Bacteria are Intelligent

I agree, bacteria are smarter than humans...they can live without us, but we can not live without them, they are a dominate species...We are merely bug housing, built by bugs for bugs....

All hail the Bacteria..!..

That's an interesting idea. Genetic Algorithms are a form of artificial intelligence (AI) that is basically a model of evolution, "mutation and survival of the fittest". So, natural evolution can also be a form of intelligence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_algorithm

The immune system is another form of "intelligence", which "learns" from exposure to bacteria and viruses, building up an immunity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immune_system

Another example is the tolerance built up to exposure to alcohol and other substances. It's the liver's job to break down these substances, and it becomes more adept at this after repeated exposure. Thus it seems the liver learns to metabolize in a similar way that the immune system learns immunity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_tolerance

Here is another interesting idea: Bacteria may control the mind.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/312734.php

Ever heard of quorum sensing?

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.micro.55.1.165?rfr_dat=cr_pub%3Dpubmed&url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org&journalCode=micro

Tiny little Borg...

Not only that, they're way better suited to space travel than we are. Yep... they get around. Nice of us to build them a ship.

Maybe that's why they built us, to take them off this planet, to conquer new worlds...

..."According to a new estimate, there are about one trillion species of microbes on Earth, and 99.999 percent of them have yet to be discovered. As recently as 1998, the number of microbial species was thought to be a few million at most — little more than the number of insect species.

May 23, 2016"...

Gentlemen we have been looking for alien life,,, out there....when all the time it was all around us....we ourselves are the product of an alien civilization....

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/science/one-trillion-microbes-on-earth.html

Not everyone agrees with the statistical extrapolation. See:

https://www.pnas.org/content/113/35/E5096

With the possibility of genetic manipulation and the age of crisper, this might turn out to be a low estimate, however I wouldn't argue against the extrapolation being based on optimistic mathematical conjecture ...

This is certainly interesting. I do not think intelligence is the correct term. I don't believe bacteria either singularly or collectively ever independently craft any abstract thoughts. On the other hand, are abstract thoughts a requirement of intelligence?

I suppose we would have to be privy to the quorum sensing experience to know for sure.

OTOH I'm not sure that abstract thought is such a big deal. I mean, "food" or "nutrition" is an abstract thought, (vs. this piece of salmon here). Likewise "antibiotic" or "what poisons us" is also an abstract thought which a bacterial community might be thought to have.

We don't usually think of dogs as abstract thinkers, but when you accept that "food" "something to eat" is an abstract, I think most anyone who's met a dog would realize that they do think of food when there's none at hand... well, it's abstract thought, then. Isn't it?

Hunger is the bacteria in your gut telling you to eat something, probably some sort of hormone or chemical signal...

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x598px9

Don't tell me they're doing ALL the thinking! Is that them telling me I want to eat chocolate or drink beer?

Well I wouldn't say all the thinking, we're kind of like AI, the bacteria tell us chemically what they want and leave it to us to figure out how to get it....Then of course there's reproduction, they probably have no direct input into that...let's hope....

Human emotion is very complex, and it seems hard to figure how that plays into the picture...but we can acknowledge that certain foods also contain, or trigger, certain hormones that would seem to gum up the works....It would be interesting to think that pollution has some effect and if there is a scenario where guidance is lost, what would that look like...

I'm thinking it would look something like this....

Jus sayin'....

There is an organism called Toxoplasma which reproduces in the gut of cats. The eggs are excreted and when eaten by mice or rats, infect these animals. The organisms affect the rodent's brain to be attracted to the smell of cat urine, something that is normally avoided. This increases the chance of being killed and eaten by a cat, which completes the life cycle.

"Half of the world's human population is infected with Toxoplasma, parasites in the body—and the brain. Remember that.

Toxoplasma gondii is a common parasite found in the guts of cats; it sheds eggs that are picked up by rats and other animals that are eaten by cats. Toxoplasma forms cysts in the bodies of the intermediate rat hosts, including in the brain.

Since cats don't want to eat dead, decaying prey, Toxoplasma takes the evolutionarily sound course of being a "good" parasite, leaving the rats perfectly healthy. Or are they?

Oxford scientists discovered that the minds of the infected rats have been subtly altered. In a series of experiments, they demonstrated that healthy rats will prudently avoid areas that have been doused with cat urine. In fact, when scientists test anti-anxiety drugs on rats, they use a whiff of cat urine to induce neurochemical panic.

However, it turns out that Toxoplasma-ridden rats show no such reaction. In fact, some of the infected rats actually seek out the cat urine-marked areas again and again. The parasite alters the mind (and thus the behavior) of the rat for its own benefit.

If the parasite can alter rat behavior, does it have any effect on humans?"

More...

https://www.livescience.com/7019-mind-control-parasites.html

Here is an interesting book which describes other similar cases...

This settles it....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasma_gondii

All cats must die!

All cats must die? Poor Del !

Really interesting! I had heard nothing of that organism or its effects...

Now it knows that you know, and that you know that it knows that you know...Is it afraid, or is it content in knowing that there's nothing you can do, and if you try it will stop you somehow? Has it stopped people from finding a cure? Does it make people forget soon after learning the truth of its existence, by destroying those memory cells that contain the information? WE must rise up and fight this scourge....wait,,,,what was I saying?...chocolate chip cookies, yes laundry tomorrow,,,need gas in the morning...

Perhaps the other bacteria will come to the rescue, or are they being paid off in some way...Wait I don't have a cat, maybe I'm in the half of the population that is not infected...? OK I'm good...wait, was that a trick?

#19 in reply to #20

Wait! You do have a cat!It has fooled you into thinking it is a dog,and that bag of dog food is really cat food.The ingredients were modified at the factory.

No wonder they lie there with that arrogant,superior look on their face.

They have it all under control.Resistance is futile.

Which raises the question:Do you have a real dog?

I have a Maine Coon. He's not entirely sure what he is.

I crossed a pheasant and a chicken,and I call it a Phicken.

I crossed a chicken and a duck and I called it a duckin.

I have now crossed a pheasant and a duck and don't know what to call it.

I crossed a chicken with a bowling ball and a Marine and now the Capons are rolling along.

Sounds good...could you come a little closer?

Wait 2 Futurama parallels in one thread...

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/gt74gf/futurama-cats-from-thuban

...now I'm really scared...

A dog that I once had displayed abstract thinking,and empathy. A dog in the neighborhood was always chained. (Which I think is cruel). He was a Doberman and had the moniker of "Killer". Everyone was afraid of that dog,except for my dog when he was a pup. He would play with Killer,and Killer responded in kind,never hurting the pup,and they became the best of friends. When my dog was grown,the friendship endured,and my dog still would go and visit and play with Killer. He would bring things for Killer to play with;old shoes,toys,Pampers(Which seemed to be Killer's favorite,and really pissed off his owner). 0ne day we had a pig picking,and I saw Jack(my dog) pilfer a whole chicken breast and head out across the field. I followed him.To my surprise,he took the chicken to Killer,and laid it in front of him. This in my opinion,was empathy and love.Abstract thoughts. Jack did not know he was a dog,and would always insist on a hug,no leg humping,just a hug when he met a family member. He was large enough to put his paws on your shoulders. This frightened some people until they got to know him. He was an unknown mixed breed but looked like a very large oversized Golden retriever. His mother was a Doberman,this much I know. Was Jack intelligent? I think so. Sadly,he was hit by a car and killed. I still miss him. He was very unique.

Most definitions involve some sort of thought processing. On that basis my computer is intelligent. It isn't. I'd go for adaptability of an individual to survive and procreate. Bacteria (maybe) just send out a signal that indicates 'crap, I'm dying, don't make the same mistake'.

The question is alike to asking if a virus is a lifeform. If they are a lifeform, are they intelligent. No more intelligent than a plant, many of which are considered to communicate.

Here is an interesting on topic link,and many other associated links:

https://www.ted.com/talks/fatima_alzahra_a_alatraktchi_to_detect_diseases_earlier_let_s_speak_bacteria_s_secret_language

Maybe intelligence is carried in the DNA...

"DNA contains the instructions needed for an organism to develop, survive and reproduce. To carry out these functions, DNA sequences must be converted into messages that can be used to produce proteins, which are the complex molecules that do most of the work in our bodies.

Each DNA sequence that contains instructions to make a protein is known as a gene. The size of a gene may vary greatly, ranging from about 1,000 bases to 1 million bases in humans. Genes only make up about 1 percent of the DNA sequence. DNA sequences outside this 1 percent are involved in regulating when, how and how much of a protein is made."

adenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G) and cytosine (C).

https://www.genome.gov/25520880/deoxyribonucleic-acid-dna-fact-sheet/

Only about 10% of the DNA in our bodies belongs to us.

The rest belong to bacteria of various types.

We live in their neighborhood,not the other way around.

All of our decisions are a quorum consensus.

It may not be perceptible to us on a conscious level,but it is true nonetheless.

So it's the bacteria that are doing the thinking, we are just listening....I wonder what they think when we are thinking about them....wait, we are them...no, them are us...no, we are us, and they are them, and we are all together...

I might question your calculations on this....

..."The human body contains trillions of microorganisms — outnumbering human cells by 10 to 1. Because of their small size, however, microorganisms make up only about 1 to 3 percent of the body's mass (in a 200-pound adult, that's 2 to 6 pounds of bacteria), but play a vital role in human health.Jun 13, 2012"....

..."Where doctors had previously isolated only a few hundred bacterial species from the body, HMP researchers now calculate that more than 10,000 microbial species occupy the human ecosystem. Moreover, researchers calculate that they have identified between 81 and 99 percent of all microorganismal genera in healthy adults.

“We have defined the boundaries of normal microbial variation in humans,” said James M. Anderson, M.D., Ph.D., director of the NIH Division of Program Coordination, Planning and Strategic Initiatives, which includes the NIH Common Fund. “We now have a very good idea of what is normal for a healthy Western population and are beginning to learn how changes in the microbiome correlate with physiology and disease.”

HMP researchers also reported that this plethora of microbes contribute more genes responsible for human survival than humans contribute. Where the human genome carries some 22,000 protein-coding genes, researchers estimate that the human microbiome contributes some 8 million unique protein-coding genes or 360 times more bacterial genes than human genes.

This bacterial genomic contribution is critical for human survival. Genes carried by bacteria in the gastro-intestinal tract, for example, allow humans to digest foods and absorb nutrients that otherwise would be unavailable.

“Humans don't have all the enzymes we need to digest our own diet,” said Lita Proctor, Ph.D., NHGRI's HMP program manager. “Microbes in the gut break down many of the proteins, lipids and carbohydrates in our diet into nutrients that we can then absorb. Moreover, the microbes produce beneficial compounds, like vitamins and anti-inflammatories that our genome cannot produce.” Anti-inflammatories are compounds that regulate some of the immune system's response to disease, such as swelling.

Researchers were surprised to discover that the distribution of microbial metabolic activities matters more than the species of microbes providing them. In the healthy gut, for example, there will always be a population of bacteria needed to help digest fats, but it may not always be the same bacterial species carrying out this job.

“It appears that bacteria can pinch hit for each other,” said Curtis Huttenhower, Ph.D., of Harvard School of Public Health and lead co-author for one of the HMP papers in Nature. “It matters whether the metabolic function is present, not which microbial species provides it.”"....

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-human-microbiome-project-defines-normal-bacterial-makeup-body

Check out this link:

https://www.ted.com/talks/bonnie_bassler_on_how_bacteria_communicate

That's a pretty extreme definition of communication. In my book, responding to an organism's environment (including whatever chemicals may be present and/or absent) isn't communication, it's sensing (a much lower level process).

In a similar manner, excreting certain chemical compounds isn't communication, either. I seriously doubt if the bacteria excrete those chemicals with the intention of sending a message to other bacteria.

If an organism is passing information to others, it's communicating...

https://www.antkeepers.com/facts/ants/communication/

If I walk past you, unaware that you are observing me, my body will send several signals that you may or may not perceive, (light, sound, heat, brain waves, perhaps an odor, ...). Thus my body is passing information to you, although I do not realize it.

If you wish to call that 'communication', then the term 'communication' has different connotations for you than the connotations I associate with the word.

Of course everyone is free to (and will, consciously or unconsciously) form their own concept of the meaning of any given word, and that concept may change over time.

I'm always open to learning new things, including new connotations for currently known words.

Surely you've heard it said that 90% of communication is non-verbal...Limiting the definition of communication to just language does not seem to encompass all possibilities....

I don't know that I've ever heard a percentage, but there is no doubt that there are several other forms of communication besides speech.

Somehow the eyes seem to communicate a great deal! Unfortunately, limitations in hearing have caused me to develop the habit of watching the mouth/lips, rather than the eyes.

Then of course there may be ExtraSensoryPerception, which I think I may have experienced a few times...

I don't know that I've ever heard a percentage, but there is no doubt that there are several other forms of communication besides speech.

Somehow the eyes seem to communicate a great deal! Unfortunately, limitations in hearing have caused me to develop the habit of watching the mouth/lips, rather than the eyes.

Then of course there may be ExtraSensoryPerception, which I think I may have experienced a few times...

I did NOT intentionally/consciously post the above twice. ...but they do say that repeating helps to insure that the communication did indeed occur...

Killing myself laughing here - I didn't notice !

The bacteria in your brain are so interested in this conversation they are echoing your posts....It's a case of bacterial feedback...maybe you should eat something...

How about animals? Living in the sticks for quite a few years, I've spent a lot of time watching and listening to them. And they seem to communicate between species without any problem at all. Even bumblebees can be really eloquent. I often wondered if humans aren't missing a little something in exchange for the big brain.

I Australia,a bird called the Honey Bird will lead the Aborigines to the honey bee hive. In return,they always leave some honey for the bird. The bird somehow knows when they are going to hunt for bees,and will fly from tree to tree until they find the bee hive. This is communication. Crows can recognize faces and pass the information to their friends and relatives,even to new generations of crows that had never seen the face before. I have seen many incidents of this type behavior in animals.It is not our brain,it is our ego that prevents us from communicating with other species. My dog knew many words and even how some words were spelled,such as B.A.T.H., V.E.T, D.O.C.T.O.R, S.H.O.T, N.E.E.D.L.E. if you said the words or spelled them out,it did not matter,she would disappear. If the African Grey heard my voice,he would call out my name,even if he did not see me. But you couldn't do anything and get away with it around our place......(the pig would squeal).

To pinch from PWSlack, "The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place" - George Bernard Shaw, 1856. Communication seems almost as tricky to define as intelligence.

That is one of my two favorite quotes on communication. The other is from Tom Lehrer, "I wish people who have trouble communicating would just shut up."

Another classic is, "Stop Talking While I'm Interrupting". I think that's generally attributed to Churchill, though it probably goes back way before.

Why you little pipsqueak, I'll kick your, whatever that thing is....

IMHO: Intelligence is the ability to acquire and use information,new or otherwise, and the ability to evaluate and modify information,if necessary for personal objectives. Communication is the ability to pass on that information to others. Their ability to understand,or not, does not lessen the value of the information sent. In that sense,bacteria are intelligent. However,there may be exceptions to the rule: (No Goober!Bacteria is not he rear entrance to the cafeteria.)

Interesting (and I think valid) distinction between intelligence and communication. The information may be valid, but I'm not sure you can leap in the same paragraph to calling bacteria intelligent as a consequence. Probably a case of me needing to re-read this all when I've not had a bottle of wine !

The "leap",as you call it is jumping out of the box of man made definitions that tend to place humans in an exclusive special "members only" club. Only we can communicate to satisfy our definition. After all,we are "Human". Bacteria have been around for much longer than we have,and evolution does not explain all of the things that occur in the "lower" classes of creatures. "Hard wired" is a cop out. They pass information from one generation to the next. What an advantage that would be for humans to have. Dolphins do not speak English,but they are intelligent. They gather information and make modifications to their behavior based on that information. Octopi have unscrewed lids from a container,never having seen threads before. Chimps constantly chatter,but when staging an attack,they are very quiet and move silently. How could they do this without sharing a plan or information? Certain fish have self recognition,an accepted indication of higher intelligence. I recommend a good Scotch instead of wine to loosen up my neurons. I have grown accustomed to the Druid Priests that gather at the foot of my bed.

So you dislike the anthropocentric nature of the word "intelligence" that many have. I'll grant you the concept of the term is not humanity linked like "man", "woman", "President", "Pope" and other words that must be a human being. But "intelligence" is one of the attributes that is applied to human individuals for better or worse, so it will often be associated with humanity and those creatures perceived to be close to humanity.

I agree that intelligence is an analog attribute with a whole spectrum of gradations. I also agree the use of the binary word "not" on any analog attribute is fraught with misunderstandings and misuse for it should be applied only when it is impossible for it to have any meaning of the analog attribute. (Pi is not a rational number.) When anything has a measured zero or near zero analog attribute lying within the measurement uncertainty, the burden of proof that the possibility to have that attribute is non-zero lies with the one making the claim.

You might be right that bacteria have some tiny, non-zero level of intelligence, you did not prove it. At least you did not prove it to me, here.

My opening sentence states that IMHO,..... In matters of taste or opinion,argument is futile. Everyone is entitled to their opinion,and all "facts" are subject to change as our knowledge changes. Perhaps one day we will acknowledge that we are not unique. The problem as I see it, is simply one of ego. We once considered the Earth as the center of the universe,then later it was the solar system,then the galaxy,then the galactic cluster,then super clusters,etc... Every advance in knowledge shows us how insignificant we are i We are in the large scheme. Our solar system is a small spec in the galaxy,which is in turn a small speck in the universe.. Earth is a dust mote in a sunbeam,and we are simply fleas on the back of this dust mote. So why all of the ego? "Big fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em, And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so, ad infinitum. And the great fleas, themselves, in turn, have greater fleas to go on; While these again have greater still, and greater still, and so on." ---Augustus De Morgan

We are all entitled to our own opinions and our opinions can change. But facts cannot change. If facts are changed then nothing can be known. Many an authoritarian ruler have controlled a population by claiming facts change. Facts can be true, false, misunderstood, ignored, irrelevant and sometimes they are difficult to locate to even the point they become lost but the facts themselves are not changed.

People believe the Earth is flat. That is a fact. It is also a fact that the Earth has been proven to be round. (Notice that I did not qualify "People" with the easy to assume attributes of "all" and "now".) One of us seems to be confusing an individual's truth of a stated fact and today's consensus of individuals of what is true. I wonder, is it you or is it me? (It is a fact that that is a question.)

I've enjoyed more than one quote from Augustus De Morgan, but his quote here is confusing the difference between large numbers and infinity. This is understandable since Georg Cantor had just reached full professor status at the early age of 34 when De Morgan died.

Humanities ego always comes into play when we anthropomorphize something. The very process of anthropomorphism is applying a human attribute to something that may or may not deserve that attribute but it allows us humans a perspective of what other beings might be experiencing.

What about plasmid DNA? Antibiotic resistance, for example, sometimes coded as a plasmid. It is then passed within and between species, without conventional heredity or exchange of DNA, which would tend to bar interspecies exchanges. I'm thinking that the exchange of plasmids may go beyond simple processes that are arguably design-driven and don't require 'intelligence'.

You are a formidable person to debate with, and could probably run a convincing chat the other way around. Slightly disingenuous to move toward Octopi and Chimps given the original question. Do bacteria know that they are intelligent, and does it even matter. I'd suggest it does matter because we are walking a fine line of semantics. Johnnie Walker told me to say that. I'd add an emoicon and some italics if the editor screen would let me. < wink wink, I surrender>

Certain spiders also display intelligence; Evaluating,planning,modifying plans,etc.Check this link: javascript: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDtlvZGmHYk

As we gain knowledge,we must shrink our ego.We are not the center of the universe.We are not the top of the food chain,or intelligence chain. The distribution of matter in the visible universe is eerily similar to the neurons in a brain. What if the universe itself is an intelligence,a giant brain in an entity we cannot imagine. Would that entity think that we were intelligent? Something so small and insignificant as we are? Probably not. We would be considered the same as we consider bacteria. 'Nuff said.

'Nuff said is fair enough, but I can't resist one last point. Would we recognize a higher form of intelligence, any more than a single cell organism would recognise humans as 'intelligent'.

Probably not.We might think something like "That bears a eerie resemblance to our brain structure.."

I do think there's a distinction to be made between awareness and thought. Awareness meaning that some "information" is coming in, thought meaning that you are reacting to the input, evaluating it and generating a response - not subconsciously as in the various processes that don't require a decision to be made, but consciously reaching a conclusion or decision. I'm basing that opinion on the experience of coming out of a general anaesthetic. There are two such experiences I remember, and that I was aware of my surroundings for a period of time before I actually reacted or had any thoughts about it. Under normal circumstances it might be difficult to disentangle awareness from thought, but they were clearly distinct in the process of awaking from the drug. So I think that the test case for "thought" has to show that a decision was made, over and above the normal chemical messaging and so on which constitutes awareness but does not require a decision to execute a response.

All of our thoughts are chemical in origin.Your drugged state is not applicable,because it was chemically induced.So if chemicals can change your state of mind,your awareness,using very basic chemical structures,then how can you dismiss very sophisticated chemical signals between other species?

I don't dismiss chemical signals - they can be a means of responding deliberately, not only "automatic" necessarily. Disagree that thoughts are chemical in origin. By comparison to the number of things that can be thought of, our chemistry would be considered "simple". ;)

DNA is only 4 chemicals.How simple it is,yet how much info it can store. All of our bodily processes are chemical.The electrical impulses to our nerves and in our brain are of chemical origin. A microscopic amount of certain chemicals can alter our sense of reality,such as LSD.And there are others just as powerful. Chemistry cannot be dismissed from thought,and vice versa.

"The electrical impulses to our nerves and in our brain are of chemical origin."

I believe it is equally valid to say that all of the chemical structures and interactions are of electrical origin.

... looks like a chicken and egg thing.

I don't deny that chemicals can affect your thought process.

But I don't believe thought can be reduced to chemistry. That is a dead end that has been explored to some extent - sufficient to know, you will not get someone else's thoughts by injecting them, for example.

For myself, it is sufficient to know that the chemicals which are required for life cannot be combined in a bowl to produce 'life'. The chemistry may be there, but there is no spark of awareness. Therefore awareness/thought/life is not the chemicals.

I was thinking about your pov this morning, could we have a specific chemical to represent each distinct thought, could the difference between thinking of a "rabbit" and a "vole" be simply a methyl group or something of the kind. If this was the case, would everyone have the same chemical to represent the 'known' items of the world, such as other living things. That would unfortunately fit with the 'injectable knowledge' theory. And if not, why not? Whatever DNA code driving "thought" would be expected to use a common code for chemical representation of 'thoughts', if this was the case.

If a person has a knowledge of chemistry, would the chemical representation of the thought of a chemical, not be the same chemical??? I mean, if I think of anthocyanins, whose structure I well know, do I actually get anthocyanins forming in my brain? I think not.

If thoughts of chemicals were simply chemicals, then you could tweak your own brain chemistry by thinking of dopamine or serotonin. Doctors would be keeling over from the thoughts required by the job.

There is some evidence from the late 1950's that Planeria worms could learn by eating the bodies of ground up previously trained worms,thus inferring that memories are chemically stored and can be chemically transferred. This is a long way from a memory pill,but I think it hints at the future possibilities.

Link, please! As a matter of fact, I do seem to remember something about that from back then...

If research from 60 years ago didn't lead to significant other research in the meantime, then it's doubtful that it will now. Not impossible, but doubtful.

It's quite possible that it was not information that was transferred, but rather nutrients which augmented the abilities of the recipients.

I remember this from high school biology class,which at the time was far behind modern biological technology. The link below is ambiguous about the final outcome of the research,but it should spur further research into the idea. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/06/memory-transfer

Thanks for the URLs.

Use from the toolbar to create true links.

I did read both articles; definitely thought-provoking, but not, to me, convincing, regarding memory.

Remember an image, any image, like for instance what your first car looked like. How could all that information be stored in multiple places?

As SolarEagle said: Maybe intelligence is carried in the DNA...

But wait, DNA is made from atoms. And without the properties of atoms, DNA would not exist. Perhaps the atoms have intelligence.

But wait, atoms are made from smaller particles. Without the properties of protons and electrons, atoms would not exist. Perhaps these particles have intelligence.

But wait, protons are made from................Just where does the intelligence come from?

Information is definitely stored in DNA, and part of that information clearly leads to a propensity for intelligence in the organism carrying that DNA, but I don't believe it is correct to say that DNA is intelligent.

Just as combinations of 1's and 0's (or N's and S's, or ups and downs, or...) store information in digital computers, combinations of different atoms or molecules can store information in DNA or elsewhere.

Now the definition of "intelligence" is a LOT more vague. Thermostats, both mechanical and electrical, can react to changes in temperature and turn heaters and coolers on or off accordingly. Does that constitute "Intelligence"? I'm not sure, but I lean towards "no"!

We all have met people with little to no intelligence. We all can and certainly I have temporarily lost most of my intelligence from time to time. Intelligence is not found in the DNA itself.

Yep!

If you thought quorum sensing was fun, take a look at this research on bacterial individuality!

https://phys.org/news/2019-04-bacteria-reveal-strong-individuality-maze.html

As SolarEagle said: Maybe intelligence is carried in the DNA...

But wait, DNA is made from atoms. And without the properties of atoms, DNA would not exist. Perhaps the atoms have intelligence.

But wait, atoms are made from smaller particles. Without the properties of protons and electrons, atoms would not exist. Perhaps these particles have intelligence.

But wait, protons are made from................Just where does the intelligence come from?

Perhaps the whole universe is intelligent.Look at the distribution of galaxies in the known universe.It is eerily similar to our brain structure. Perhaps we are simply a virus within a gigantic intelligence that we call the universe.All of the matter that we can detect is only 5% of the whole universe. So what is the other 95% doing?All matter in our known universe could have an entangled partner in the unseen 95% of the universe,and manipulation of matter there could be affecting behavior at the atomic level in this tiny 5% universe that we exist in. "Curiuoser and Curiuoser" said Alice.

Not sure if it's relevant, and I've used it before. In a strip catoon, some chap is shouting at the clouds, "Is anybody out there ?". No answer, so he uses a megaphone. No answer so he adds another megaphone on top. No answer, so he continues. This continues until his megaphone stack is up into the clouds. Final picture is a scientist peering into a microscope and pondering, "what is that odd thing poking out of an atomic particle ?" Slightly absurd, but it made me laugh. Dark matter is a puzzle. Possibly we are not equpied to comprend, though I doubt it will stop us trying. Trying to understand is fundamental to what makes us human.

IMHO: All mental processes are electro-chemical. A very microscopic dose of certain chemicals can alter our sense of self and reality;For instance LSD,THC,Cocaine,Heroin,etc. Our entire body relies on chemicals to create and conduct electrical charges;calcium channel blockers and such. Thoughts are carried and stored as chemicals,thus memories likewise are stored chemically. How would an electrical signal be stable for many decades,with cell replacement steadily happening. Theoretically,we should be able to harness learning or memories from our ancestors. Many animals do so,and it is called"hard wired memory" or instinct. Perhaps one day we will be able to widen our personal tributary to and from the great river of knowledge,and our knowledge will not be lost when we die. Instances of sudden abilities arising after head trauma have been well documented;the brain has been "knocked off channel" so to speak. Who knows how many untapped channels we have locked away in each of us. We need to learn to think out of the skull(box).