Re: genetic superiority

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Phil Nicholls: "Re: AAT Theory"
• Previous message: Phil Nicholls: "Re: great chain of being"
• Maybe in reply to: Alex Duncan: "genetic superiority"
• Next in thread: H. M. Hubey: "Re: genetic superiority"

hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu (H. M. Hubey) graced us with the following
words:

>Alex Duncan <aduncan@mail.utexas.edu> writes:

>3) It still doesn't mean that we are not the most highly
>evolved. It just means we're stuck with intelligence as
>the only measure of it, for now.

How do you define intelligence in a way that makes sense
interspecifically?

Phil Nicholls pnich@globalone.net
"To ask a question you must first know most of the answer"
-Robert Sheckley

• Next message: Phil Nicholls: "Re: AAT Theory"
• Previous message: Phil Nicholls: "Re: great chain of being"
• Maybe in reply to: Alex Duncan: "genetic superiority"
• Next in thread: H. M. Hubey: "Re: genetic superiority"