait of being a culprit.
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Much like some aspects of physics that require a frame of reference, I think weighing our evolutionary heritage also requires one. If you weigh it against the "ideal" sentient creature, we have weaknesses. If you weigh each individual against the average, a bell curve will fill the spectrum. If you weigh us against an ape, our mental portfolio is all very strong. There is also the purpose for which our minds are weighed. For example, if we are contrasted for our ability to procreate, we are successful. If it is our speed at simple math, a computer performs better than us. At pattern recognition, we are without equal. At discovering the truth of our reality, we have a few weaknesses.