Instinctive Intelligence?

In the middle of writing and the abstract notion of "Instinctive Intelligence" kept re-occuring in my thoughts.

What do I mean by Instinctive inteeligence?

Well.....
"Jack was sitting down on the concrete barrier watching the people move across and through the city square. They seemed as if instinctively aware of each other and moved with a grace and precision that could only imply instinctive intelligence"

"Many arguements have been devoted to the design / random debate regarding the evolution of the universe. Could it be that instinctive or sublime intelligence is working in the background setting up things like karma, destiny, coincedence, luck, romance, etc....in ways that are not the priviledge of normal conscious volition but more an instinctive and automatic intelligent progression of reason and understanding..."

I am not sure that I have conveyed this topic well and maybe someone else could do a better job of it..

Care to discuss?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Aheh. You have conveyed it well.

Your evolution of sustainable success was just as similar if not more profound but this one IMO states it a whole lot better~!

I'm not sure what you mean by instinctive awareness, but as he was sitting watching the cars go by, the people move; this was an instinctive intelligence.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

" Could it be that instinctive or sublime intelligence is working in the background setting up things like karma, destiny, coincedence, luck, romance, etc....in ways that are not the priviledge of normal conscious volition but more an instinctive and automatic intelligent progression of reason and understanding..."- I think the answer is yes, but I don't know how it works.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Alorus:

Yes that's the point! We must figure it out.

 

Good luck with that...

Even if one were to set up a bunch of science experiments that meet the gold standard of science and publish them in well respected journals, almost nobody will accept that they're anything more than moronic pseudoscience experiments. A long time will pass before people accept intention as scientifically legitimage.

 

up a bunch of science experiments that meet the gold standard of science and publish them in well respected journals, almost nobody will accept that they're anything more than moronic pseudoscience experiments. A long time will pass before people accept intention as scientifically legitimage.

You have contradicted yourself.

Scientifically gold and in respected journals that meet the gold standards of science;

Youo're talkling philosophy now aren't you?

Intention.


You may be right, but what you're talking is somewhat fragile. We're asking heated questions here.
Do you even know what they were?

For example.
Take his opening post. It involves something which is other than psuedo science here,

Nobody likes a contradicter my friend:

arguements have been devoted to the design / random debate regarding the evolution of the universe. Could it be that instinctive or sublime intelligence is working in the background setting up things like karma, destiny, coincedence, luck, romance, etc....in ways that are not the priviledge of normal conscious volition but more an instinctive and automatic intelligent progression of reason and understanding..."

Let's see just who has a better understanding huh?
First of all,
he is stating that you are a moron.
Second of all, he is stating that these things you mentnion about are not lacking scientific validity.

For me to say "oh, this is trash"; throws out the whole towl.
You haven't even made a comment.


Go ahead, make a comment.

 

you are insane
as is that other character

 

Yes, yes I am. Who gives a rats ass as they say?

 

your "Instinctive Intelligence" usually occurs in the context of canines

i was gonna discuss but realized i couldnt put a philosophical spin on rather mundane, physiological routines

 

stfu

 

We have certainly evolved to fit reasonably well in our environment, more so if our environment happens to be artificial.

 

Fair point Gustav......however as much as you are entitled to ridicule any one you choose it just merely reflects badly on your current mood....

In that it hs difficulty being expressed in a philosophical forum.
Instinctive intelligence is a form of automatic intelligence free of volition not unlike a computer algorythm... it is the intelligence that for example drives the auto immune systems of the human body.
It is the intelligence that allows most humans to conform to a certain growth cyles like pubity and old age.. not to mention mid life crisis....
It is also the intelligence that created the most amazing thing of all and that being the DNA structures of life itself.
So before you ridicule the concept by linking to a pet food web site I suggest you have a little bit more of a think....mind you you don't have to and I expect no response....to my counter....

btw "mundane physiological rountines"....sort of says alot...hey?

 

Interesting thought SG linking to artificial environment...hmmmm

 

Fair comnment and appreciated....I think science is constantly trying to prove the point any way by default. With every discovery especially to do with the human body they uncover more and more issues to debate upon...

I used to say and still do...
"If I was only 1% as clever as the body I have in my control I would be a genius beyond compare...."
Not only instinctive inteligence but extremely clever intelligence I tend to think....

 

Sis......

I am not...have not and will not....

And I am waiting for a comment that extends the debate from you too.

Whilst I appreciate your defence of the legitimacy of the question on my behalf I cannot accept your ridiculing someone on my behalf..please don't....If you are going to ridicule someone do it on your own merit ok?

Simply because you force me to defend the person you are ridiculing on my behalf...
I believe Alorus has made a fair comment and in terms of scientific enquiry he is quite correct. However as you [sis] have pointed out this is about philosophy or at least an abstraction leading to philosophy, an opener to a line of enquiry if you like...[ not a new line either I might add] and raising the issue of science should have indicated that...however......this is a public forum afterall....and I believe Alorus was merely stating what he believed was the main limitation to this line of enquiry...

btw..you are correct I think that it could be a deeper chapter in the E.O.S.S proposition.

 

I think it is hard for people to buy into the notion that we are "just here" by coincidence, as in we are nothing really special, and we just happened. I think people are uncomfortable with this so they desperately find something else to buy into.

 

LOL

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I agree.

The bit about instinctive intelligence only points towards the philosophical side of the coin.

That does say a lot QQ. And for one it manages to bring out the fact that this intelligence thing, instinctive or instincts intelligence or however / whatever you will call it, is something that provides us with ideas about life. Life as in, ... sheeshus should I really make some input?

Similarly to the E.O.S.S., it drives the basics to our humanity. It tells us what we are and it examines how we function.

It shows us what we are to do when facing something that can be of benifit.

But this is only from the perspective that the benefit is something which BAH benefits.

IMO it's a very serene outlook, at least this one.

But it is very complicated, and obvious that no one gives a rats tale guestav about replying to my messages.

 

Is there any reason why you believe in something such as co-incedental evolution with out proof that it is?

I asked in a thread once years ago.."Can chance be proven to be chance?" "Can coincedance be proven to be coincedance?"

The answer is a philosophical no... Chance and randomness can not be proven scientifically, nor can design or even instinctive intelligence which I might add has nothing to do with desparately looking for some sort of crutch as you imply....

If it smells intelligent , it taste intelligent and damn well looks intelligent, it "might" just be intelligent. In fact it would be very unintelligent to dismiss the notion with out careful thought given the complexity and sheer cleverness of it all. There is no obligation on a randomly inspired evolution to enshrine cleverness and as far as I can tell it certainly is clever by human standards any way....and I see no one saying that it isn't.

This does in no way imply divinity or Gods or anything but pure instinctive intelligence programmed with in all of us...

 

it is complex to fully justify the notion. To explain it in a way that is conclusive.
I can imagine a lot of words going into quite a few books just pushing the E.O.S.S. barrow let alone the Instinctive intelligence issue.
"An objective imperative to our morality" Morality and ethics are underpinned by universal physics and on that basis are objective in nature....sheesh! you'd be there for ever...most of the time attempting to de-condition peoples thinking I guess....

 

my most abject apologies, qq
i do hold in you in the highest regard

that said...basics...comment on this...

* Direct combination or synthesis, in which 2 or more chemical elements or compounds unite to form a more complex product: N2 + 3 H2 → 2 NH3 (Chemical reaction)

explain the mechanics. do the elements exercise freewill or choice? can they opt out?

as to your example.... what comes to mind is roomba

Even though they sell for as little as $150, each Roomba features sophisticated collision sensors, infrared detectors, and reliable electric motors. The machine can find its way around obstacles to cover nearly every inch of a floor. It’s clever enough to plug into its own battery recharging station. But Roomba hackers have more ambitious goals.

that is.. figuring out the algorithms. quite mundane.

now....

i do know why i choose not to bump into something. probably self preservation. why do i choose to preserve myself? why not. i am already here. lets give it a shot

why do i think? clueless on that one