Evidence suggests that no creature becomes more intelligent than it needs to be, intelligence is expensive of calories, for example, human brains are about 2% of our overall mass but require 20% of our minimum calorie intake. So intelligence beyond basic survival needs is actually maladaptive for...
Good answer. To illustrate the second paragraph: gecko does not have the "hardware" that is powerful enough for intelligence. You cannot run videogames on a basic handheld calculator, and you cannot run "intelligence" on a gecko's brain.
With regard to "Evidence suggests...", see the story of Gua, a chimpanzee raised from birth along side a human child (Donald) in the 1930s: "For a while, Gua actually excelled at these tests compared to Donald. But eventually, as NPR notes, Gua hit a cognitive wall: no amount of training or nurturing could overcome the fact that, genetically, she was a chimpanzee." See smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/…. [Emphasis on "cognitive wall" is mine.]
@jkd If it is immortal, then "pressure" is irrelevant. It doesn't have pressure to survive by being smart, nor does it have pressure to tone down the resources already being used for the limited amount of intelligence they currently possess. It will just stay the way it is currently.
While I agree with your conclusion, please don't bring evolutionary adaptation into it. That is something that can only happen across multiple generations, the length of an individual's life is completely irrelevant.
"So intelligence beyond basic survival needs is actually maladaptive for individuals and species." ... looks at human race ... I think your logic contradicts actual observation and is therefore unscientific.
@jpmc26 No I'm not, look at our Y chromosome deterioration rate, we aren't going to be here nearly long enough to register on that time scale. That's if we survive the ecological damage we're doing.
Actually it sounds like your argument could be stated as "Animals become as smart as they need to be (Within physical limitations)". Some individual animals are as smart as human children already. The big difference is speech which is extremely tailored to our physiology. If we could communicate with certain individual animals as easily as we do with each other (from birth) they might become quite smart--perhaps smarter in some areas because their brains might be specialized in ways ours aren't.
@Ash Many species have already completely lost the Y chromosome, and they are striving. It is not needed for sex determination. It is sufficient, but not necessary. There are many other genes on many other chromosomes that play a part, and could equally determine sexual differentiation and reproductive ability. The y chromosome is trivial to human survival.
Evidence suggests that sentience alone leads to higher intelligence. That is, sentience itself is sufficient to drive a species to develop greater intelligence. By the OP's definition of intelligence, my cat (without any doubt, very sentient) is continuously developing new ways to plan ahead and conspire to get outside, in spite of my attempts to keep him inside. Every obstacle I put in place, he finds a way to overcome it. Is he becoming more intelligent?
@JustinThyme I know of only one vertebrate without a Y Chromosome, the species is composed entirely of genetically identical self-cloning females. The scientists studying them consider them the most vulnerable species on Earth, one mutation, either in them, or something in their microbial environment, and they will vanish almost instantly. No Y Chromosome, no genetic diversity, no genetic progress, no longevity.
@JustinThyme But sentience itself is not an existing trait of the described baseline so it's not relevant to the question. No your cat is gaining experience and learning new ways to do things, said ways being within the limits of his existing intelligence. Intelligence is a measure or his problem solving ability not the number of problems he solves with it.
Discussion on answer by Ash: Given im…
Discussion on answer by Ash: Given im…