[chrisseaton]

> this is more or less equivalent to saying "this person is inherently superior than that person"

Strong disagree. Intelligence is not a more valuable attribute than any other.

Concrete example: there's no point being a more intelligent officer in the Army if you aren't able to physically get yourself to the fight in time and someone else who's less intelligent but is more fit is there on time to have an impact.

[camehere3saydis]

>a more intelligent person is inherently superior

I also disagree with this statement.

>a "more intelligent" person is defined as "having more consciousness" which, in a system that ascribes value to humanity and consciousness, is equivalent to saying that a more intelligent person is "more of a person", and therefore inherently "superior in value"

This is what I meant. Do you still disagree with this statement?

And, well... should I make my posts more detailed or less, considering they fail to communicate the idea? Or should I go back to just saying nothing?