• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Do some Animals, aside from Humans, think?

Once a planaria learns something, you can cut it up, feed it to another planaria, and the new planaria may suddenly know the same trick.
 
Not really. Mc Connell's findings have not been replicated when appropriate controls were established. Otherwise Professors emeriti would be willing their bodies to the student cafeteria.
 
Not really. Mc Connell's findings have not been replicated when appropriate controls were established. Otherwise Professors emeriti would be willing their bodies to the student cafeteria.

Today's Specials
Word Salad with dressing a la Chomsky
English pot pie with Sir Francis Bacon
Schroedinger's cat a la mode Francaise
And for afters:
Fermat's Last Theorum n=2 tiered layer cake with nuggets of unsolvable conundrums.
 
I think I alluded to it in this thread a while back, but I'd like to ask the psychologists - would, say, a scallop trying to get away from a starfish be "thought", outside of some innate instinct, and would the decision to go in X direction vs. Y be any different than a humans instinctual "thoughts" to run towards safety or in a particular direction away from danger.

When I drive around my campus at night I see failures of instinctual thought vs. rational thought constantly (rabbits that are in perfectly good positions waiting until my vehicle is upon them to run in front of me, or killdeers taking flight to fly in front of my truck, but could these not be decisions that seem rational within the context of instinct or evolution for a prey species that would appear to be outside the scope of "thought" to beings that have the evolutionary baggage of being pray and predator as well as developing rational cognizance in flight or fight situations?

(Sorry to the pros if this nonsensical. I've had 9 beers and will clarify anything I've muddled much later this evening when I'm back at work.)
 
I remember reading many years ago about studies with dolphins where they (and maybe dogs, but I don't recall for sure) were the only animals that had shown the ability for "complex" language understanding. For example, you could tell them something like "take the red ball under the bar and then put it into the round hole," and they would be able to do it. Most animals can only comprehend simple statements like "red ball" but can't master the "unders" and "thens" and "intos." That's my basic recollection, and I'm sure I'm oversimplifying it, but as I said it was maybe 20 years ago.

I've also read some stuff that makes a lot of sense to me (and has been touched on by quarky) about our inability to really comprehend dolphin (and other marine mammal) intelligence because their environments are so alien to us, as is the way they perceive their environment. Their use of sonar means a very different way of translating incoming data, which could mean a very different brain process that we are unable to truly understand. We only test intelligence as we know it ourselves.
 
UnrepentantSinner said:
When I drive around my campus at night I see failures of instinctual thought vs. rational thought constantly (rabbits that are in perfectly good positions waiting until my vehicle is upon them to run in front of me, or killdeers taking flight to fly in front of my truck, but could these not be decisions that seem rational within the context of instinct or evolution for a prey species that would appear to be outside the scope of "thought" to beings that have the evolutionary baggage of being pray and predator as well as developing rational cognizance in flight or fight situations?
Click to expand...


How about kittens, who for some reason feel compelled to squeeze through a slamming door at the last second? Or try to get your attention by scrambling to get between your foot and the floor as you're walking?

It's a wonder any of them survive to cathood.
 
wolfgirl said:
I remember reading many years ago about studies with dolphins where they (and maybe dogs, but I don't recall for sure) were the only animals that had shown the ability for "complex" language understanding. For example, you could tell them something like "take the red ball under the bar and then put it into the round hole," and they would be able to do it. Most animals can only comprehend simple statements like "red ball" but can't master the "unders" and "thens" and "intos." That's my basic recollection, and I'm sure I'm oversimplifying it, but as I said it was maybe 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

There are many dog trainers who tell you to reinforce the meaning of a word, such as "sit", by saying "good sit!" when they do what you want them to do.

Others say this is ridiculous. Although "good sit" is a very simple sentence to us, understanding it still requires the ability to parse grammatical phrases. Dogs can't do it.

I've learned that what dogs think when they hear a word may be very different from what we think. My wife and I learned by accident that when our dogs hear the word "kennel", they immediately find a quiet spot and lay down.
 
The thought that only humans think is a fallacy along the lines of "The Earth is the center of the universe", or "There is no other life beyond the Earth", and probably began with the perception (before language was developed) that "Only I think".
 
UnrepentantSinner said:
When I drive around my campus at night I see failures of instinctual thought vs. rational thought constantly (rabbits that are in perfectly good positions waiting until my vehicle is upon them to run in front of me, or killdeers taking flight to fly in front of my truck, but could these not be decisions that seem rational within the context of instinct or evolution for a prey species that would appear to be outside the scope of "thought" to beings that have the evolutionary baggage of being pray and predator as well as developing rational cognizance in flight or fight situations?
Click to expand...

Yes,

Trucks wouldn't have been a hazard during most rabbit evolution, but predators would.

Although dodging is a way of avoiding being caught, immediately running at right angles to an approaching predator would just give it a chance to change direction, and might make it easier for it to catch such a rabbit...

How would an animal "know" that the truck will stay on the road?
 
When tracking the ability to "think" across species, or how it's evolved per species, would time recognition (memory potential (past, present, future awareness) be as important an indicator as the thought processes themselves?

I would imagine language is needed to expand how far this thought window reaches into the past and future beyond a certain time (perhaps a days or two). Though it wouldn't have to be as complex as what we consider language today (think symbolic / simplistic / cave paintings).

Of course, even in humans, there is a broad range in the attention span from far-sighted to closed-minded. (Remember, far-sighted doesn't imply future or past in particular.)

Also, I wouldn't necessarily separate short term and long term memory specifically as we do with computers, but apply broader ranges and borders.

It seems basic life (like bacteria) just "go" (with set goals) with basically no thought. While an insect, like an ant, has a few options, but still basically no thought window beyond the immediate present. More evolved species reach farther into the past and future for information to use in the decisions they make on the options they encounter.
 
jimbob said:
Although dodging is a way of avoiding being caught, immediately running at right angles to an approaching predator would just give it a chance to change direction, and might make it easier for it to catch such a rabbit...
Click to expand...

THAT is a very good and interesting point.

Side note: Are posts like this one considered extraneous (and therefore shouldn't be made)? I've wondered this, finally get what seems a useful answer and I'd like to say something about it.
 
I think animals can learn a set of repetitive actions if it results in a positive outcome. Even an anthill can demonstrate a collective "mind" by sending messages throughout the population about food/danger and showing a purposeful response.

What would be "useful" behaviours from a survival point of view that could be viewed by humans as "thought"?
- Spatial awareness
- Basic consequence/cause and effect for social animals, i.e. a chimp thinking "if I give some of my food to Bobo, he grooms me. If I give some of my food to Tinkerbell, she doesn't groom me. It is better to give my food to Bobo"
- 'Rote' learning, e.g. hunting animals learning ways to stalk/bring down an animal, from their parents
- Medium-term memory, e.g. knowing which parts of the waterhole are dangerous because of past experience with crocodiles (this one is a big maybe..)

The only way to answer the question is to ask it in more detail. What do you mean by "thought"?
 
social insects, like a super colony of ants, act as a single collective mind. The individuals are 'stupid', but through collective feedback, the colony is intelligent. The mass of nuerons of the collective possibly outweigh the brains of humans, and the organism as a whole is nearly ageless. Somehow, these colonies even manage to not over-suceed...not destroy their food source. Quite amazing.
but does it (the colony) think?
 
Depends on your view about the Chinese Room.

I do not have, and never will have any evidence to show that you or any other humans have "thought". Other humans act like me, they respond to cues (if I punch someone he'll act as if I hurt him), but so does a robot, or a parrot. I will never absolutely know that you have a "self" like I view myself to have one.

The best we could do is figure out a Turing test for animals. What would an (imaginary?) animal that 'thinks' act like? would it be any different to existing animal behaviour? If my cat passes the animal-turing test, then it thinks.
 
Last edited:
quarky said:
The mass of nuerons of the collective possibly outweigh the brains of humans, and the organism as a whole is nearly ageless. Somehow, these colonies even manage to not over-suceed...not destroy their food source. Quite amazing.
but does it (the colony) think?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure a definition of the word "think", in the context of the question, is an absolute requirement. Which only shunts the question onto another line of inquiry. How you define the word "think" only defines the word. If the definition includes neurons communicating, in a way that is intelligent and allows organisms to survive, build, avoid threats, and so forth, then a colony of ants thinks.

If you define think another way, they don't. What is the point?
 
robinson said:
Returning to the opening question:



Think, like humans do? Or think in the way an Ape or a Dolphin does?
Click to expand...

OK, what is it? I know that I think. Internal speech as I am composing this. Planning things, saying to myself that Monk is on in 8 minutes. No 7.. It is almost 6, Sorry, I have to polish the TV.
 
Undesired Walrus said:
I understand that there is a Gorrilla somewhere that can actually express itself using sign language, which is quite extraordinary in my book.

I just wonder, can the more intelligent animals, like Apes and Dolphins actually think? I think I heard that Dolphins actually have their own language, or something like that. Seeing how Chimps can now prove themselves to have better memory than Humans, presumably there is some process going on in their minds that is beyond 'food ug. Mate ug ug.'
Click to expand...
Of course animals can think. Do you believe the theory of evolution or not? Think some single genetic change allowed humans to have instantly different brains?

I guess I don't quite get your question in light of common sense that our brains are just one more step along the evolutionary path.

Now as to language, there were 2 recent threads discussing the complicated issues surrounding animal use of language. If someone hasn't already posted a link, I hunt them down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom