Human Intellect: Uniqueness Analyzed - Essay Example

?Human Intellect: Uniqueness Analyzed Introduction The human specie is said to be cut above the rest of the living organisms existing on this earth. For one, no other breathing creatures have been able to surpass the intellectual achievements that human beings have attained, including the construction of towering infrastructures and elaborate organizational capabilities. On that account, it seems that the advanced improvement of biological neural structures and functions played the major parts in bringing the human rise forward. According to Hauser and Spelke (2004), such development is evolutionary in nature, where the core concepts of psychological and neuronal knowledge systems are specific, rather than generalized, in human beings. Aside from the triumph in manipulating the environment to suit their comfort and convenience, mankind has attained an enormous feat in projecting an extensive language system, geographically distinct, but still contains the main principles of language formats and techniques in similar context. Even on the cultural aspect, the value of morality and social conduct is relatively complex compared to their wilder counterparts. Yet in some respects, a number of similarities emerge; animals and human beings may be separated by higher order of cognition, but a number of parallel characteristics portray the proposition that these two entities share common dynamics on approaches in learning. Common Aspects in Learning Many applauded the human race for the network of language systems developed all throughout the centuries. From the simplest symbolic gestures to interpretative inductions in communication language, the idea of man creating relevant sounds that can be extensively comprehended may seem like this is unique in their specie. In the concept of language and communication, “language learning capability” is one of the most important communicative areas that must be focused on (Nadal, et al., 2009, p. 149). The capacity in learning communication patterns is common in man, but this is not necessarily absent in other living species. For one, even animals like the tamarins and mice have experimentally exhibited the act of distinguishing rhythms in each of their communication language. By doing so, the difference in language systems does not account for the lack of learning skills in animals, proving that even animals are capable of learning their own type of language--where only their kind can understand. In another learning proposition, the superior language memory in humans are also shared by other animals, like the dogs, which can competently recall and act according to conditioned nouns that are task-oriented (Nadal, et al., 2009). The memory and aptitude required in imitating communication sounds are also performed by other animals, such as specific classes of birds, which are said to be traced on discrete neural systems that give rise to the ability to retain and perform learned language sounds (Hauser & Spelke, 2004). In more simple terms, other animals can also keep track with the organization of interspersed syllabic syntax, giving the appearance that despite the interference of environmental stimuli, they also have the conditioned capability to extricate important communication issues from benign ones. Most of all, even primates can establish the inclusion of vowel systems in their language patterns. Theoretically believed to be of the same genus with the humankind, it is little wonder that primates can integrate such principles in their communication (Nadal, et al., 2009). The discussed cases of similar language competency goes to show that not all the principles in language are found only in man--there are some ways around that notion. In another area of learning, the social aspect of learning is also not only apparent in mankind. The social values in culture dictate the establishment of common norms that the whole group to follow. In an excerpt on the evolution of living organisms, a theoretical proposition is presented wherein species are said to be morally guided by their social instincts. Such supposition gives the impression that even animals develop a set of moral behaviors that may account for their survival in the wilds. In this instance, the ideals of “sharing, fairness, and reconciliation” are not unique in human beings, as they are also manifested by their primate relatives (Nadal, et al., 2009, pp. 152-153). As there is a tough competition for male dominance in each group of primates, from chimpanzees to orangutans, the act of sharing food stocks can be the social means to prevent violent aggressions and maintain the neutral interactions between each member of the primates. In parallel, such behaviors also characterize the attitude in human beings, where they tend to avoid violent fights by mutual interactions and appropriately allocating resources to each members of the group. In relevant theme, the values of fairness and reconciliation serve as strong factors within the primate groups, where kins recognize the import of delivering punishments to those who committed cheating their kins within the group, and the emotional motivation that drives each one to compromise in order to avoid violent encounters (Nadal, et al., 2009). These are quite familiar scenarios, as human beings from different cultural orientation employ such patterns of behavior in dealing with negative arousal and sustaining a peaceful group harmony. The attitude of imitation is a significant behavior that denotes the act of basic learning skill. As discussed in early topics, some birds have the strong tendency to copy communication sounds from environmental sources--this takes an intensive intellectual capability to do so. In a cultural appeal, Huffman, Nahallage, and Leca (2008) have experimentally proven the notion that even animals can exhibit innovations in independently-learned social behaviors, which can transcend and improve through time. In a specific area, the cultural tradition of stone handling of several primates acts as the precise case of social revolution. The imitative act is still at the center, where the young samples of Arashiyama primates tend to copy the behaviors of their closest kin, their mothers. The close proximity gives the young ones the opportunity to observe, and in later development, demonstrate the exact actions performed by the adult mentors (Huffman, et al., 2008). There is a link between the mental development in young primate and human infants. Tomasello and Rakoczy (2003, p. 125) briefly explain the mechanism of learning in infants, where the promotion of “social referencing...(and) imitative learning” are the primary learning behaviors. Of similar scenarios, both the young primates and infants learn on the same manner, through basic imitative manners. The integration of culture, then, starts early on in life, and is fostered through the diffusion of patterned behaviors from adult groups to their offspring. Primarily, cognitive learning is developed depending on neural networks, as such in imitative acts, and enhanced by the presence of nearby environmental stimuli, the mothers as carers for the young one. Culture, through language and social systems, possesses a complex nature, but can still be relevantly learned by both humans and animals. Recognition of Distinct Human Intellect The intelligence projected by human beings manifests more than the instinctual cognition and social behaviors present in both wild and domesticated animals. On a significant scale, human beings can relevantly attain a constructive perspective on things--in a deeper and more elaborate manner. In a distinctive conduct, human beings account for three general qualities that set them apart from other living species: numerical intelligence, significant language perception, and extensive social integration. Granted that animals possess the necessary intelligence for survival, but on a multifaceted sense, this serves as the limiting dimension that hampers their evolutionary progress, indicating that there are things that they cannot do-- as only man can. On the cognitive level, the numerical and constructive communication elements can be construed as transition points that separate man and animals. On the former dimension, Hauser and Spelke (2004) strictly emphasized that the concepts of numeric can solely be fully understood by human beings. The complex nature of numerical standards, with its different scales and versions, only man can extensively learn each of its subtopics in an organized and step-by-step procedure, from single discrete integers to more complex arithmetical forms. To clearly assess such phenomena, an experimental study on a chimpanzee had been carried out, where the chosen subject had been intensively trained on the numerical forms, as well as its practical association with actual objects. On the first three digits, from 1-3, the chosen subject had successfully applied the new learning concept on a variety of sample items; but in a span of two decades, numerical learning stood at a standstill in the value of 9. Moreover, in spite of rigid training, numerical understanding still falls on the quantified category, and not on inductive association common in human beings (Hauser & Spelke, 2004). In a more developed state, human beings can construct statistical analysis through basic calculation skills, an action that can never be initiated by their inferior cousins, the primates. The numerical knowledge, then, is one proof that mankind has a unique ability that assists in building more analytical constructs. Language is also another assessment parameter of cognitive competency. In earlier discussions, the common language traits between human beings and animals have been demonstrated, where learning abilities in communication memory, rhythm, noun and vowel forms, and recurrent language patterns are treated as shared attributes. Yet, these are not the only categories that complicate language learning. Unlike animals, human learning imposes proficiency in setting associations between language structures and its inherent meanings. Nadal, et al. (2009, p. 150) posit that only man has the general capability of creating “mentally structured sounds into meaningful units...(through) combination into words.” Birds can imitate the words fed unto them by man, but they cannot individually create such mental units on their own. The operative term here, then, is mental construction--where only man has attained such novel growth. In a typical way, this ability is nurtured through academic means; a connection between the deeper and surface learning approaches is significantly compared for better learning results (Gijbels, et al., 2009). Evidence points out that the individuality of word and sentence construction is reserved for human communication. In so far, no animals have yet to develop their own language systems that can surpass those of the mankind. In describing man’s unique interactions in society, it seemed that the emotional cognition involved in such field is shared by their evolutionary cousins, the apes. Nadal, et al. (2009, p. 155) propose the morality of keeping a harmonious association with each member of the group, with “consolation, conflict intervention, and mediation” at the midst of the cohabiting animals. Such demonstration may have clarified the notion that to a certain degree, social values can also develop in animal. Nonetheless, Tomasello and Rakoczy (2003) explained that such schematic social pattern may exist, but at a different level than those in man’s standards. To a point, human beings have a distinctive way in handling issues concerning a variety of social perspective, with prior considerations to self and others--in a mutually understanding concept. In like conditions, social patterns in human beings, thus, operate on a higher transitory period; one that accounts for the general consensus of others, before proceeding in moral acts that satisfies societal parameters. Conclusion All in all, the intellectual transition bestowed upon man through the passing decades account for their advancements in diverse aspects, ranging from cognitive intelligence to the values in social interactive sensitivity. What man lack in physical strength and armour, they compensate through intellectual guile. Man’s development in cognition has branched out to diverse competency, from language perceptions to numerical analysis, giving the founding basis in which fertile ideas are elaborated and realized--in the form of infrastructure and well-organized bodies of knowledge. On this account, systems in communication are also at an enhanced stage, where sets of language syntax are utilized by man to generate understandable communication patterns; this is potentially advanced for animals to comprehend. In further observation, the social capabilities of man are wounded up in compounding networks, where all possible avenues of strengths and weaknesses are considered before tactfully acting on them--while their animal counterparts act in accord to their innate survival instinct. Admittedly, there are more common themes linking the humans to animals, but in this paper, it shows that the overall lead goes to mankind, as they are a step forward in cognition and social behaviors, keeping them at the top of the web chain of life. The similarities are, thereby, basic in form, but as these capacities get intricate, human competencies are intensified--giving them unique qualities that cannot be exemplified by other living organisms. References Gijbels, D., Coertjens, L., Vanthournout, G. Struyf, E., & Van Petegem, P., 2009. Changing student’s approaches to learning: A two-year study within a university teacher training course. Educational Studies, 35(5), pp. 503-13. Hauser, M.D. & Spelke, E., 2004. Evolutionary and developmental foundations of human knowledge. In: M. Gazzaniga. ed. 2004. The cognitive neurosciences. Cambridge: MIT Press. no pag. Huffman, M.A., Nahallage, C.A. D., & Leca, J.B., 2008. Cultured monkeys: Social learning cast in stones. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(6), pp. 410-14. Nadal, M., Barcelo-Coblijn, L., Olivera, A., Christensen, J.F., Rincon-Ruiz, C., & Cela- Conde, C.J., 2009. Darwin’s legacy: a comparative approach to the evolution of human derived cognitive traits. Ludus Vitalis, XVII(32), pp. 145-172. Tomasello, M., & Rakoczy, H., 2003. What makes human cognition unique? From individual to shared to collective intentionality. Mind & language, 18(2), pp. 121-47. Read More