Question for you English teachers, majors, experts. (skill, anthropology, tests)

[jufrbo]

In this line "But our ancestors were lacking in the intelligence that we modern humans possess to more than compensate for our shortcomings." Should the word intelligence be subsituted for intellect? Microsoft Word is of no help there, and I am having trouble in finding which is the proper word to use. Thank you.

[DontH8Me]

I think the whole sentence is confusing. What is the point you are trying to get across? Are you claiming that our ancestors were short on brains? I would question the accuracy of that comment FWIW - intelligence is the capacity to learn. If our ancestors weren't as intelligent, I'm not sure we'd be where we are today. The part that says "to more than compensate for our shortcomings" sounds off as well. I guess I'm trying to get across that the sentence structure is confused.

Did you mean to say our ancestors lacked the know-how? They weren't as savvy? Hope you can help shed some light on that.

[jufrbo]

To assume that Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection is the explanation of white dominance over people of color throughout history, one must first assume that Darwin’s theory is correct. There is a plethora of evidence suggesting that Darwin was correct in his assumption that only the strong survive and the weak die out. This is evident in the fact that at any point in the globe the flora and fauna that exist in their habitat are perfectly suited to survive in their particular environment. Darwin’s theory can also extend to the human race in the fact that throughout ancient history there have been multiple humanoid species that physically were not suitable to survive in the wild, just as we Homo sapiens are not. But our ancestors were lacking in the intelligence that we modern humans possess to more than compensate for our shortcomings.

Here is the sentence in context, it is the last one.

It is a paper disproving natural selection and race for a history 112 class. The opening paragraph almost makes it sound like a justification of racism, but I can assure it is not.

[TouchOfWhimsy]

I don't agree with the statement, LOL, but the proper usage would be something like:

Our ancestors did not possess the intellect that we as modern humans use to compensate for our shortcomings.

or

Modern humans compensate for our shortcomings with intellegence that our ancestors did not possess.

[Briolat21]

I don't know that I agree with your premise - because the primary other hominoid that has a lot known about it is Neanderthal, and they had plenty of intelligence (culture, shelter, furs, fire)...

but the biggest problem is that as a sentence, the sentence doesn't exist. Its a clause.

You seem to be trying to say that the reason other hominid offshoots of the homo line died out is because they did not possess the intelligence of modern man.

Say that.

Don't worry about sounding so grand.

Try something like:

Darwin's theory can also be applied to the human race, as there have been mulitple hominid species that were not physically suited to survive in the wild, just as Homo Sapiens are not, however these ancient cousins were lacking in the intelligence that modern humans possess and which more than compensate for their physical frailities. It is intelligence then that triumphs over Darwin's theory and natural selection when speaking of Homo Sapien. (or whatever point you're trying to make)

Or something like that.

By the way, I argued that biological evolution in Humans was meaningless in today's world in the face of cultural (anthropological) evolution, when I was a freshman in college. Its a fun argument to make.

[muffinman]

Some comments.....

Should be "on the globe" not "in the globe"

Phrases like "at any point" and "perfectly suited" are way too general.

Keep it simple. Maybe focus on something more historical. This is more of a topic for an anthropology paper then a 100 level history class.

[Medicman55]

Since the question seems to have already been answered, all I have to say is:

Woo for English Majors!

[jufrbo]

Originally Posted by Medicman55

Since the question seems to have already been answered, all I have to say is:

Woo for English Majors!

No, actually no one answered my question. Let me rephrase, forget what ever I wrote, Does someone possess intellegence or intellect?

[Debsi]

I would use intelligence, although I don't think using intellect would be wrong.


Webster's on intellect:

Pronunciation:
\ˈin-tə-ˌlekt\
Function:
noun


1 a: the power of knowing as distinguished from the power to feel and to will : the capacity for knowledge b: the capacity for rational or intelligent thought especially when highly developed2: a person with great intellectual powers

Webster's on intelligence:

Pronunciation:
\in-ˈte-lə-jən(t)s\
Function:
noun

1 a (1): the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason (2): the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests) bChristian Science : the basic eternal quality of divine Mind c: mental acuteness : shrewdness2 a: an intelligent entity; especially : angel b: intelligent minds or mind <cosmic intelligence>3: the act of understanding : comprehension4 a: information, news b: information concerning an enemy or possible enemy or an area; also : an agency engaged in obtaining such information5: the ability to perform computer functions


I also have to agree with another poster that "But our ancestors were lacking in the intelligence that we modern humans possess to more than compensate for our shortcomings." is not a complete sentence. Your paper could also benefit from tightening up your language, otherwise your argument gets lost in a sea of unnecessary words. Don't be sore, just some friendly advice from a former English major.

[jufrbo]

Thank you Debsi.