[late]

Yes quite obviously so.

If you compare like for like, upper class from 2020 to upper class from 1920 or 1820 or 330BCE you can clearly see a severe reduction in knowledge, wisdom and intelligence. You can repeat that for any other class and still come to the same conclusion. At best the only argument modernists can make is in the field of social mobility but that does not equate to intelligence.

Our overreliance on third-party information has made us far stupider than people of previous generations who actually had to deduce things on their own and that does not just apply to politics but to anything.

As previously stated, knowledge or intelligence needs to be measured according to situational awareness.

Acute awareness.

Some of my earliest political memories are from the hostility of Right wingnuts during the McCarthy era.

At the time, I thought my generation was dumber. In my country, at least, we have long had an anti-intellectual streak. Google the Scopes trial..

What I think, is that there are different sorts of intelligence. These new technologies do teach, but it's not what we're used to. One of the problems is the fear, kids today have a lot to be afraid of, and they are vastly more cautious than my generation.

Having said all that, the Anglo countries badly need to improve education. And we all need to adapt to the new tech environment by developing smart programs to augment education. The potential is vast, but developing programs at this level is quite expensive.

[QatzelOk]

Humanity is not getting dumber.
Just because you find some aspects of our culture and/or behavior "dumb" from your singular, unique, perspective...

Did you not notice that I quoted three sources in the OP?

Did you not notice that they all come to the same conclusion regarding decreasing levels of "smartness?"

What are you still capable of noticing? (squeeze my hand if you can hear me )

***

...a better term would be 'domesticated'.
...Similarly to what we witnesses with dog brains relative to wolves, .

This is an interesting theory about WHY humanity is getting dumber. And that you blame technologies... makes me want to agree with you.

And who pushes every new technology? Wise people or moral idiots looking for more power?

***

I think people are more educated today, but people have less common sense and wisdom. I also think people's values have devolved terribly.

Thank you for classifying different types of "smartness": Wisdom, Common Sense, Values, and Education (training)

I think the OP sources are suggesting that it is wisdom, common sense, and values (morality) that are on the skids.

Education... humanity has never seen the kind of scorched earth "education" that humans today get from mass media.

It Takes a Lot Of Education to Keep Us This Stupid

The oligarchic empire is working harder and harder to bolt down our minds in service of its agendas.

Silicon Valley is working more and more openly in conjunction with the US government, and its algorithms elevate empire-authorized narratives while hiding unapproved ones with increasing brazenness.

The mass media have become so blatantly propagandistic that US intelligence operatives are now openly employed by news outlets they used to have to infiltrate covertly.

NATO and military institutions are studying and testing new forms of mass-scale psychological manipulation to advance the still developing science of propaganda...

...

[XogGyux]

Did you not notice that I quoted three sources in the OP?

Did you not notice that they all come to the same conclusion regarding decreasing levels of "smartness?"

What are you still capable of noticing? (squeeze my hand if you can hear me )

Just having a "source" does not necessarily mean the source is reliable/trustworthy. I can show you plenty of sources claiming the earth to be flat, plenty of sources documenting ghost activity, and plenty of sources that swear aliens put antennae in their rectum.
The premise that we are getting dumber simply does not hold any water. Our society today is more capable than any other version in the past. Our population today has a higher percentage of literacy than before. The general public knowledge about various aspects of life is significantly higher than at any prior time in history on average.

My real question to you, if you hate technology so much, why are you stuck using it? Why are you using a computer and an internet connection (technology) right now? are you trying to become a more stupid person? Doesn't this make you a hypocrite constantly bitching about technology's perils and people obsessed with their electronic devices when you yourself are doing it right now?

[QatzelOk]

Our society today is more capable than any other version in the past.

More capable of what? Of playing Russian Roulette with more bullets than ever before?

Our population today has a higher percentage of literacy than before.

Functional illiteracy creates people that can use big machines, but can't reason at all.

The illiterate of a thousand years ago had more wisdom and common sense. But they couldn't drive cars around corners fast, if that's what you mean by "literate."

The general public knowledge about various aspects of life is significantly higher than at any prior time in history on average.

Community relationships? (this has disappeared, and with it, common sense)

Farming? (food has become more processed, chemical and flavorless - potentially toxic in some cases)

Building shelter? (homelessness, rent poor, car company-ordained sprawl)

Teaching children? (neglect, TV kids, 7 hours of screen time...)

How many of the universal-knowledge subjects of a thousand-years ago have YOU mastered?

[noemon]

@XogGyux

No, It does not make him a hypocrite. Using available technology does not mean that one is prevented from asserting this obvious fact(or other facts) about the human condition.

The premise that we are getting dumber simply does not hold any water. Our society today is more capable than any other version in the past. Our population today has a higher percentage of literacy than before. The general public knowledge about various aspects of life is significantly higher than at any prior time in history on average.

Your argument misses the point as it interjects the totality of human technology. However, the argument is about cognition, ie human-intelligence sans artificial aids like human technology.

The individual in the past has far superior cognitive abilities. Is that not obvious to you?

[Crantag]

I smoked cigs when I was a teen. Did a lot of dumb shit.

That's the way kids are. Sometimes I like to say the nervous system doesn't fully connect to the brain, until you're 30.

I smoked and drank and ate shrooms when I was a teen. I still drink and smoke and smoke weed. I think the dumbest thing I did though was drive too fast. I had to top out the speed on any car I drove, see how fast it could go. Now I drive like a grandma usually.

[XogGyux]

More capable of what? Of playing Russian Roulette with more bullets than ever before?

I am not surprised you feel that way given that you have this ability to see doom and gloom on everything touched by humans. But you are wrong.

Functional illiteracy creates people that can use big machines, but can't reason at all.

Says who?
Besides... you think the plebs that chanted "burn the witch" were using a lot of reason? Please, you are just using a very obtuse view of the word that has no anchor on reality.

The illiterate of a thousand years ago had more wisdom and common sense.

That is a bold claim.

But they couldn't drive cars around corners fast, if that's what you mean by "literate."

Actually when I use the word literate I mean exactly what the word means, being able to read. Apparently, there is a functional illiterate here... I wonder who .

Community relationships? (this has disappeared, and with it, common sense)

I disagree with your claim. But even if we were to take it at face value for the sake of argument. What does community relationship has anything to do with being dumber? You can be a very smart and isolated individual, does the lack of community relationships make you stupid? ROFL Chimpanzee have a lot of community relationships
They are not related. I think you are projecting your overall discontent with modern culture.

Farming? (food has become more processed, chemical and flavorless - potentially toxic in some cases)

You have no idea what you are talking about.
More processed, yes, but it is processed for a reason.
Flavorless? Nonsense. We have the most flavorful food ever. Do you know why the trade of spices was so fucking lucrative?
Want to talk about toxic? How about the use of Lead Acetate as a sweetener? Our ancient fellows used it... but you can see right through this because you don't like that M&M use "Red #40" as an ingredient.
Our farming has become more industrialized and our food more processed PRECISELY to make it safer, less toxic, in some cases more nutritious and less harmful. How do you think we discovered pellagra and scurvy? Because there were people in the past who would only eat the same crap that would not offer the required nutrition.

Building shelter? (homelessness, rent poor, car company-ordained sprawl)

How does this relate to "humanity getting dumber"? Homelessness is not the result of "dumbness"....
If you think about it, 100% of the earliest humans were homeless, presumably living in caves and on the open field. If anything, we have dropped the homelessness number significantly from our earlier days.

Teaching children? (neglect, TV kids, 7 hours of screen time...)

LOL.
A few years back I was reading the laments of an old philosopher. I don't really remember who he was, but it turns out that he was lamenting that the society was suffering due to books. Until the invention of the printing press, books were rare and expensive. It is the kind of thing a wealthy/royal family would commission for someone to hand-write and hand-illustrate. This guy, was lamenting that society was suffering because now young people would have access to "cheap" books and this would distract them from other "more important" activities. You can also see similar complaints when magazines started circulating "more recently", people complaining about magazines distracting the youth from books, and later it was the radio, people were concerned that radio was distracting the youth away from books and magazines, and then it came the TV, and people were concerned that TV was distracting the youth.... And later, it was the internet, and now the phones/internet... It is fake nostalgia... there is absolutely nothing wrong with the medium, there is nothing wrong with getting screen time, TV, magazine or books.

How many of the universal-knowledge subjects of a thousand-years ago have YOU mastered?

What the heck do you even mean with "universal knowledge subject" and what do you mean with "mastered"? How many have YOU mastered?

@XogGyux

No, It does not make him a hypocrite. Using available technology does not mean that one is prevented from asserting this obvious fact(or other facts) about the human condition.

I disagree. Using technology to constantly and incessantly bitch about technology is hypocritical.

Your argument misses the point as it interjects the totality of human technology. However, the argument is about cognition, ie human-intelligence sans artificial aids like human technology.

The individual in the past has far superior cognitive abilities. Is that not obvious to you?

Really? How can you say that? Based on what?

[QatzelOk]

...you think the plebs that chanted "burn the witch" were using a lot of reason?

They were illiterate.

Today's generation are functionally illiterate, and get to kill "witches" in foreign countries using high-tech gadgets - but are just as ignorant of the harm they are doing because....

functionally illiterate.

[XogGyux]

They were illiterate.

Today's generation are functionally illiterate, and get to kill "witches" in foreign countries using high-tech gadgets - but are just as ignorant of the harm they are doing because....

functionally illiterate.

Utter nonsense and hyperbole.

[Godstud]

Today's generation are functionally illiterate, and get to kill "witches" in foreign countries using high-tech gadgets - but are just as ignorant of the harm they are doing because....

Literacy has nothing to do with national foreign policy.

I suppose the next thing you'll do is tell me that a person with a Masters in Engineering is illiterate.

We aren't getting dumber. That's just a suggestion that has no critical thinking behind it.

Millennials are the smartest, richest generation — but they have it worse than their parents
https://www.businessinsider.com/young-p ... ves-2016-1

Millennial life: How young adulthood today compares with prior generations
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-tren ... rations-2/


It is pure hubris to say that you're smarter than the people being born today, or indeed those in the past. There's no realistic way to compare them, but education, nutrition, and other things can certainly suggest that we're smarter than our ancestors.

QatzelOk is just like the guy who wants it to be like the 1950s, in the USA, with racism and all.

The only reason we're even discussing this is because of false perceptions brought on by our intelligence and access to vast amounts of information that would make even an ancestor from even 50 years ago, look dumb.

[MistyTiger]

I agree with @noemon about humanity running low on situational awareness. I have one example from work.

One of my colleagues is fairly new to the company. I cut her some slack when I can. But I made a suggestion to her the other day, knowing how my boss thinks. She disregarded my suggestion without really thinking about what I meant. Sure, my suggestion goes against chronological order. I suggested that she bring a 2021 check data into the 2022 check log. Why? Because the 2021 check had not been deposited in December. I knew the boss would ask about the 2021 check. But she said she didn't want to and gave the boss some weak answer that didn't make much sense to me. We don't do things because we feel like it. It makes sense to include the check in the new year's file because it was included in the 2022 check deposit. She studied accounting like me but she had no sense of continuity in that situation, she just wanted to keep 2021 separate from 2022....then we would have to pretend we never deposited the 2021 check? She's not the brightest.

I learned that workplace procedures don't follow what the book says. People have to go with the flow and be flexible. I would hope that she would be more flexible in the future, but only time will tell.

[XogGyux]

I agree with @noemon about humanity running low on situational awareness. I have one example from work.

One of my colleagues is fairly new to the company. I cut her some slack when I can. But I made a suggestion to her the other day, knowing how my boss thinks. She disregarded my suggestion without really thinking about what I meant. Sure, my suggestion goes against chronological order. I suggested that she bring a 2021 check data into the 2022 check log. Why? Because the 2021 check had not been deposited in December. I knew the boss would ask about the 2021 check. But she said she didn't want to and gave the boss some weak answer that didn't make much sense to me. We don't do things because we feel like it. It makes sense to include the check in the new year's file because it was included in the 2022 check deposit. She studied accounting like me but she had no sense of continuity in that situation, she just wanted to keep 2021 separate from 2022....then we would have to pretend we never deposited the 2021 check? She's not the brightest.

I learned that workplace procedures don't follow what the book says. People have to go with the flow and be flexible. I would hope that she would be more flexible in the future, but only time will tell.

I don't think that has anything to do with intelligence. What you are describing, seems like a classic example of a new inexperienced employee pretending to have things under control and ignoring the advise of a more seasoned and experienced fellow. This is often seen when people are trying to prove themselves. Can you objectively say that your coworker is an overall dumber person than a randomly chosen individual from 3k years ago? I suspect no.

[noemon]

I disagree. Using technology to constantly and incessantly bitch about technology is hypocritical.

First of all you are putting technology and Technology in the same soup. That is wrong. You are also doing the same for humanity, you are putting everyone & everything in the same soup. Another error.

It is not hypocritical at all to identify the dumbing down of modern western society as related to technology, while still using Technology. Technology will always be used by humans and that has never prevented anybody be it scientists or social commentators from criticizing bad technology.

You are being unnecessarily obtuse for the sole purpose of being rude to Qatz. It's not cool.

Really? How can you say that? Based on what?

Take any 2 humans, from any profession and compare the 2 humans sans technological aids, one from today and from the past. From any industry, from any profession given that the 2 are like for like and identify which of these 2 humans has superior cognition. I highly doubt you will ever be able to find a single example that shows the modern human as having more cognitive function than the one from the past.

A very clear and obvious example is the use of GPS for drivers. 20 years ago you had to find the location, ask for directions and generally be able to navigate. Today if the GPS makes an error most drivers have the inability to correct the error on their own using their own wits(cognition) and if the GPS takes them to a very wrong route, they will follow it until it's too late.

The average modern driver is far stupider than the average driver just from a mere 30 years ago. This applies to a whole bunch of other things and depending with who you are comparing yourself to, the differences can be quite insanely masssive.

Igor's argument about dogs and wolves is quite good actually.

[XogGyux]

So many things to say. Doubtful I'll get to everything on a single post, but I'll do my best...

First of all you are putting technology and Technology in the same soup. That is wrong.

Ok fine. I'll bite. What's the difference between technology and Technology?

It is not hypocritical at all to identify the dumbing down of modern western society as related to technology, while still using Technology. Technology will always be used by humans and that has never prevented anybody be it scientists or social commentators from criticizing bad technology.

So the excuse is "other people did it"?. Would you be surprised if I told you I think those people are being hypocritical as well?

You are being unnecessarily obtuse for the sole purpose of being rude to Qatz. It's not cool.

So the title of the threat and his OP is a blanket insult for all of humanity but I am the rude one for pointing out the absurdity of the claim? I think you are wrong, forgive my rudeness....

Take any 2 humans, from any profession and compare the 2 humans sans technological aids, one from today and from the past. From any industry, from any profession given that the 2 are like for like and identify which of these 2 humans has superior cognition. I highly doubt you will ever be able to find a single example that shows the modern human as having more cognitive function than the one from the past.

Oh, you are stuck in a deserted island with Galen and Myself, but you rather have Galen treat your affliction based on humoral theory medicine than me? GL with that

A very clear and obvious example is the use of GPS for drivers. 20 years ago you had to find the location, ask for directions and generally be able to navigate.

That's your big example of how technology is bad? You know what else can navigate without GPS? Doves, good luck trying to prove that Doves have higher cognition than modern humans.

Today if the GPS makes an error most drivers have the inability to correct the error on their own using their own wits(cognition) and if the GPS takes them to a very wrong route, they will follow it until it's too late.

So your example is that some people will make mistakes when doing tedious/repetitive tasks that could get them into trouble? Big fokin deal, this is not new. How many carpenters have lost their fingers? How dumb do you have to be to cut your own finger? It happens... and it is NOT a measurement of cognition or intellect. We have the ability to automate certain tasks to a degree, and sometimes this fails us. Sometimes we can drive in the wrong direction if the GPS tells us to, sometimes we can hammer our own fingers, sometimes we can follow an insane general into certain death. This is not an example that proves that modern humans are inferior to their predecessors, this is merely an example of all humans being fallible, you are simply ignoring the failures of our predecessors and focussing on their wins. Another example of activities that we automate and sometimes fail us is walking... nobody thinks about walking, we just walk... but sometimes we have a shitty step, or move a bit too quick, or put our feet on the wrong place, etc... and we fall. Is that a failure of cognition? How stupid are you for putting your left foot 3cm into the black ice and slipping!?

The average modern driver is far stupider than the average driver just from a mere 30 years ago. This applies to a whole bunch of other things and depending with who you are comparing yourself to, the differences can be quite insanely masssive.

When did driving become the universal measurement of cognition?
Ancient Egyptians couldn't drive, so they are very dumb then

Igor's argument about dogs and wolves is quite good actually.

Nope. It is the usual nonsense that he spews with the usual poor understanding of how evolutionary biology works. I am surprised you are missing that. Are you being sarcastic now?

[late]

There is so much wrong in this thread it's nearly giving me a headache.

In brief, mostly kids are not dumber, they are simply different.

Americans are, as a group, anti-intellectual. That goes back to the 1800s, and may largely be a result of the birth of the Modern. Which gave us a world full of solutions that are either not intuitive, or are anti-intuitive.

Kids are very cautious, they lack trust and for perfectly good reasons. They feel like they are being screwed 666 ways to Sunday. Which is an accurate perception.

There is a cycle to generational change. After Prohibition ended, the country stayed drunk for years. Their kids saw the result, and drank a lot less. Ike was one of them. Then my generation came along, and let's just say we set new standards for the recreational use of chemicals..

Lastly, every generation getting old thinks the younger generation are idiots. They aren't, they're just different.

[Potemkin]

Oh, you are stuck in a deserted island with Galen and Myself, but you rather have Galen treat your affliction based on humoral theory medicine than me? GL with that

You are simply asserting that you have more, and better, medical knowledge than Galen. Which is undoubtedly true. But are you more intelligent than Galen was? This is much more doubtful. Somebody (I forget who) once said that the measure of an educated person is whether or not they accept that Aristotle was one of the greatest thinkers who ever lived, despite the fact that we now know that almost everything he ever wrote was wrong. This is the point which I think @noemon is trying to make.

[QatzelOk]

The average modern driver is far stupider than the average driver just from a mere 30 years ago. This applies to a whole bunch of other things and depending with who you are comparing yourself to, the differences can be quite insanely masssive.

In my first few years as a tour guide, I would mention to the group that Montreal has 200,000 students in a city population of 2 million.

I would then adress a question to one of the university-age tourists: "What percentage is this of the city's population? 200,000 students in a city of 2 million."

One in 20 university students can answer this question on tours.

Usually, an older person who is listening to the question will shout it out after a few uncomfortable seconds of silence from the brilliant university student.

Igor's argument about dogs and wolves is quite good actually.

It is pure hubris to say that you're smarter than the people being born today, or indeed those in the past.

I think Igor was comparing wolves to dogs, and not to humans.

As a dog, I realize it's hard to follow complex arguments, but the wolves are still onboard.

It is pure hubris...

I think I heard the master use this expression to describe the dogs who don't always chase sticks for him.

...new inexperienced employee pretending to have things under control and ignoring the advise of a more seasoned and experienced fellow. ...

Arguing over who gets to be "top dog?" Interesting theory. But I want the wolves back.

... every generation getting old thinks the younger generation are idiots. They aren't, they're just different.

"All the other species think that dodos are going extinct. They're not. They're going to heaven."

[XogGyux]

@Late. Agree with most of what you said except for this part:

Americans are, as a group, anti-intellectual. That goes back to the 1800s, and may largely be a result of the birth of the Modern. Which gave us a world full of solutions that are either not intuitive, or are anti-intuitive.

I don't think Americans are anti-intellectual. For the last 100 years the US has been driving knowledge forward, experimentation, new discoveries, etc. Perhaps it is the culture that we are more exposed to and thus we can see their weak sides more readily but I am sure this would be the exact same thing everywhere else. In fact I know it from experience, there were a lot of "anti-intellectual Cubans" in my prior country, but as a whole, I couldn't claim that cuba is less intellectual or "more dumb" today than it was 100 years, 200 years or 1000 years ago.

You are simply asserting that you have more, and better, medical knowledge than Galen. Which is undoubtedly true. But are you more intelligent than Galen was? This is much more doubtful. Somebody (I forget who) once said that the measure of an educated person is whether or not they accept that Aristotle was one of the greatest thinkers who ever lived, despite the fact that we now know that almost everything he ever wrote was wrong. This is the point which I think @noemon is trying to make.

So what you are hinting is something that cannot be done. How can you "measure intelligence" in a vacuum? Not to mention, our intellect is the result of both genetics and environmental forces. We certainly don't have any good reason to believe the humans from just a few hundred years ago had superior genetics that are giving them extra intellectual powers. And the second part of that equation, the "environmental forces" you cannot really properly evaluate them if you take education out of the picture. Yes, I am a better doctor than Galen was because I had better training. But that is the whole point right? We as a society are in overall better shape than any other prior point in history. Yesterday there were news of a team of doctors putting a pig's heart into a human, a few weeks back we were launching the largest telescope satellite in history to see at our universe's infancy. How can somebody claim with a straight face that we are living the in the times of intellectual decadence?

Somebody (I forget who) once said that the measure of an educated person is whether or not they accept that Aristotle was one of the greatest thinkers who ever lived, despite the fact that we now know that almost everything he ever wrote was wrong.

Well, that is the problem with idolizing historical figures. All of the sudden, their avatar is larger than the person. Take socrates, convicted to die by his peers... does it look like he was revealed in life as he is today? What can you infer from his peers? Are you able to infer intelligence from Socrate's peers? What about Gallileo's peers. When you hear their stories... do you imagine a society full of intellectual beasts that value knowledge and truth?
Dumb people, fanatics, etc. have always existed, we just don't remember them as well as the illustrious people that shaped our history. History is not going to remember your anti-vaxxer aunt or my friend's ivermectin-eating grandmother.

[Pants-of-dog]

I am almost certain that Aristotle's grandparents also thought that kids were getting dumber.

[noemon]

So many things to say. Doubtful I'll get to everything on a single post, but I'll do my best...

So the excuse is "other people did it"?. Would you be surprised if I told you I think those people are being hypocritical as well?

So the title of the threat and his OP is a blanket insult for all of humanity but I am the rude one for pointing out the absurdity of the claim? I think you are wrong, forgive my rudeness....

If you feel insulted by the question of the thread you really ought to reconsider your pov.

Feigning a slight to engage in hubris is what people with very small cognitive functions & morals(like children or entitled brats) do. If you are going to call someone a 'hypocrite' at least be true about it, don't insist for something that is objectively untrue.

And just to drive the point home and avoid unnecessary back and forths, using the technology of writing does not prevent someone from criticizing things written, be it either propaganda or Holy Writ.

Serious question, does it even get any dumber than this?

Your insult is not just uncool but fundamentally idiotic. Move past it into the actual topic, please.

Ok fine. I'll bite. What's the difference between technology and Technology?

The iphone is technology, the GPS is technology, facebook's and google's algorithms are technology. Science, Writing and the totality of all technology is Technology.

Oh, you are stuck in a deserted island with Galen and Myself, but you rather have Galen treat your affliction based on humoral theory medicine than me? GL with that

Is that even a question? Galen wrote the handbook of Medicine from his own wits. You can barely argue with 2 people on the internet without insulting them. Remove the fancy tools & processes in the hospital and the average doctor is functionally illiterate, useless, not to mention depressed and very likely the one requiring the medical attention in such a setting. If you think you can repair a broken leg or remove arrow debris from a person better than Galen without your fancy tools, then you 're wrong. You 're nowhere near.

If that is difficult to rationalise consider this, if you changed spots in time Galen would be far more superior than you in both settings. It's not a 1-1 but a 2-0(nil) always.

That's your big example of how technology is bad? You know what else can navigate without GPS? Doves, good luck trying to prove that Doves have higher cognition than modern humans.

That is called a straw-man, good luck trying to convince anybody with strawmen. Drivers in 2020 are stupider than drivers in 1980 who in turn are far stupider than caravaners of the 1200's CE or the 400 BCE navigating to their destination. Fact.

We have the ability to automate certain tasks to a degree, and sometimes this fails us.

That is precisely the point Sherlock. We are outsourcing a lot of tasks to devices and this means that we are our losing our wits on how to deal with these tasks. That is exactly the point of this thread.

This is not an example that proves that modern humans are inferior to their predecessors, this is merely an example of all humans being fallible, you are simply ignoring the failures of our predecessors and focussing on their wins.

It is a perfect example of outsourcing navigation to a device and then losing the capability to navigate properly. The whole point of this thread again.

When did driving become the universal measurement of cognition?
Ancient Egyptians couldn't drive, so they are very dumb then

Navigation, ancient Egyptians could navigate land and sea far more superior than any modern human alive. Remove the aids and the modern western human is functionally useless.

Navigation is a primary function, the I-E root produces knowledge, cognition, [dia]noesis, [dia]gnosis, naut, astronaut, cosmonaut, nous, noema, noon, mind and even noemon. Navigation is the ultimate measure of cognitive functioning and navigation does not just apply to traveling but to anything from going to the shop down to navigating the psyche and the mind.

Greek(both ancient and modern) word for stupid = anoetos. Someone who cannot navigate/perceive.

Nope. It is the usual nonsense that he spews with the usual poor understanding of how evolutionary biology works. I am surprised you are missing that. Are you being sarcastic now?

Not at all. Insulting him does not address his argument or the rationale.