[smart (OP)]

i would like to know how likely that human life is the pinnacle of evolution?




What do you think?

[Kryptid]

You would have to define what "pinnacle" means in this case.

[chiralSPO]

I'm gonna say that this is an easy "no."

How can I be so certain, even without quite knowing what "pinnacle" entails? Three reasons:

1) Even if we were to agree that humans are somehow the farthest along some one-dimensional axis of "evolutionary perfection", we are still evolving rapidly. Based on how evolution works, I think it is likely that our descendants in 1000 generations will be "better" than we are. And if we are not, it is likely because we have been extinguished by another "even better" species.

2) I don't think that it is safe to assume that we are the farthest along some one-dimensional axis of "evolutionary perfection." As humans, we have comparably very long generational periods: at least 12 years must come between conception of a human and when they can first conceive (and today it's more like 20-30 years). Compare that to fruit flies, which can have a new generation every 12 days or so. That allows for a lot more refinement. If (for instance) there is a drastic change of climate over 200 years, we might be able to fit in 15 generations, but fruit flies will have had >5000 generations to adapt. (our technology advances quickly enough that we don't have to worry about this type of evolutionary pressure.) And fruit flies aren't even fast in the scheme of things. E. coli cells split every 20-40 minutes, you do the math...

3) And speaking of E. coli... Sexual reproduction certainly has its benefits, especially when diversity is important. (having a built in randomizer that mixes and matches certain sets of genes certainly helps creating randomness). But the way that bacteria exchange genetic information might be better for optimizing: they can basically trade genetic material like baseball cards (they are open source systems and will give useful apps to each other). http://biology.kenyon.edu/courses/biol114/Chap03/mobile_genes.html

4) Speaking of genetic material: humans definitely don't have the longest or most complex genetic code either (not by a long shot). Even within the animal kingdom, we are on the short end, but longer than most birds. Plants and protozoa have many, many times as many base pairs.

[smart (OP)]

No living organisms on Earth or elsewhere have the ability to think like we do. I think it's important to recognize that. We are most likely the most advanced living beings to have ever existed in the universe for this unique reason.

[evan_au]

No living organisms on Earth or elsewhere have the ability to think like we do.

Turn it around: The fact that we don't think like other organisms must then show that they are more advanced than we are. It sounds like a wishful argument to me.

We tend to focus on brains, and think that "size matters", and yet behavioural scientists have been surprised by the types of problems that can be solved by New Caledonian crows, with their tiny bird brains.

We also point to our ability to modify our environment to a greater extent than other species. But some of us point to the fact that "modify" eventually translates into "destroy" - and is that really advanced?

In fact, humans are much weaker than our nearest relatives - geneticists have pointed to mutations that make our muscles weaker, and this weakness is our strength - favoring dexterity over strength.
- And the human sense of smell is far weaker than our canine companions - this lack of input is probably what allows us to tolerate crowded train carriages, business meetings with people who don't come from our village, and polluted cities. Again, our strength is based on weakness.

I think that a sustainable settlement on another planet would show that we have taken the next step.
- The voyage of Columbus merely got him where people and animals had already arrived, by foot and canoe.

[alancalverd]

Famous exchange between Lucille Ball and a parrot:

"Stupid bird!"

"I can talk. Can you fly?"

AFAIK no other species is as stupid or pathetic as homo sapiens. Perverts and megalomaniacs do not become presidents of wildebeeste herds or queens of beehives. Dogs fight over food, not religion. An octopus can unscrew the lid of a jar - an activity that seems to be beyond the capability of half the human race. Other animals migrate when the climate changes: humans just reproduce to the point where they can't feed themselves, then expect everyone else to bail them out. Humans are happy to sacrifice their youngest and fittest in war, spend a fortune keeping their demented elders alive, and do all they can to prevent the unfit (including convicted criminals) from committing suicide.

If rational behavior is an indicator of evolutionary status, humans score rather lower than bacteria.

[syhprum]

I believe it is bacteria that that god created in his own image and we were only made as an environment for them

[chiralSPO]

I believe it is bacteria that that god created in his own image and we were only made as an environment for them

Yes, another good point: our bodies themselves are complex ecosystems, dominated by bacteria (I believe human cells are outnumbered at least 10:1 by bacterial cells). And it's not just bacteria that we have symbiotic relationships with: would you believe that you probably have a few dozen tiny little mites living on your face right now? http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150508-these-mites-live-on-your-face