Why humans are so distinct from other species?

[Angrboda]

Any thoughts on why humans differ so much from other species in terms of intelligence?

Define intelligent.

I rather disagree with Apo about whether our accomplishments are attributable largely to a set of hardwired social instincts, and most of us individually accomplish little that is intelligent beyond what is taught to us.

I think if put to task, a group of humans starting from scratch will spontanously and more rapidly home in on a wider range of clever, non-specifically-instictive actions to address the need to eat than any other animal.

Reasoning and problem solving

Closely related to tool use is the study of reasoning and problem solving. It has been observed that the manner in which chimpanzees solve problems, such as that of retrieving bananas positioned out of reach, is not through trial-and-error. Instead, they were observed to proceed in a manner that was "unwaveringly purposeful."

It is clear that animals of quite a range of species are capable of solving a range of problems that are argued to involve abstract reasoning; modern research has tended to show that the performances of Wolfgang Köhler's chimpanzees, who could achieve spontaneous solutions to problems without training, were by no means unique to that species, and that apparently similar behavior can be found in animals usually thought of as much less intelligent, if appropriate training is given. Causal reasoning has also been observed in rooks and New Caledonian crows.

I might take your position more seriously if you weren't a) straw manning my position, b) had some actual evidence beyond your gut, and c) weren't just pulling shit out of your ass.

The simple fact is that we have almost no example of human behavior in the absence of learning and social processes (Victor of Aveyron and Genie, the prototypical cases of so-called feral children do not make particularly suitable subjects for resolving the question; however the experience of deaf children prior to institutionalized education of the deaf might [c. 364 B.C. - Aristotle asserted that "Deaf are born incapable to reason"]). (ETA: A comparative study between first and third world subjects is another possibility; it's worth noting that to lack education, or be ignorant, is commonly regarded as severe a deficit as lacking intelligence.)

Feral children lack the basic social skills that are normally learned in the process of enculturation. For example, they may be unable to learn to use a toilet, have trouble learning to walk upright and display a complete lack of interest in the human activity around them. They often seem mentally impaired and have almost insurmountable trouble learning a human language. The impaired ability to learn a formal language after having been isolated for so many years is often attributed to the existence of a critical period for language learning, and taken as evidence in favor of the critical period hypothesis.

It's unclear in the case of feral children whether the intellectual deficits are due to lack of learning or due to lack of mental development as a result of impoverished learning environments. Having watched some of the footage of Genie, there appears to be a general brightness to her (she was known to be particularly adept at communicating her wants to others) but surprisingly little in the way of conventional intelligence, as she needed constant care throughout the documented portion of her life. I can't help wondering offhand whether, if we shoved Chuck out in an uninhabited section of the Amazon, to compete with the native, roving bands of monkeys, whether his supposed greater intelligence would enable him to survive.

Regardless, there are several competing explanations or potentiators in the history of human evolution to which is normally ascribed the selective pressures which resulted in our larger brains, and the specific topographical features. Among these are bipedalism, language, climactic instability, manual dexterity (opposable thumbs), and just a general adaptationist "more is better" explanation (which has serious shortcomings, as it doesn't explain why we have big brains, and say cheetahs don't). Of these, only climactic instability seems reliably suitable as a selection pressure resulting in generalized increase in intelligence. The back side of this is that there are animals with similar intelligence ratios (body to brain size) who haven't become "intelligent" in the way that we have. Regardless, if you are arguing that humanity is distinct, it would seem that the null hypothesis is that humanity is, perhaps modestly improved, but not in any sense distinct; if correct, then the notion that humans are distinctly intelligent bears the burden of proof, and I've yet to see any put on the table. (Beyond the rather insipid, "Lookee what I can do. Shiny!")