> The primary idea was “intelligence can take different shapes”…
IIRC, it was more "intelligence may be a maladaptive dead-end".
The book makes pains to draw a line between consciousness (or meta consciousness) and intelligence. I don't think he really argued that intelligence is maladaptive, but does argue that meta consciousness might be.
No. It was about possibility of intelligence without consciousness.
The book makes pains to draw a line between consciousness (or meta consciousness) and intelligence. I don't think he really argued that intelligence is maladaptive, but does argue that meta consciousness might be.