tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post6416836000379561023..comments2023-12-21T06:35:36.624-05:00Comments on Recursivity: Yet More EgnoranceUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-24668090256039900072016-07-15T05:07:46.250-04:002016-07-15T05:07:46.250-04:00PS. See also: www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/07/vide...PS. See also: www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/07/video-ducklings-capable-abstract-thoughtAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11132121296728341268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-25105412108726317132016-07-15T04:59:29.940-04:002016-07-15T04:59:29.940-04:00'Science' has this latest news on animals ...'Science' has this latest news on animals (ducklings) and abstract thinking:<br />science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6296/222<br /><br />It seems to me that people like Egnor have a crazy reverence for ancient thinking because obsolete science doen's contradict their believes.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11132121296728341268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-85473813629073268512016-07-13T15:14:11.207-04:002016-07-13T15:14:11.207-04:00There's also this study, which to me seems to ...There's also this study, which to me seems to show ravens can think abstractly.<br /><br />Bugnyar, T., S. A. Reber, and C. Buckner. 2016. Ravens attribute visual access to unseen competitors. Nat Commun 7. Article number:10506doi:10.1038/ncomms10506Chris Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04778164246719803780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-68706962523730206522016-07-11T13:54:26.797-04:002016-07-11T13:54:26.797-04:00There was a documentary on animal intelligence on ...There was a documentary on animal intelligence on PBS years ago that refutes Egnor. It demonstrated, among other examples, that a five-year-old chimpanzee has better abstract reasoning than the typical five-year-old human (since brain development in humans takes longer).<br /><br />A child is shown a room with various furniture and objects in it, then shown a small scale model of the same room with the same objects, with verbal explanations, e.g., "See, the big room has a big couch next to a wastebasket, the small room has a small couch next to s small wastebasket." Then they show the child a banana, and tell them, "I have hidden a banana in the big room. If you find it, you can have it." Next they take a small model of a banana and place it in the scale-model, behind a cushion on the couch, or in a cabinet drawer, or in the empty wastebasket, telling the child, "The banana is in the same place in the big room as it is in the small room." The child then runs into the big room to look for the banana and does so randomly, in several trials, even after being shown the banana is where it was in the model. The child cannot make the abstract connection between the big and small rooms.<br /><br />A five-year-old chimp is given the same test (with the same demonstrated explanations). It immediately runs into the room and looks where it was shown to look in the scale model, and finds the banana.<br /><br />My conclusion from this and lots of similar evidence is that there is a spectrum of reasoning ability among animals, and we happen to seem to be on the top of it, on this planet, just as giraffes have the longest necks and whales have the biggest volume. Some animal species had to be on the top, or tied for the top, and we happen to the one. It doesn't prove that we are special in any universal sense, just randomly lucky. JimVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10198704789965278981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-44970247269472165992016-07-11T10:45:24.039-04:002016-07-11T10:45:24.039-04:00Absolutely.
Nobody can deny that Aristotle was s...Absolutely. <br /><br />Nobody can deny that Aristotle was smart for his time, but there's no way someone living 2300 years ago can compete with all the knowledge gained in the last 500 years using the scientific method. Why people have this crazy reverence for ancient thinking is a real mystery to me.Jeffrey Shallithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-84932999336711453312016-07-11T10:12:18.421-04:002016-07-11T10:12:18.421-04:00As it happens, I'm reading some of Aristotle&#...As it happens, I'm reading some of Aristotle's biology. It's interesting to note the things he got right (e.g. that scale and feathers are "analogous") and the things he got wrong (e.g. that insects don't breathe). Aristotle deserves credit for his early attempt at doing empirical science (in contrast to his teacher Plato), but there was a whole world of stuff he had <b>no effective way</b> of investigating at the time. Using Aristotle as some sort of authority is ridiculous.Steve Watsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06022832831084750602noreply@blogger.com