Skip to main content
7 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 31, 2013 at 13:33 history edited Keegan Keplinger CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 166 characters in body
Jul 31, 2013 at 13:29 comment added Keegan Keplinger I think that's a debate in itself, but since it's not a primary point, I will just remove it to avoid the distraction.
Jul 31, 2013 at 13:24 comment added Gala I see your point but it is only tangentially related to the one I was trying to make, I still don't think any of this has much to do with evolutionary psychology.
Jul 31, 2013 at 12:42 comment added Keegan Keplinger Also, I don't think insects "reason". They certainly process information... whether they're intelligent or not depends on how you define intelligence (different researchers will define it different ways, but there's a lot of room for anthropomorphizing there.)
Jul 31, 2013 at 12:37 comment added Keegan Keplinger the question has been changed since I answered it, from human reasoning (a process with an associated verb: to reason) to human intelligence (a much broader concept). I don't equate "general information processing" to either human intelligence or human reasoning. Even inanimate objects can process information.
Jul 31, 2013 at 5:23 comment added Gala Good point in the first paragraph but I don't think the evolution of intelligence has much to do with evolutionary psychology. One of its main assumption/tenet/characteristic is that specific behaviors or psychological traits evolved. That's the main point of contention and the level evolutionary psychologists discuss; they don't have much use or much to say about some general information processing capacity. Furthermore, evolutionary thinking about cognition is certainly not limited to evolutionary psychology, there is no reason to consider it “belongs” to its proponents in any way.
Jul 31, 2013 at 0:24 history answered Keegan Keplinger CC BY-SA 3.0