John Galt:
A person is smart, people are stupid. When in large numbers, the lowest common denominator wins out.

What this guy said. I'm too lazy to read the rest of this.

Depending on who you are talking about some are smart and some aren't. Also there are different kinds of smart, book smarts and street smarts or common sense. Some people have both, Some have neither and some have one of the two. People in general however are not smart because the majority of them aren't.

I quote Tommy Lee Jones from Men in Black: "A person is smart, but people are idiots." It is true. If you take one look at the world for what it is and still believe that people are intelligent en-mass, then I consider your opinion to be extremely misinformed.

Personally, I find intelligence as the ability to survive in a habitat given. Humans are very intelligent in this aspect. Although we kill eachother all the time, there is still an ever-growing rate of people flowing into the planet. By working together, we're making the population grow.

As others have said, there are a lot of "stupid" people because they don't use their potential. Take the poor. They could make surviving much easier, but they didn't use their intelligence to help them get far. So they lead their life struggling to get by and have a family to carry on their name. But wealthier people (middle class and upper class) used what they could, to do what they could and they lead a typically more suitable life to raise a family for.
This doesn't mean some are and some aren't intelligent. It's just whether or not we want to survive or not.

I don't see why people are saying we're smart because other species are below us. That's not what was asked. He was just asking if humans were smart. We are.
But most animals are as well. They've adapted and evolved. Some better than us to survive. Just because we can recollect memories and develop tools to help suit us for survival, doesn't mean we're superior.

Overall we are quite stupid as a species IMO. Lots of us are smart, but I'd say a LARGE majority would forget to breath if it wasn't autonomic.

We're smart, but sometimes we are just clueless.
Case in Point: At my school, I remember a physics class oh so long ago when a girl, when asked if she knew off the top of her head, which way North was. She responded with an enthusiastic "That way!" with one finger pointed directly...

up.

I find it interesting that the question posed sounds more like a query on the species. What has been discussed so far has been consideration of psychology and society (individuals & groups).

As a species we are smart. We have effectively outbid every other species in direct competition and now indirectly control the rest. War has been a part of the animal kingdom for as far as we can study. Poverty is much the same. Therefore how can one consider us smarter than the kingdom? How often do we fight compared to other species? How many cases of poverty do we have compared to other species?

As individuals and society goes there are plenty of stupids or smarties as the case may be. My lil bro once tried to convince me that 'preserving' the blond gene was important. This was said while eating dinner with my (at the time) girlfriend of Chinese lineage. I could tell his intention wasn't racial, but earmarked of stupidity. I hid my annoyance and replied with a questioning voice, "But if all the dumb blonds die off isn't that just like natural selection?" My gf and my mother both stifled their laughter as my brother scrunched his face in confusion.

I've been reading The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature. If you find any of the above depressing or dismissive, that's probably why.

Intelligence is relative, it all depends on what you compare to the human intellect. Compared to animals we are smart. When asked such a question, however, I personally compare how much the human intellect knows to how much can be known. That gap is enormous...in this sense we are incredibly stupid.

last I checked a bear or tiger never built anything.

show me a monkey who can light a fire or a pig who can knit a sweater.

BallPtPenTheif:
show me a monkey who can light a fire or a pig who can knit a sweater.

Show me a human that can find it's way through magnetics, sonar or smell.

Actually, show me a human under 14 that's capable of living by itself. Most animals can manage it after less than a year.

The_root_of_all_evil:

BallPtPenTheif:
show me a monkey who can light a fire or a pig who can knit a sweater.

Show me a human that can find it's way through magnetics, sonar or smell.

Actually, show me a human under 14 that's capable of living by itself. Most animals can manage it after less than a year.

Key difference. Those animals that can do that, have it from birth due to evolution

Humans had to learn on there own how to use fire, make a wheel .../... build nuclear power plants

The_root_of_all_evil:

BallPtPenTheif:
show me a monkey who can light a fire or a pig who can knit a sweater.

Show me a human that can find it's way through magnetics, sonar or smell.

Actually, show me a human under 14 that's capable of living by itself. Most animals can manage it after less than a year.

natural genetic advantages having nothing to do with intelligence or smarts. humans can stand upright, but that doesn't matter either. fires or a sweater... pick an animal.

Somethingironic:
Humans are, by any way you want to measure intelligence, the smartest creatures known to man.

Do you understand the irony of this statement?

Give an animal 14 years where it is protected by it's parents and allowed to process information whilst not having to fend for itself and I think we'll see similar.

Why would a dog, cat or sheep need a sweater when they could grow their own?
Why would an animal NEED a fire? They adapt to the benefits (heat/light/reduction in harmful bacteria) in their own way.

Just because we have tools that can replicate natural genetic advantages doesn't make us better, because our tools are reliant on the social infrastructure (See bees) or tool adaptation (see octupi, birds, squirrels). That's our genetic advantage.

Judging things on an anthropomorphic level isn't really a fair measure of intelligence. They already have everything they need to survive. Take our tools away and we're no longer able to function as an animal anymore.

Try living for a day without electricity, for example. (Not just your own, but any use of electricity : cars, delivery trucks, freezers). Take away a cat/dog's reliance on humanity, and they'll still be going for a good year.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

The_root_of_all_evil:

Try living for a day without electricity, for example. (Not just your own, but any use of electricity : cars, delivery trucks, freezers). Take away a cat/dog's reliance on humanity, and they'll still be going for a good year.

We have, for thousands of years. We don't any more, because its easier to do it this way.

Churchman:

The_root_of_all_evil:

Try living for a day without electricity, for example. (Not just your own, but any use of electricity : cars, delivery trucks, freezers). Take away a cat/dog's reliance on humanity, and they'll still be going for a good year.

We have, for thousands of years. We don't any more, because its easier to do it this way.

/facepalm

We'll see what happens when the oil runs out.

We will develop something better. Solar, wind, nuclear, fusion. We just need the push.

Smart is a comparative term. Smart as compared to what? If you're just looking at one category (humans) they aren't smart or stupid, they just are. Individual people are smart or stupid as compared to other people, but even that's questionable when you take the environmental upbringing factors into consideration. One thing I can say with a measure of certainty though. This thread is not smart.

This is a really stupid question.

Well Lord Krunk

We can't really say that Einstein CREATED E=mc^2. It was always there, he just made a connection. Personally, I find Chadwick to be a better precursor to the A-bomb. Special relativity is fun and all, but until the thirties we didn't understand the concept of neutrons, which really pave the way for nuclear science.

Sure, scientists discover things that get used for horrible wars. Just look at Nobel and dynamite. It's easy to bash chemicals for harmful effects like CFC's, but looking at the positive effects at the time they were great.

Even fossil fuels have been both a blessing and a curse. There is no way we could have gotten through the last century without using them, but we're gonna have to stop using them soon or else it's gonna get real bad.

Religion does still exist. Just like greek mythology still exists. And somehow Germany still exists, despite trying to conquer the world twice and being defeated twice. Even if it doesn't make any logical sense anymore, people will keep on believing in it, even if they are told it is false. Unless you are in Rwanda, then they just kill you and all your family, and those beliefs are removed.

We don't actually need catholics, to be more precise. Figurehead aside, the system of religion is fundamentally flawed and not even backed up by their number one bestselling book for the past 2000 years. (well, really closer to 500, but whatever...)

There are indeed many stupid things people believe, but what allows us to be called smart is the simple truth that if we find something that contradicts perceived truth, we can change. The only stupid people are ones that will not change even with the truth readily available.

Define smart. is being able to play beethoven's 4th smart? If so, Take that person and throw him into the wild with nothing. He will die.
Take Purplerain away from his compooter, and throw him into the wild. Is he still smart without technology? Think about that.

jthm:
Smart is a comparative term. Smart as compared to what? If you're just looking at one category (humans) they aren't smart or stupid, they just are. Individual people are smart or stupid as compared to other people, but even that's questionable when you take the environmental upbringing factors into consideration. One thing I can say with a measure of certainty though. This thread is not smart.

Humans are stupid as compared to how intelligent they generally tend to think they are.

In the grand scheme of things, humans are the smartest creatures on the planet.

In GENERAL humans are not very smart.
For example:

The current president of the united states
The people who VOTED for him
Creationism

The list can go on.

Naybo:
We're not the smartest, we're just the most awesome and trigger happy.
Badgers are the smartest.
They're black and white, so no racism ^-^

Hats off to the badgers...

I especially like the saying "A person is smart, people are dumb" it pretty much sums it up.
Singularly a human can be very intelligent. In small groups much can be accomplished. but in large groups we tend to go along with the crowd even if it doesnt make sense.

The fact is were afraid of standing out and being different. Not to mention if something goes wrong its a typical human reaction to think someone else will take care of it.

While Humans can be intelligent we're also incredibly smug about it. Which goes to some idiots heads making them incredibly arrogant. But then what constitutes as "intelligent" can often be a subjective question. If someone intelligent spoke a sentence with very complex words, another person who might not know what that person said believe it was all jibberish and say the intelligent person is infact a moron.

So heres something to think about, would an intelligent person know he was intelligent if there were no morons or commoners around? Humans like to know who they are by comparing themselves to others. Maybe the finding of intelligent life on other planets will settle the question if humans are smart or not.

The Unified Pratchett Group IQ Equation
Group IQ = (Dumbest Group Member IQ)/(Population of Group)

It's fun to say that people are dumb a person is smart, but as mentioned before "smart" is a comparative term. Even if all technology were arbitrarily taken away from humans we can just re-engineer/reverse engineer it again.

As for doing without technology... we can. Our ancestors had an interesting tactic to hunt larger game: scare it into running over a cliff. Requires no tangible tech, had to be found or figured out.

'Fish aren't smart; they can't walk on land!'
If the term 'smart' is usually used in reference to abstract intelligence, and we are compared to other species we win out. If the term 'smart' is being used to compare our innate abilities to a specific task that is not of our ken there's little point. Is there a point to saying a barracuda can react in .015 seconds compared to our .3 seconds? I figure there's not much considering that our abstract intelligence also allows us to bypass situations in which we are naturally at a disadvantage by making new technology.

I find it odd how it has become the 'cool' 'independent' and 'witty' to start heckleing humanity's intellegence.

Let me defend my species from itself by saying that by stating humans are idiots we are effectivly saying humans are stupid compared to other life-forms. Humans have had many technological, artistic and cultural achievements that no animal has matched, for example:

Have chimps managed to create things like the rocket engine, suspention bridges and computers? No
Has any animal created an advanced social and economic system of government? Someone please inform me when they find dolphins practicing communism and establishing exchange rates.

Many people have talked about the lowest common denominator showing our inherent stupidity while the few handful of exceptional geneius' explain our many achievments (frequent mention goes to the difference between a person and people). Explaining this difference does very little to prove your point. If we say people are stupid, that is including everyone, both the most and least intelligent examples of mankind. To suggest otherwise is to point out the blatanly obvious(if you say people are stupid when you are only refering to the most retarded people you can think of, you haven't really proven much).

PS: I haven't taken the time to read what everyone has said so don't critisise me if quite a few people agree with me prior to what I've written here.

To call something smart, you have to have something not-smart to compare it to. This something, for a balanced response, must be about the same as the original something.

We have yet to discover something that comes anywhere near human levels. The closest living example, the ape, still enjoys plundering termite nests for sustenance.

In short, your question cannot be answered.

Khedive Rex:

Korolev:
As a species we are generally intelligent, and a hell of a lot more intelligent than any other species on the planet. We are the only species with a complex language that has grammar and syntax. We are the only species which has extend its natural lifespan. We are the only species which have comprehended the most fundamental aspects of the universe. We are the only species with philosophy, advanced morality and science. We are the only species which has ANY prospect of self-improvement.

Actually, dolphins and whales communicate with a more complicated language than we do according to a lot of studies.

Countless species have extended their natural life span by adapting to better live around humans. Whether this involves pretending to be dogs (in the case of wolves) so people will give you food, patroling with three people intead of two (in the case of racoons) to ease the act of stealing food, or just making yourself look cuter and more cuddly while around humans (in the case of pigs who before domestication had tusks and wiry hair and now look mostly harmless) so that humans will get rid of all your parasites and generally make your life more pleasent, species are extending their life spans all the time.

As for not grasping the basics how the earth works, Racoons perfer to wash the food they find before they eat it. There would be no reason to do this except to remove germs. Ants build boats which are capable of crossing things like the Mississippi River, I think they would understand properties like boyancy and displacement. There are also the countless species (Crows, Monkeys, ect) who know to use things like gravity in problem solving.

As for animal morality I would point out that just because we don't recognize it doesn't mean it's not there. We can't get people to agree on what is morally correct even amoungst our own species (and there is often violent disagreement on this particular issue), how would we be able to discern what other species view as morally sound or how would we even know that their species had come to any kind of concensus? that being said though, Elephants have grave yards and mourn their dead and it would be impossible to name all the speicies that put the life of their children before their own.

And evolution gaurantees self improvment. All species are subject to evolution and therefore all species have some prospect of self improvement.

I once sat down and tried to make a list of all the things that empiraclly seperated Humanity from the animal kingdom. The only things I could think of were that humans create things for entertainment and have currency. Looking back I'm not entirely sure that those are unique to humans either.

Woudn't all the above be adaption? The pigs lost the tusks because they became useless on farms and the hair became useless wince farms usually arn't in the cold and they are given a place to sleep. The pigs did not decide to lose the tusks they were used less and less and they then lost it completely. The appendix is not useless. We have just adapted past its usefulness. Intelligence is being able to communicate

Intelligence - the ability to comprehend; to understand and profit from experience

Thats what we do. Just some do those less. We can understand each other, We can comprehend and adjust to what we know. Like from what we have heard and experience we change. We are not creatures of instinct no longer we have evolved past that. We now make choices on what we know, Whats likely to happen and etc.

Bulletinmybrain:
We are not creatures of instinct no longer we have evolved past that. We now make choices on what we know, Whats likely to happen and etc.

*cough* *cough* *cough*

Right...

Tell your mum that there's a bread shortage and see how many loaves appear in your freezer.

We'll always be creatures of instinct; we've just found a definition of intelligence that puts us at the top.

Lanczos:
Firstly: We are not the smartest. Dolphins are smarter than us which makes them the second smartest creatures an this planet. First place in case of smartiness are the mice! Diddn't you read D. Adams Hitchhikers Guide?

Dolphins may be more complex but i have yet to see a dolphin build a city.

No.