Comment Re:the only surprise (Score 2) 75
Just because we use as single word to refer to human faculties collectively doesn't make them one thing (e.g. planning). Billions of years of evolution have furnished us with a swiss army knife of cognitive abilities from being able to proto-count (subitize) to being able to infer where other people around us are directing their attention.
A lot of our intelligent behavior is being able utilize these disparate capabilities *together*. For example, I notice the people around me are looking at some other people, who are looking back; I recognize that some of these people are in my in-group and other are outsiders; I perceive (subitize) that there are more of them than of us. There are some people who can't do this because they aren't as capable as other people at various links of the chain, and yet these people are often highly "intelligent" in other ways.
As we build AI tools, there is little point in them unless they *exceed* human abilities in some manner. So arguably we have already AI tools that, on certain tests with well-chosen constraints, are smarter than humans in a very narrow and specific way -- certainly in their ability to process large volumes of data. What we won't get at first is that kind of seamless integration of different kinds of mental capabilities. This integration is so natural and effortless for us we call all our highly disparate abilities by a single word.