[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 406 KB, 1480x1046, 1305436207811.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR] No.3748683 [Reply] [Original]

A question, /sci/:

In relation to a current thread on human intelligence and the general trend I noticed while observing similar topics, I have noticed a lot of /sci/entists think animals are not sapient. Does anyone that believes this ever have a pet?

Also, general animal cognitive discussion.

>> No.3748697

lol fuck this thread
goto the source
>>3748080

>> No.3748699 [DELETED] 

>think animals are not sapient

please look up this word on wikipedia before posting it further

>> No.3748708

We sure seem to be having a multi-related thread day up in here...

>> No.3748711

>>3748697
that thread is all about cannibalism now, you better come here. I'll let you put OP in name if you like.
>>3748699
No I don't think that, thats the point. What indeed do these people mean sapience and sentience means...

>> No.3748726

>>3748708
Its called following a train of thought, or maybe memetics.

Anyway, the ted talk I mentioned in the other thread:
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/laurie_santos.html

>> No.3748744

people who are pushing animal intelligence usually spend an inordinate amount of their life with them, and have a rather vested interest.

For fun, look up literal translations of conversations with "signing" apes. It reads like this "BANNA WANT LOVE FOOD BANANA HELP"

Its like a dog knows several tricks to get food, and it's just looking for which combo brings the banana.

Or for example, counting. Even very smart animals can't go beyond 7 or so.

>> No.3748760

>>3748711

>that thread is all about cannibalism now

Those bloody cannibalism threads, eh? They're the bane of /sci/.

>> No.3748787

Animal intelligence is a neat field of study. But nothing is near human level. We are amazed when we learn that parrots, apes and dolphins can do things a 2-year-old can.

>> No.3748791

>>3748744
I doubt its bias, infact my current captcha is "reverse onbias (i shit you not). I'm not overvaluing animals, its just that a lot of them have a brain with pretty similar components to us and as far as experiments go none have disproven that they are sapient. Of course, the nay-sayers would twist that into meaning its not proven correct, but what would be an accurate all-encompasing test of that? We can only really be SURE we as individuals are sapient, we can't even prove it on humans, and if we can then some animal can pass that test as well.

>> No.3748806

>>3748791
>as experiments go none have disproven that they are sapient.
What.

Just what do you think "sapient" means? It sounds like you haven't read any experiments that explore the limits of animal intelligence at all. Just the pop-sci stuff that plays up the things they CAN do.

>> No.3748820

How can anyone believe animals aren't sapient? they have pretty much the same brains and same train of thought as we do. Humans are able to take advantage of our intelligence far better than other animals but still, all animals are sapient to some degree

>> No.3748814

>>3748744
7 is the most popular random number of 1 through 10.

This leads me to believe many humans are not sapient either.

>> No.3748811

> reverse onbias

Well, that's definitely fitting. I'm a bit jealous.

>> No.3748824

>>3748820
see
>>3748806

>> No.3748837

>>3748806
and you sound like a hypocrit, if I'm not citing any reliable research, and you have a problem with that, then why don't you? Sapience is self-awareness and the sense of self, btw.
>>3748787
Yes, I would say one of the biggest distinctions is infact intelligence and our practice of teaching our offspring.

>> No.3748842

It's kind of funny watching all the people in that other thread discuss something of which they obviously have NO knowledge. "Human vs. Animals", lol.

>> No.3748852

>>3748837
>Sapience is self-awareness and the sense of self, btw.
NO. NO NO NO NO NO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom#Sapience

If you're talking about self-awareness, then there are tests that strongly suggest that elephants, dolphins, and apes are self-aware, among others. But they're still not even close to human intelligence.

>> No.3748881

>>3748852
I concede, you are right sapience doesn't mean what I thought. But I still have an ego so I must now riposte with a request you link any research (even if wikipedia) that shows animals are not capable of reasoned judgement, not only instinct.

>> No.3748956

>>3748881
>any research (even if wikipedia) that shows animals are not capable of reasoned judgement, not only instinct.
Well, I'll concede here too. I'm not arguing that. It's just that animals have less of it than we do, and some animals have more of it (ability to reason) than others.

Here's a parrot that can understand questions about quantity, shape, and color.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXoTaZotdHg

>> No.3749136

I was just thinking about an experiment for reasoned judgement. The first thing that came to mind was Pavlov's conditioning, which although proving dogs learn it does imply its instinctual. Then again, it used very simple parameters with only 1 clearly good and 1 clearly bad stimulus. I think a human would be as conditioned as a dog in that situation. What we need is multiple choices without clear right or wrong ones. For an example 4 buttons with each representing a benefit to the dog, we can then look for statistically significant difference among the dogs. If they all, upon learning what each option is and memorizing it, push the buttons in the same order (f/ex food first always) we can say they aren't sapient. On the other hand, if they go by their own pattern (differentiated from randomness by the dog immediately reacting to the presented benefit as if expecting it, or alternatively rejecting it and pressing a different button) we could show they are making a judgement. Another thing that came to mind is simply giving it an option between a variety of food, both of different flavor and quantity.

>> No.3749144

OP meant sentient

>> No.3749187

>>3749144
yes I did, but now that I have conclusively learned the difference I mean both sentience and sapience.

>> No.3749202

>>3749187
tell the class what you have learned

>> No.3749417

>>3749202
I have learned trolls give a good excuse to bump, among other things.