Human Superiority. Man is the most intelligent species on the planet etc...

I hope you will have the free time to finish. The structure will be as follows; 1. Acceptance/definitions2. Argument/Questions3. Rebuttals/Answers/Questions4. Rebuttals/Answers5. Rebuttals/ConclusionDefinitions: I agree to Pro's definitions for the terms "Man”, and "Species". I do not believe that any single creature is clearly more intelligent than the next. But I do believe that man is clearly not more intelligent if a formal measurement was taken. I will not engage in semantics, as quibbling over minor issues will take away from the integrity of the discussion. However, I do wish to include plant species in my argument. Plant Species including all plant life; tree, fern, vine, shrub etc. .. I would like to add to the defined terms the definition for "Superior"Superior - higher in station, rank, degree, importance, etc. :As clarification to my perspective on the phrase "Most Intelligent"; The definition used for “Intelligent” by pro is efficient but is obviously subjective to humanities perception. I do not view intelligence as liquid in a cup where tiny droplets of the individually described parts of intelligence can eventually fill the cup. In contrast this view is subjective and I believe that the resolution should be left to the voters to decide. I am not debating whether humans are the most diverse mentally; they can perform many different tasks and acquire this invisible thing called knowledge. But, are we absolutely sure that knowledge of the universe is limited to us who write it down and use tools to study it? The end means of Intelligence is creating progress for your species, any intelligent human would agree. Having Intelligence and using Intelligence is the basis for my argument. I believe the use of intelligence is the best example of intelligence and is the deciding factor of who is "Most Intelligent". Argument:My arguments will directly address the definitions used for Intelligence and Superior, and I intend to display that - which in my eyes is man’s only true intelligence; the aptitude to accept the obvious. Reasoning: Human reasoning is flawed and causes the supposition of superior intelligence. Mankind creates with technology, what instinct has done for animals naturally (and does to a lesser extent for humans). Instinct is the more accurate tool of reasoning. Our pursuit of creation mastery is a tangible proof of the inherent defect of human reasoning. We allow curiosity to win over well-being. This obsession has become self-destructive, and our reasoning does not have our best interest in mind. We wish to cure illness, and in doing so create more illness. Humanity has a history of awkward reasoning. For example animals never sacrifice (on altars) as an attempt to change the weather (or at least to my knowledge they haven’t). Instead, they sense it and use their reasoning to avoid it. Human intelligence only works on paper, and these are all examples of faulty reasoning. I argue that this is one facet of intelligence that humans are clearly inferior. I would like to believe that humans have an ability to reason better, but there is no solid proof. Capacity for learning: Capacity is measured in different ways. I will resort to my water analogy as I think it can be easily understood. Not all knowledge is liquid, some of it is food coloring showing us a different shade of truth but never adding to the material. For example; If a maze is built an animal may be able to travel through it quicker than a man due to senses. Or a man may because of a hidden map or an interest in escaping it that is not shared by the animal. However, the animal does not have a capacity to desire the challenge of a maze and will never build one himself. I feel that humans perceive this as a weakness of mind, but contest that the building of the maze does not necessarily make man more intelligent… Nor does it prove a capacity to learn more. A Sea Lion has been recognized as remembering a trick after 10 years without performing the trick. . http://www.newscientist.com... Proving that a capacity is there when measured. But then again, If we measure capacity by the unnecessary things that man does, then yes man wins this point. I can’t figure out why my dog pisses in the house, I don’t know if I’m dumb for not being able to train him or if he’s smart because he knows that’s a way to spend more time in the yard. My point is every living thing learns what is necessary some even learn from other species. For the most part there is no clear line. We are doing what we want and what we are capable of doing. Man is the only creature physically capable of building a laptop, so we build one. When we genetically engineer dolphins to have human hands then capacity will have to be revisited. I conclude that capacity is somewhat irrelevant and w/ out a seal mind reader we will never know how much it may really know. Superiority: Human superiority is perceived but never attained. Darwin once wrote; “inferior animals are more likely to become extinct while the superior ones are more likely to thrive. ” In our ability* to survive extinction through evolution we have seemingly bested our animal counterparts. This mixing of long-term and short-term thinking is illogical. If the homo-sapiens cannot outlive the generation before them by decades then how much has their “ability” to survive actually increased? Besides the apparent domination of earth by the human species, man has no single ability comparable to animal that is undoubtedly superior. Especially intelligence. We have enslaved the planets life forms, bullied, brutalized and literally wiped entire species off of its face. As Alfred Adler once said; Superiority complex is compensation for an inferiority complex. Saying that, Should the slave master be worshipped for his dominance? The answer to this question should decide the resolution. Questions: Are we absolutely sure that knowledge of the universe is limited to us who write it down and use tools to study it? Should the slave master be worshipped for his dominance? I had more questions- but I wrote the prior this morning, went on an unexpected journey and lost my frame of thought a little. I said I would post earlier - so I wanted to stick to my word as much as possible. .. .. . as an afterthought I could have said much more but we'll leave it at this for now. I look forward to your argument and hope this was enough to provoke some thought. ..