Possibly related to this is Dennett’s notion of the intentional stance. The idea is that when we describe something as a goal-directed agent, what that cashes out to is the fact that it is—for us!—computationally/cognitively less expensive to model that entity/object/phenomenon/something as an agent, than it is to model it as an artifact designed for some purpose (the design stance) or simply in terms of physical laws (the physical stance). In other words, modeling that entity as an agent lets us make better predictions about the entity’s behavior than the other two ways of modeling. As in the OP, this is at least partly a fact about us and not about the entity in question (because the reason it’s inexpensive for us to model agents is that we can make efficient use of our mental modules which evolved to do just that).
Yes, using the right tools for explaining and predicting is what recognizing a fellow intelligence boils down to. Other than that, humans have no more “inherent intelligence” than other natural phenomena. That’s why something like the Integrated information theory has no chance of success.
Possibly related to this is Dennett’s notion of the intentional stance. The idea is that when we describe something as a goal-directed agent, what that cashes out to is the fact that it is—for us!—computationally/cognitively less expensive to model that entity/object/phenomenon/something as an agent, than it is to model it as an artifact designed for some purpose (the design stance) or simply in terms of physical laws (the physical stance). In other words, modeling that entity as an agent lets us make better predictions about the entity’s behavior than the other two ways of modeling. As in the OP, this is at least partly a fact about us and not about the entity in question (because the reason it’s inexpensive for us to model agents is that we can make efficient use of our mental modules which evolved to do just that).
(Also, seconding cousin_it’s comment.)
Yes, using the right tools for explaining and predicting is what recognizing a fellow intelligence boils down to. Other than that, humans have no more “inherent intelligence” than other natural phenomena. That’s why something like the Integrated information theory has no chance of success.