Are apes as intelligent as human beings?
447895
No; but they are pretty smart. They're able to grasp some abstract mathematical concepts like addition and subtraction, and even occasionally multiplication - things that our own civilization didn't grasp for quite a while. They can respond quite effectively to stimuli. (Dolphins are also extremely smart.) Of course, they have animal mentalities, and the fact that we are able to categorize and think about them, while they are not able to do the same of us, puts us in a higher school of thought.
200642
It seems that anthropologists have bones of austropethicus and ape-like people like the bones of an ape person called "Lucy" The skull cavity was for a large brain but the bone structures were more ape like than human like. There was neanderthal man which was believed to have been exterminated by homo erectus. Also homo habilis. I'm really not sure if people wiped out some smart ape people or if those bones are supposed to be us. But I personally believe humans are not apes. If anything I believe people are more closely related to bears than apes, though genetically speaking I'd be laughed at for that assertion.
860914
♥♪♦♫ yes it was said that humans are oringinated from the ape family. I hope that I have helped you.♥♪♦♫
273011
The two most closely related species to \nChimpanzees (Pan troglodites) are the Bonobos or Pygmy Chimps (Pan paniscus) and Humans (Homo sapiens).  Chimpanzees are more closely related to humans than they are to Gorillas and Orangutans. Some anthropologists argue that the two species are so similar genetically that they should be classified together in a single genus.
518678
No, they are not saying that.  All living organism including the ape and man die.  I think what they are saying is that the nearly perfect man came from the simpler imperfect protozoans and apes, and that the general direction is toward excellence and superiority.\n\nOn the othe hand, I don't believe we came from the apes. I believe otherwise.  We came from perfection to our present near-ape nature.  I don't see man moving in the general direction of excellence.  Generally, I see the weakening human specie.  However, the direction toward perfection is always possible by virtue of the Law of Polarity.  I just hope that there will be more of us who would rather "close their eyes and think" (Einstien) than "open their eyes and see" (Aristotle).
263791
Humans are designed to evolve; spiritualy, mentaly, and physicaly. Evolution takes place every generation and we are growing at a rapid rate.\nHere's an annalogy, a different type of being see's an infant human, and an infant hippo next to each other. The hippo can walk and defend itself right after birth, where as the infant human can do nothing but sit, cry, and roll around. It's obvious which would be "smarter" in the current state. Looking outside the "box of time" the human will grow to be smarted than a hippo in many ways when it reaches maturity because it evolves with time... hope i could help you feel better about everything, i feel like you've had a hard time lately... things will get better, just remember that.
129358
Humans or human beings define themselves in biological, social, and spiritual terms. Biologically, humans are classified as the species Homo sapiens (Latin for "thinking man"): a bipedal primate of the superfamily Hominoidea, together with the other apes: chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, and gibbons.
530192
Well, on this Earth, primates are the ancestors of the only known sentient species.  I don't know that these means that humans are the 'best' species, even if we are (arguably) the most intelligent.\n\nIf the human evolutionary path is any indication, there may be some prerequisites for the development of sentience.  A large brain is the most obvious one, but things such as free and mobile appendages suitable for tool use may also be required.  As far as bats go, they are limited in the size that their brains can grow to and still be able to maintain flight.  Their forelimbs are also not readily available for manipulatory organs.  \n\nSo a sentient bat species would probably be unlikely.  The ecological niche of intelligent species would probably go to a different species that already displays some of these adaptations to some extent.\n\nMice are a remote possibility for potential sophonts.  They can achieve a semi-bipedal stance and use their forepaws for some remarkable manipulations.  Their current small size is their chief impediment.  Increasing body and brain size to an extent to make them candidates for sentience would also slow them down, remove their stealthiness and ability to fit into tight spaces, and many of the other adaptations that allow them to survive in a world full of predators.\n\nOther than the great apes, I think one of the major candidates for potential for sentience is the racoons.  They are already pretty smart, near the top of the food chain, versatile, adaptable, omnivorous, and curious, and have very well developed forepaws with perhaps the highest level of manual dexterity of any mammal outside the primates.  \n\nI seem to recall a novel by Stephen R. Boyett called 'The Architect of Sleep' in which a man goes to a parallel universe where racoons evolved sentience instead of the primates.  It seemed to be an aquel (a book that fails to spawn the expected series of sequels), but if I remember correctly it was quite intriguing.\n\nAnother intriguing species with curiosity, adaptability, intelligence and manipulative abilities that I think would make an interesting candidate for the development of sentience are some of the large cephalopods (like the giant Pacific octopus, Humboldt's squid or even the giant squid!!)  - imagine the society they might create.
349380
We don't know that humans are the only creatures that can think deeper.  There's evidence that whales are quite intelligent.  Not to mention there's an awful lot of universe out there to contimplate.
77393
You guys are brilliant!!\n\nFirst of all, more than one species can evolve from one- due to enviormental factors.  So no apes do not have to be extinct for us to evolve from similar creatures.\n\nSecond, it is only a matter of oppinion that humans are superior.  If humans are so smart, why do they continue to damage the enviornment and overpopulate the earth?  Isn't that like biting the hand that feeds you?  Where are we going to live when we destroy the earth?\n\nAnimals would be able to thrive without our intervention through natural selection and adaptation.  \n\nEvery other animal has evolved- Even humans evolved in the time since we have started keeping records.  We as a species have gotten taller and less hairy.  Noticably.  You can not convince me that humans didn't evolve.  All evolution is, is change.  Everything in this world changes.
894987
Humans are animals, biologically. \n\n1. We reproduce.\n2. We must eat.\n3. We must drink.\n4. We must breathe.\n5. We think.\n6. We die.\n7. Subject to animal instincts.\n\nWe are mammals.\n\n1. Females of our species lactate.\n2. We have hair/fur.\n3. We are warm-blooded.\n4. We give birth to live young (exception: monotremes)\n5. Four limbs (exception: whales and dolphins)\n\nWe are primates.\n\n1. Opposable thumbs.\n2. Eyes in front of head.\n3. Binocular vision.\n4. Large brains.\n\nWe are hominids.\n\n1. Bipedal movement.\n2. Upright movement.\n3. Color-vision.\n4. Different arrangement of limbs.\n5. Larger brain.\n\nWe are human.\n1. Emotion\n2. Civilization\n3. Conscience\n4. Choose between Right and Wrong\n5. Urge to know about our world\n6. Intelligence\n7. Ability to reason\n\n....and we where clothes LOL\n\n\nDespite all religious claims, Humans are animals (mammals specifically). We are not inherently superior--that is arrogant. And we are still subject to animal emotions, animal subjects, and animal instincts. However, we are more advanced than other animals, emotionally and mentally.
107058
Chimp.\nHe's about as smart as one,and there's a definate resemblence.
1181090
You are so funny!!!  I'll just bet they do.  Animals are smarter than their human counterparts.
54798
First, let's define smart as knowledgeable and wise (i.e., one who is wise is good at applying previously obtained knowledge).\n\nLet's use Tarzan and Jane as a demonstration.\n\nNature is not enough to make someone smart: Tarzan is by nature *able* to be smarter than his fellow jungle inhabitants. However great his ability to be wise and knowledgeable is, the jungle does not provide him with more knowledge than any other jungle animal. He also cannot gain wisdom about knowledge he has not obtained.\n\nNurture on the *foundation of nature* makes one smart: Jane "nurtures" (or tutors) Tarzan, providing him with knowledge. Tarzan learns and applies wisdom, and becomes smart.\n\nNurture is *not* enough to make someone smart alone: Jane could not have taught a jungle snake to be as smart as Tarzan, as the snake is limited in its wisdom.\n\nI submit that humans *generally* have the nature to become extremely smart (even geniuses!), and that nurture does not have to imply care received as a child. Most humans have the innate ability (nature) to become smart by gaining knowledge and wisdom. The difficulty, then, is having the opportunities (nurture) to gain *both* knowledge and wisdom, and not just gain knowledge.
918211
Orangutans are anthropoid apes or great apes. The living anthropoid apes consist of Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Gorillas, Orangutans, and of course, Humans. Gigantopithecus lived as recently as 50,000 years ago in Southeast Asia, and some think they may still exist, deep in the jungles.
684350
Yes, we all are capable of absorbing the same amount of knowledge except as mentioned people with disabilities. Studies are now showing we all have different learning patterns but it doesn't necessarily mean higher intelligence. We are all exceptionally smart creatures. All of us.
836762
Technically, we don't differ from primates since Homo sapiens are primates.  Monkeys, lemurs, apes and hominids all belong to the order Primates.   \n\nI'm assuming your question is "How do we differ from other primates?"  So, I'll answer that instead.  \n\nWe are unlike the other primates physically in that we do not have opposable thumbs on our feet.  Our hipbones are structured differently to facilitate vertical walking.  Due to this, unlike other primates, humans are the only obligatory bipedal primates.  One misconception is that humans are hairless relatives of apes.  In fact, we have just the number of hair follicles per square centimeter of skin that one would expect on an animal of our size.  It's just thought our hair is unpigmented and finer and shorter than most other animals so it's not as visible at a glance.    \n\nApart from physical characteristics, our advanced brain size and capacity exceeds that of lesser primates.  This allows us to have abstract thought and use logic and other ideas that lesser primates are capable of.  Our use of tools and external objects to compensate our physical shortcomings is unrivaled not only among other primates, but among all other organisms.  \n\nWe do have some common characteristics with primates.  After all, we are supposed to have descended from a common ancestor.  Like other primates, we have opposable thumbs on our hands.  Also, all primates have five fingers (not counting my old shop teacher, Mr. Windslow).  All primates have fingernails instead of claws, or other keratinous apendages.  In general, primates are social creatures.  All primates also have forward facing eyes, useful for depth perception.  Humans are similar to most primates in that we are both omnivorous, meaning that we have the physiology to eat and digest both plant matter and meat.