→This is where it starts... human intelligence is not a standalone, we're just smart scavenging apes - chimps do better at math, pilot whales have almost twice our cortical nerve cell number... so no, we're not "an intelligent species destined to find our match between the stars."
→We're just advanced enough to muse about it, as a dog might muse about exploring the neighbor plot - but most dogs only muse about food.
→Our most important "human right" is to freely follow insane delusions ("religious freedom"), and our "meaning of life," apart from that, is to live out our drives to the fullest ("pursuit of happiness"). What ?
→And there are sure signs that we already reached our intellectual ceiling and are on our egalitarian way back to blissful apedom, the smallest common average ("equality") fast in our sights, this always being the main measure of our collective, illucid herd animal desires.
In essence, it really only seriously begins with script. The transformation from the steppe-clever scavenger living in hordes and caves, towards a civilization-building, culture-creating WonderAnimal like us would have been impossible without script...
Sumerians were more or less the first critters to have written annals - the way we define them, and a documented communication system. Fire and the wheel were all good and well, but script is so much more important... before script, long term (historical and scientific) memory and real education wouldn't have been possible - neither complex language nor culture.
Script made us more into humans than the evolution of the neocortex itself - if you look at what children learn today (or SHOULD be learning) during about ten years of their lives - well then that's not really a lot, but still the essence of what we gathered in about ten thousand years. All we have...
Or so it used to be since recently. It took us that long - and without script, we'd still be nomads or troglodytes.
In essence, script was the beginning of data processing - the impact of the first tables similar to the one below, but usually in cheap clay rather than marble, must have been greater than that of the smartphone, and certainly way more constructive, in the 4th millenium B.C.
Intelligence is at least 85% genetic - obviously, humans are overall slightly more clever than chimps not because they went to school, but because they have slightly different genetics. The same is true for different human tribes, but you may prefer not to believe this because you already believe that humans can only be distinguished by their skin color. This is a very strange but widespread belief, and as illogical as it may be, it stays around because humans are quite reality-resistant and harmony is addictive. C.B.Robertson at Counter Currents writes :
Humans can read faces, speak languages, and gauge the trajectory of moving objects like a radar system, but abstract information is a challenge. Although we are better at it than any other animal on the planet, we aren’t as good at it as we often think we are, or as we require ourselves to be. It turns out that when presented with facts that run contrary to our own internal narrative, for instance, humans are far more likely to dig in their heels and further entrench themselves in their own view than they are to be persuaded by the facts.
For people whose conception of humanity requires us to be rational and possessing a reasonably-high level of abstract reasoning, this revelation can be painfully dispiriting. It is why Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and other prominent atheists are perpetually flabbergasted that so many people can believe in an invisible super-person who lives in the sky. In their world, humans are supposed to be rational, yet they prove over and over again how their superstition and irrationality trump their reason. Especially when the chips are down.
But the expectation of rationality is unreasonable.
Indeed. We are primates, illogical descendants of a biological eat-or-be-eaten scenario, and we are causal thinkers who believe that everything has a reason, a causator )*, because it's just safer to do so, we are herd animals, hardwired to believe in something 'above' ourselves, something we owe a reckoning to, we are small brains in a giant, complex universe that we will never be able to fully understand - and so we must at all times simplify. In most cases - and always in doubt - we will simply follow our emotions, human rationality being crassly overestimated. Sigh. So, back to the genetics...
[Here's some corroborative https://www.rt.com/news/352123-dna-test-school-study]
Let me also take this opportunity to briefly deal with the male/female schism using only this one video (20 minutes), which I largely endorse :
When I tried to find early African writing systems, there weren't any - because they never developed any, though almost everybody else did. As in, other human races - you know. You possibly heard that average global human IQ, due to 2019 estimates, is actually 86, and that this is so because Subsaharan Africans have IQs around 70 (while those of Pygmies are said to be around 50). There are obviously human tribes who evolved more and others that evolved less, no guilt being assigned here - shit happens - over the last 100.000 years or so - likely due to environmental challenges or their absence, which would be entirely reasonable.
Anything else would actually be... bizarre.
[This is an interesting article about the subject http://www.unz.com/gdurocher/hbd-in-the-ancient-world/]
There have been many tries to deconstruct these facts, some by serious scientists, who failed, though more by politically interested parties - who don't need to actually prove anything, especially not to intellectual nonentities, all they need do is bully around and force their hare-brained gospel into the school books - at which they succeeded in many countries in the West.
Here is a long but highly interesting video about one of the most dedicated tries so far to objectify the matter (since then, human intelligence and its relativities have been turned into a taboo subject) :
The "do human races exist, can intelligence politically be allowed to be genetic" issue is really a Hippie sophistry too ridiculous to be discussed further, but the issue will linger on until evolution hopefully removes its initiators. The "social experiment" of inserting hundreds of millions of Black African into Europe will definitely and without fail lower the average IQ there significantly (Hint : why and to whom, would this be desirable ?).
A chimpanzee is more genetically similar to a bonobo (99.6% identical) than a Caucasian human is to a Subsaharan human (99.5% identical). Chimps and bonobos are typically classified as two different species, but of course all humans are classified as the same species. The ethics we make, will make us.
Well, that's none of my business...
While less intelligent people wallow in egalitarian romanticism, another herd animal reflex, and worship the smallest common denominator (IQ 85 for all would be the fairest and most 'democratic' imaginable thing mankind ever thought up, and is actually in the process of being made come true), it seems obvious that a group or tribe of persons will profit from a general dumbing down, this being the reason they are orchestrating it so ardently. There are in fact several ways in which several different groups will profit, but I'll explain that in a different essay.
Here, the only thing of importance is THAT THIS IS HAPPENING now. As Feminists Scientists postulate that fairness is more important than intelligence, in fact that high intelligence is 'Smart Privilege' and must be deconstructed, I am looking forward to the IQ 90- Europe that prominent, possibly psychopathic Pentagon philanthropist Tom Barnett already proposed in 2005 :
[http://library.aceondo.net/ebooks/HISTORY/The_Pentagon's_New_Map__War_and_Peace_in_the_Twenty_First_Century.pdf]
The ideal human IQ level, the only fair, equal and non-racist one ahead, is of course not being entirely idealized by everybody - while ever more NPCs will postulate that "IQ is a western construct that doesn't exist, and therefore doesn't matter." Most Feminists seem to find this assumption plausible or rather, intuitive.
Yay. With opinion leaders like that, what could go wrong ? Studies show that to keep a modern high-tech civilization running, an IQ average of ~ 96 is needed.
Then again, certain groups do not want to keep a modern high-tech civilization afloat, they WANT us (see above) to sink to "a pre-industrial level." There are arguments about why this is a good idea (i.e. Climate Change and The Sixth Extinction), valid points, but there's a third party, a human primate self-centered party, riding them.
See it that way, and everything fits... 8.5 minute video.
Deal with it. And let's take this further and a bit beyond, in my next post.
IF we assume that in a biological evolution, only herd animals are likely to develop a practical intelligence like ours, to a degree that enables abstract thinking and the recording of such, data processing, science and complex civilization, and if herd animals have a natural bias for delusion and strong egalitarian tendencies... tendencies that are at this time countermanding science and rational thinking, openly calling for their replacement by emotionality ('political' and 'feminist' science), openly instigating a genetic deterioration of the entire species, or rather its most intellectually developed races with the most advanced civilizations...
If this is typical at a certain stage of civilization reached, and there is reason to assume so (google #mouseutopia), then this may be, among other things, the so far most plausible explanation for the Fermi Paradox.
If you're still convinced that it was inevitable and only natural that humanity would evolve "intelligence," that intelligence and the human primate belong together and that more intelligence must surely be our species' only possible future, guess again after watching Stefan Molyneux' recent reflection (10 min):
We so need Egalitarianism, the Equator, and Smallest Common Denominators.
Thanks for your interest. Be well.
P.S. DID you know ? The only valid solution to the overpopulation/dumbing down quagmire is of course splitting this species in two, and eventually depopulating the lower, by then and even now, servant-supplicant species.
The split should occur around IQ 110, the level of a clever cop, and the way things are, at least 80% of humanity should be excluded by that simple measure - to keep them from procreating will be one of the most noble challenges of our near future.
This may sound brutal and unbelievable to some, so-such unethical and whatnot, and must therefore be enacted in a clandestine manner, behind the cover of something seemingly completely different...
So that the unwitting emo-ethical part of the momentary population will not be in the way, or even rebel, and will instead even voluntarily further the process.
Tip : they're already at it.
Think about this, and contact me if you want to know more.
)* and if we think about it too much like a human (what else), then we feel that the causator must be thinking like a human as well, what else... and zoom, there we are assuming an omnipotent delusion and owning it. So good ! Roll over, Mohammed - you smell.
As to delusionality as such, it's a mighty part of us... first, a brain cannot distinguish very well between real and illusionary impressions, real memories mingle freely with changed ones. They all look the same... so we tend to prefer nice memories to nasty, troubling ones and nice hopes to fearful expectations... only natural, eh ? Hope and delusions must have been a real evolutionary survival mechanism in cold winter caves... help yourself to conclusions about religion, the afterlife, 'all will be well', 'don't worry, be happy' and all that jazz, and nevermore wonder about human irrationality. Take it as a given, as something that needs go EXTINCT.