Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
Intelligence is a non-physical entity. How does one inherit that through the physical media ? sonhouse says that the DNA carries coded information ( from generation to generation ), which to me appears to suggest / lead to what I thought about Instinct being a built in subroutine type programme. googlefudge does not agree with sonhouse on this matter. Wh ...[text shortened]... y the way, does evolution explain why and how the worker ants developed in the species of ants ?
Intelligence is a non-physical entity.
that depends on how you look at it and exactly how you would define “physical entity”.
Intelligence can be viewed as something that is
generated by physical arrangement of matter in the brain or, according to some philosophers, it could be literally viewed as BEING the physical matter and/or processes in the brain. I am honestly unsure which of those two would be the more semantically correct way of the two ways of describing intelligence but it must be one of those two or both and which one/ones is correct is just a matter of pure semantics thus is purely academic.
How does one inherit that through the physical media ? sonhouse says that the DNA carries coded information
that's your answer. Although, obviously, intelligence only partly comes from inheritance because environment and the animals life experience also plays a big part.
You had stated sometime back that mind is a process and not an entity, fine, how does one inherit a process ?
DNA. There are genes for brain development and also for instinct and memory capacity and ability to reason etc.
I don't know why you may think that inheriting a process would be problematic. Metabolism would be another process that is inherited via DNA, do you see that as problematic?
There has to be an obvious physical limitation also in storage of information and passing it on to next generations.
that physical limit would be huge. A genome can be very large and curry more info than a thousand books.
How does an ant store and carry information to the next generation ?
DNA.
The poor worker ants cannot even pass on that information being incapable of reproduction.
actually it can do so indirectly by serving the queen that shares its genes and thus, by helping to make its queen's genes pass on, it is helping to pass on at least half of its own genes which, according to may biologist, is good enough for this to work. Actually, I think that very last bit is simply wrong!
The reason? Well, to ask why a worker ant serves the queen and even though the worker cannot reproduce is a bit like asking why a flagella of a cell serves the rest of the cell even though a flagella cannot reproduce. The problem with this question is that it is sort of the wrong question because, to answer it, you need to answer a different question namely; why does the queen ant produce worker ants programmed to serve her?
The answer to this is that queen ants evolved to do this because having slave ants serving the queen helps to increase the chances of survival of her and passing on her genes. This actually makes it totally irrelevant what genes the worker has in common with the queen! Hypothetically, although this would not be biologically plausible, this would still work even if the worker ant had NO genes in common with the queen! That's because the worker ants do what they do simply because that is what they are genetically programmed to do and there doesn't have to be a reason “why” that goes beyond that.
How, by the way, does evolution explain why and how the worker ants developed in the species of ants ?
strange question: no worker ant/ants “developed into the ant species” but rather a non-ant species of insect evolved into the ant species.