The Remarkable Story of the Evolution of Intelligence

“…the difference in mind between man and the higher animals, great as it is, certainly is one of degree, and not of kind.” –Charles Darwin, in The Descent of Man

I just finished reading Carl Sagan’s The Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence. It’s a great book, though nowhere near as good as his masterpiece, Cosmos. It’s very intriguing to ponder about the origin of intelligence. The complexity of the brain and ratio of brain mass to body mass seems to be a reasonable measure of intelligence. But what is intelligence, as manifested by behaviour? Is it unique to humans? How and when, did we become “humanly” intelligent? What could be the possible direction of future evolution of intelligence? These are issues that are touched upon by Sagan. Besides, when we refer to violent, rash or cruel behaviour as beastly, we are probably referring to reptilian character, which is probably a part of us, due to our inheritance of significant portions of the reptilian brain. Emotions like love, and generally sensitive behaviour, are characteristic of most mammals.

Perhaps one of the most interesting parts of the book is the one which deals with out ancestors. We all know that we are descended from monkeys, but how closely related are we, to them? Particularly enlightening is the report of a study of chimpanzees, in which they demonstrated amazing aptitude for mastering sign language, complete with syntax and semantics. Aren’t we perhaps too chauvinistic in holding our almost universal conviction that human beings are somehow fundamentally superior to the rest of the living world, and that the world is ours to rule?

Perhaps human chauvinism is not particularly recent. We had a variety of different primate species of ancestors, who were probably contemporaries with at least a few others, which means that their reigns may have overlapped. But where are they today? Why did they become extinct? It’s still a mystery. Perhaps it was just natural selection at work, and the smarter primates survived while the others were wiped out. There is evidence of fractured fossil skulls that belonged to one species of our ancestors who didn’t use tools, who were contemporary to another who did. Could it suggest that the smarter(and shrewder) of the two just killed off the other unsuspecting and defenseless group? Could the line of human beings, that led to us, have exterminated all other relatives they thought intelligent and perceived as  a threat? That could explain why today there are no primates other than us displaying obviously comparable levels of intelligence, but there are species like chimpanzees, who at first sight, is “just a monkey” but upon greater scrutiny, show signs of intelligence very similar to our own.

When I read about this theory, I just couldn’t help imagining how the world would have been, had a few of our ancestors survived. The vision of the world that sprang to my mind was eerily like that in the Lord of the Rings- with a variety of human like creatures co-existing. Little and gentle Hobbits who lived in hilliside burrows, the big Men of Gondor who were known for their skill at machines and warfare, the mysterious elves who were legendarily philosophical.

On the whole it is a great book, though certain portions lack the rigor and flow that is so characteristic of the works of Carl Sagan. For example, there is a chapter called “Future Evolution of the Brain”, which actually talks mostly about the human invention of storing knowledge outside our bodies, computers and machine intelligence, and gives a hint of human chauvinism. It’s a very educative work, and is perfect for the layman wishing to know more about intelligence.

His Experiments with Truth

I read Gandhiji’s famous autobiography, The Story of My Experiments With Truth almost a year ago. I had been told by my friends who had read it before, that it wasn’t really that good and they found it boring. But since I was intrigued and curious from what I had read about Gandhiji’s philosophy, I decided to read it myself. I discovered that it was an unremarkable piece of literature.

But I was simply fascinated by the ideas that originated in his undoubtedly remarkable mind, and presented themselves to me from the book. It was inspiring to read about his experiments with life. How he thought and reasoned and created standards that seemed logical and worked for him, in matters such as diet, medicine, faith, economy and politics. My friends seem at best amused and sometimes even repelled that I find his ideas attractive. Some of them have opined that they are archaic and possibly relevant only to the particular social context that he lived in. If anything, I think they are timeless and as relevant today as they were a century ago.

Apart from this, I found it inspiring that a person who lived such an extraordinary life, and possessed such an extraordinary character, was plain unremarkable during his childhood. Some people might find it hard to associate the shy twenty year old who had to get a friend read out his speech at a meeting of people with a special interest, with the philosopher who would go on to influence the thoughts of billions of people, even decades after his death. I firmly believe that the “achievements”, academic or otherwise, of children really don’t mean anything. What really matters is that their characters are nurtured and they are encouraged to think freely.

The ideal childhood is one which affords the child a lot of freedom and interaction with nature, where he learns how to learn, so that when he grows up he can look at the world with an integrated view and decide for himself what to believe, or pursue. I think this is an important point because of the fuss being made today regarding child prodigies and celebrities. I feel that the long years a child spends learning moribund facts, will be more fruitful if they are let out to play in the mud or climb mango trees instead. When they reach the right age, I’m sure they will have developed a taste for worthy pursuits and a hunger to take on the world.

P.S. Playing in the mud or climbing mango trees have nothing to do with Gandhiji’s childhood(!). They were just my figure of speech in a call for giving more opportunity for children to communicate with nature.

‘The God Delusion’

I just finished reading the book, The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. It’s a wonderfully well thought-out critique of religion, and the God hypothesis. Dawkins focuses on why a belief in a supernatural being is so ubiquitous, and further examines the arguments in favour of the existence of God, and explains how scientific evidence contradicts them. He also tackles the social and psychological purposes which religion claims to fulfill, such as morality, consolation and inspiration, and argues why these functions are fulfilled even in the absence of religion. The book ends with a chapter on how the broadening of the horizons of our knowledge through the advancement of science reveals a beautiful and diverse universe, governed by simple and elegant laws, which doesn’t really need a supernatural element for us to perceive beauty.

It is impossible to write a review of this book without mentioning my personal views. If you read the “About me” page, you can probably guess that I am an atheist. I was lucky to have been born into a family which was only mildly religious, though a benevolent personal God(s) was always there, for consolation and inspiration. As I grew up I gradually began to think for myself, and have become a proud, if tactful(since none of the persons closest to me is blindly religious, definitely not fundamentalist, and I respect their faith) atheist.

It’s a must-read for all those who have wondered, at some point in their lives, whether God exists.

An afterthought(25 June): Since writing this post, I have had discussions with a couple of friends about religion, and I think I need to add a few more thoughts here. One of them is an agnostic, and the other a believer. Neither of them could understand why an atheist should be so hostile to religion, if so many people indeed find comfort in faith. I don’t have any problem with faith, but I feel that these are things which one should work out for oneself. Indeed, the believer friend has a beautiful faith, that the universe is full of intentions(whether it is true or not is beside the point), which gives her hope and comfort. In fact, I believed in something similar for a while myself.

Unfortunately, such enlightened faith, acknowledging science and savouring scientific knowledge of the world, is rare and doesn’t reflect the blind faith of an overwhelming majority of the religious people in the world. Just look at the attack on evolution by creationists in the twenty first century, that too in developed countries like the USA today, and you will see what I mean. I understand and sympathize with the (verbal) hostility of Dawkins towards religion. In fact, it’s a stance every true scientist should take, in my opinion, since religion has tried too much in the course of history, to discourage scientific enquiry and encourage unquestioning faith as a virtue.

Besides, it beats me why people should find comfort in believing something like creationism, that all evidence points to be false. Why does a better, more beautiful and apparently true knowledge of the world drive them to despair? Probably there is a psychological role for faith, but I think it’s ultimately down to education and consciousness raising. I don’t think the atheists of the world live in quiet desperation. Quite the contrary. I think most of them would have become atheists because of a certain level of satisfaction in learning more about the universe, and perceiving it as it is, without needing the comforts of beliefs which they find false anyway.

The Sparrow’s Resting Place

What’s this thing I sit upon
As I wait for my sweetheart Ron?
Surely, I tell you, not a tree-
For leaf nor twig nor bloom I see.

Tall and rigid a mast underneath,
With wires black taut on either side.
Dozens I see in a row such poles,
Linked to the next by wires tied.

Tears flood my eyes as I recall
That chilly tragic night last fall,
When poor old Stevie sat on one-
Little did he know the wire breathed fire.

So he sat there watching the moon
And as he flapped his wings to keep warm
Alas! He touched those perilous wires…
A flash there was and there he was
Charred and dead- was poor old Stevie.

The very same peril over me hangs- I know-
But I’ve got to sit someplace Ron’ll see.
And all I find that’s high enough
Are these poles, while I wait for her.

No leaves to cover me from the hot Sun,
No yummy worms in woody wood,
Not a swing on a branch in the wind,
Just a pole of hard grey stone, and
Wires of fire taut on either side.

Ah! There in the distance I see my love
Flying to me- she’s graceful as ever.
Face full of fear is hers, but why?
On seeing me atop this pole.

“Careful, darling- don’t you know?
These are wires that breathe fireballs.
On a tree you could have sat,
And I’d find you just as well.”

“Yes, I am careful, dear Ron.
I know the peril that over me hangs.
But look around, my dearest Ron-
Tree or hedge or bush you find?”

“Gone are the trees indeed, but where?”

“Cut, of course, by man- to log.”

“Then let’s go find where there are
Trees in plenty that shelter us.”

And we flew away and away
With the golden Sun on our wings.

—

I wrote this poem back when I was in the Twelfth standard, inspired by the sight of a bird sitting on an electric pole. I recently found an abandoned written copy of it when I was searching for something and thought I’d post it here. The choice of names seems strange and inexplicable, but anyway I don’t think it matters!

Note: The phrase “golden Sun on our wings” is borrowed from the song Raindrops and Roses (”wild geese that fly with the moon on their wings”) in the movie The Sound of Music. I was simply captivated by the beauty of that phrase, and felt that it was a fitting end to the poem.

Passenger (movie)

Last week, I watched the movie Passenger, while I was at Kottayam with Harimama and family. It’s a really good movie(even ignoring the abysmal standards of recent Malayalam movies) and all of us liked it. What I liked most about the movie was that it’s different from the usual “thrillers” in which an inevitably invincible hero fights against all odds and conquers evil. This story gives us a refreshingly different perspective- that of a common man used to an uneventful life, who does not hesitate to jump into the strangest adventure in his life, out of compassion for another human being.

Other things I liked about this movie-

1. Cast- very apt, brought out the best in everyone.
2. Lack of explicit violence- like my cousin Devika remarked, the makers could have made it a lot more gory, but they didn’t
3. Message- I don’t know why I feel so obsessed about this, but I feel that every movie should have a message, because it is such a powerful medium of communication, and I seem to like movies that extra bit if they convey good messages.

Globalisation- or Colonialism 2.0?

That’s the question that invariably comes to your mind as you read Globalisation and its Discontents by Joseph Stiglitz, former Senior Vice-President and Chief Economist of the World Bank. Though we all know that special interests within the developed countries are systematically exploiting the people and resources of the poorer countries, it is startling to hear about the facts from an insider. It is no accident that some of the poorest countries at the official end of colonialism remain extremely poor today. The age of colonialism has not ended. Only today the imperialists use their economic might instead of military power to bully the weaker nations, while pretending to help them “develop”.

The Great Forgetting

Read The Great Forgetting based on The Story of B by Daniel Quinn.

For thousands of years, people of our culture (not in the usual sense of the world, but as Daniel Quinn defines it- “if food is placed under lock and key and people have to work and earn money to buy it back, then the people of that place belong to OUR culture”, in short- modern civilization) believed that humanity, agriculture and civilization all began at roughly the same time, and that they are inseparable from each other. This meant that the general belief was that humanity was only a few thousand years old.

But today we know that it is not so. We know that humanity is about three million years old, and people had led a very different life from ours, obeying the laws of life which applies to all living beings on earth. This had been forgotten in the “Great Forgetting“, when one group of people (or more, we don’t exactly know) decided to take up totalitarian agriculture, convinced that human beings were meant to be the rulers of the world, and that they weren’t meant to live like lions and snakes and butterflies any longer. Man’s destiny was surely something more “glorious” and they broke with their past.

Now, if we call this event the Great Forgetting, something happened in the nineteenth century, which could have been called the Great Remembering. Charles Darwin published his theory of evolution and others followed up his research to tell us that we are much older than a few thousand years, that we evolved from “lower” animals, and did not just appear as “civilized” agriculturalists. This was a bitter pill to swallow as it shook the very foundations of our culture, which was based on the pillar of the alleged specialty and uniqueness of man which vindicated his rule of the world.

But nothing remarkable happened, really. Things went on as before, and the Great Remembering didn’t even happen. No one thought about questioning the assumptions on which our civilization was built. It didn’t even occur to anyone that this new finding could make any difference. After all, that’s pre-history. What did it matter if man evolved from the slime around him? He was always meant to be an agriculturalist, and the ruler of the world.

Nevertheless, a century and a half later, with the world on the brink of catastrophe, at least some people are starting to ask the right questions. It’s still a tiny minority, but importantly it is a growing minority. We can’t blame the Industrial Revolution, we can’t blame cars and factories and missiles. The seeds of disaster have been with us for a long long time- a culture that casts us as conquerors of a world which is hostile and from where we have to forcibly take everything we need. We can save the world only through changed minds.

“If there are still people here in 200 years, they won’t be living the way we do. I can make that prediction with confidence, because if people go on living the way we do, there won’t be any people here in 200 years.” –Daniel Quinn

Reports of Some Real Work Done This Sem

Digital Signal Processing Lab

• Complex Plane
• FFT
• FIR filters
• IIR filters

Digital Image Processing Assignment

IPL and the Commodification of Sport

The Indian Premier League represents the pinnacle of commercialism and commodification of sport. Honestly, no other stunt has been so exclusively focused on making money. I’m not against making money, but I am against destroying the tradition upon the sport is built and in the process destroying the sport itself, to make money.

The BCCI, the richest sports body in the world, suddenly announces that it’s going to start a Twenty20 league and forms eight teams(franchises) out of thin air, to be auctioned away to celebrities. Then comes the auction of the players, as if they were comodities to be traded. It beats me how anyone can have any attachment or loyalty to any of these franchises. Well, they may bear the name of your city, or be owned by your favourite film star!

They say it is inspired by the highly successful commercial model of the English Premier League, but the English football league became commodified only in the last 15-20 years and actually people there are now starting to realize and retaliate against its harmful effects like the alienation of fans from the game.

For me what made English football marketable in the first place, was that English football and English football clubs had a magnificent history and tradition of over a century. Besides, England can boast of the biggest and broadest football pyramid, with around 7500 clubs plying their trade. It is that strong base and history which the game has, that gives the Premier League a foundation to be attractive.

Does IPL and its franchises have anything remotely similar to offer? Obviously not. In fact, Twenty20 itself is a new form of cricket. I don’t even like to call it cricket. I know most of the people would say that Twenty20 is exciting and you don’t have to waste five days watching it.

But in my opinion, Cricket is a subtle sport involving some highly specialized and subtle skills, which can never be universally enjoyed, or match the heart stopping drama of football. Well, Twenty20 is aimed at producing drama so that cricket can be made marketable, but in doing so it kills the subtle beauty of cricket- the joy of watching an outswinger miss the edge, off spinners that drift away and then spin into the batsman, majestic cover drives, packed slip cordons…

I’ve been accused of being a purist, but I’m a cricket fan, and slogging away for 20 overs and edging the ball where slips should have been just doesn’t make cricket. If you are a cricket fan as well, I would request you to not watch the IPL.

Computer Network Experiments with Netkit

While learning about Computer Networks, Sabu and I came across a tool called Netkit, which is a framework for experimenting with computer networks. As you can imagine, it is very difficult to experiment with actual computer networks- you need to get hold of a lot of hardware like hosts, routers, lan wires etc- which is difficult and expensive.

So we do the next best thing. We create a network of virtual machines and play with them. Netkit was developed at the Roma Tre University, based on User Mode Linux and comprises of virtual GNU/Linux virtual machines running in the user space. We can create as many virtual machines as we want, with any number of virtual network interfaces and connect them in any topology we like.

We tried out a few interesting things with Netkit, and we felt we should share it with the class, so we met our faculty, Dr.A.V.Babu, who readily gave us an hour to give a demonstration, which we did this Monday. It went reasonably well. A few of our friends got really interested in Netkit, and hopefully will try it out and get addicted to GNU/Linux!

P.S. The slides of the presentation can be downloaded here. It was a practical demonstration, but I made use of the slides in support, to get started.