15 ms·

Really interesting article. In regards to: "Cooperation leading to the development of language is one of the leading hypotheses for what makes human beings uni

Really interesting article. In regards to: "Cooperation leading to the development of language is one of the leading hypotheses for what makes human beings unique among the animals." The core difference between humans and animals is that humans can reason; we possess cogitative powers. Philosophers of mind and language, like PMS Hacker, have written extensively on this topic. Humans can ask "why?", can plan, can hope, can wish, can dream, all through language. Language is an ability and allows us to reason, give reasons, and have reasons. Dogs and animals can't ask "why?" "Why?" is beyond their limit of expression because they do not possess language. They can be confused, but confusion is not asking "why?" because "why?" is a demand for reasons. Confusion is simply not knowing what is going on, while reasoning is thinking in future and past tenses, it allows us to plan and introspect. I think the equation of whistling with full language is interesting, but it potentially reads cogitative powers in dogs when it might simply be the humans reading themselves into the dogs. The point around cooperation is fascinating in this regard, in which case, the cooperation might be that humans reason for the dog. In other words, the dogs provide the brawn and the handlers supply the brains. We domesticated dogs because they worked for us.

agumonkey 9y ago
Well a lot of time I asked why and was confused. Lots of people are even more confused. They may ask why but have no clue whatsoever about anything they're looking at. Maybe we have larger neuron capacity than animals that allows to store signals, relationships that "maybe" will later resolve that why, while they just have to accept that confusion and just go along doing something else, maybe remembering a map (context, confusion, avoid).
interfixus 9y ago
>The core difference between humans and animals is that humans can reason So there's a body of research suggesting beyond reasonable doubt that no animal - except us - is capable of reason? Do you have a link?
- Brockenstein 9y ago
  I would be skeptical of research that says other animals are incapable of reasoning. I think it would be more along the lines of the limits of their reasoning, and other abilities to utilize the reasoning they're capable of. Clearly there are some differences between humans and other animals, even other primates. But it's hard to quantify those exactly. If humans have reasoning score of 10, do dogs have reasoning of 1 or 5? Even the variability among people and measurable differences between individual dogs or breed of dog further complicates that.
- pjc50 9y ago
  There's significant evidence to the contrary, all sorts of animals can solve puzzles.
  - mabub24 9y ago
    Computers can solve puzzles too. Would you say, then, that computers can reason? The problem with your argument is computers and animals are not cogitative, in any way similar to humans. There might be instances when animals come close, but that is no reason to imply all animals can. That means some come close.
    - posterboy 9y ago
      animals solve without being told how to by a human, in contrast to a computer. of course newer AI is different, and it's called AI for a reason.
      - mabub24 9y ago
        Newer AI is entirely limited by the algorithmic and logical frameworks assigned to it by others than itself. Machine learning is not "true" AI. It's called AI because it's slick marketing. Animals can solve puzzles. Solving puzzles, however, doesn't mean you can reason in the same way humans can. For instance, humans can ask why they are solving the puzzle. That's an expression of cogitative ability that animals don't have.
oh_sigh 9y ago
Why is language required to ask why? > Dogs and animals can't ask "why?" "Why?" is beyond their limit of expression because they do not possess language
- mabub24 9y ago
  Because dogs have no means to express the concept "why?" Animals don't plan in an animate sense in any form observable in the same way humans do. See the quote from Hacker's "Wittgenstein: Comparisons and Context" here: "The limits of thought are the behavioral expression of thought. It is perfectly possible, in certain circumstances, for an animal to think and not show it. But it makes sense to ascribe thinking to an animal only insofar as the animal's behavioral repertoire includes such behavior as would express what the animal is said to think."
  - dkersten 9y ago
    > Animals don't plan in an animate sense in any form observable in the same way humans do. Why should they do it the same way humans do? Behaving exactly like humans do is not a prerequisite for intelligence or reasoning. I think its a mistake to put us on a pedestal and saying "if its not like this, then it doesn't count". Anyway, many creatures can and do plan, just not necessarily the same way that humans do: From http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/01/160121-jumping-spiders-animals-science/ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/01/160121-jumping-sp... These tiny spiders are able to plan their attacks and take different approaches depending on their prey (even if they've never encountered their prey before! They're extremely fascinating creatures): "In the 1980s and 1990s, Robert Jackson of New Zealand’s University of Canterbury demonstrated that Portia fimbriata, a member of this spider-snacking subfamily, methodically plans winding detours to sneak up on prey spiders. Portia can even find hidden prey, suggesting that the predator can visualize its prey's location and a path to get there." From https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/07/more-evidence-that-ravens-are-ridiculously-intelligent-birds/ https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/07/more-evidence-that-ravens... "The study, published yesterday in Science, shows that ravens (Corvus corax) can anticipate the nature, time and location of future events based on prior experiences." (study linked within) Apparently apes can plan: https://www.livescience.com/2620-humans-apes-plan.html https://www.livescience.com/2620-humans-apes-plan.html
garrybelka 9y ago
My shepherd is by no means special yet he asks 'Why?'. He plans, hopes, and most definitely has and could express wishes. And while his intelligence is limited and very material in a pragmatic way he does possess a language (that I'm still learning) and he could reason. He is not into abstractions, but, perhaps, could master one or two with a sufficiently tasty motivation. But he understands generalisations, conditionals and iterations.
sqeaky 9y ago
I think you are confusing inability to communicate with inability to think. Many animals are dumb, Many are smarter than we give them credit for. In past few decades there have been a great many papers indicating some animals can do things just short of what we can do and many people used to think that animals could think, feels emotions, learn by trial/error or even communicate. You are making an assertion "No animal thinks 'Why?'" without evidence. You could be right or wrong, but you have chosen an odd place to stand. You are inside an ever receding pocket of ignorance.
coldtea 9y ago
>Dogs and animals can't ask "why?" "Why?" is beyond their limit of expression because they do not possess language. Citation needed.
woodandsteel 9y ago
>The core difference between humans and animals is that humans can reason; we possess cogitative powers. I agree that human language makes it possible for human beings to do all sorts of cognitive things that animals can't. That said, you are making the term "reason" have a single meaning, whereas there are actually many types of cognitive activity, some of which animals can do, and some of which they can't. You really need to be more specific about the different types of reasoning, and each different type of reasoning should get a distinctive label.

agumonkey 9y ago

Well a lot of time I asked why and was confused. Lots of people are even more confused. They may ask why but have no clue whatsoever about anything they're looking at. Maybe we have larger neuron capacity than animals that allows to store signals, relationships that "maybe" will later resolve that why, while they just have to accept that confusion and just go along doing something else, maybe remembering a map (context, confusion, avoid).

interfixus 9y ago

>The core difference between humans and animals is that humans can reason So there's a body of research suggesting beyond reasonable doubt that no animal - except us - is capable of reason? Do you have a link?

Brockenstein 9y ago
I would be skeptical of research that says other animals are incapable of reasoning. I think it would be more along the lines of the limits of their reasoning, and other abilities to utilize the reasoning they're capable of. Clearly there are some differences between humans and other animals, even other primates. But it's hard to quantify those exactly. If humans have reasoning score of 10, do dogs have reasoning of 1 or 5? Even the variability among people and measurable differences between individual dogs or breed of dog further complicates that.
pjc50 9y ago
There's significant evidence to the contrary, all sorts of animals can solve puzzles.
- mabub24 9y ago
  Computers can solve puzzles too. Would you say, then, that computers can reason? The problem with your argument is computers and animals are not cogitative, in any way similar to humans. There might be instances when animals come close, but that is no reason to imply all animals can. That means some come close.
  - posterboy 9y ago
    animals solve without being told how to by a human, in contrast to a computer. of course newer AI is different, and it's called AI for a reason.
    - mabub24 9y ago
      Newer AI is entirely limited by the algorithmic and logical frameworks assigned to it by others than itself. Machine learning is not "true" AI. It's called AI because it's slick marketing. Animals can solve puzzles. Solving puzzles, however, doesn't mean you can reason in the same way humans can. For instance, humans can ask why they are solving the puzzle. That's an expression of cogitative ability that animals don't have.

oh_sigh 9y ago

Why is language required to ask why? > Dogs and animals can't ask "why?" "Why?" is beyond their limit of expression because they do not possess language

mabub24 9y ago
Because dogs have no means to express the concept "why?" Animals don't plan in an animate sense in any form observable in the same way humans do. See the quote from Hacker's "Wittgenstein: Comparisons and Context" here: "The limits of thought are the behavioral expression of thought. It is perfectly possible, in certain circumstances, for an animal to think and not show it. But it makes sense to ascribe thinking to an animal only insofar as the animal's behavioral repertoire includes such behavior as would express what the animal is said to think."
- dkersten 9y ago
  > Animals don't plan in an animate sense in any form observable in the same way humans do. Why should they do it the same way humans do? Behaving exactly like humans do is not a prerequisite for intelligence or reasoning. I think its a mistake to put us on a pedestal and saying "if its not like this, then it doesn't count". Anyway, many creatures can and do plan, just not necessarily the same way that humans do: From http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/01/160121-jumping-spiders-animals-science/ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/01/160121-jumping-sp... These tiny spiders are able to plan their attacks and take different approaches depending on their prey (even if they've never encountered their prey before! They're extremely fascinating creatures): "In the 1980s and 1990s, Robert Jackson of New Zealand’s University of Canterbury demonstrated that Portia fimbriata, a member of this spider-snacking subfamily, methodically plans winding detours to sneak up on prey spiders. Portia can even find hidden prey, suggesting that the predator can visualize its prey's location and a path to get there." From https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/07/more-evidence-that-ravens-are-ridiculously-intelligent-birds/ https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/07/more-evidence-that-ravens... "The study, published yesterday in Science, shows that ravens (Corvus corax) can anticipate the nature, time and location of future events based on prior experiences." (study linked within) Apparently apes can plan: https://www.livescience.com/2620-humans-apes-plan.html https://www.livescience.com/2620-humans-apes-plan.html

garrybelka 9y ago

My shepherd is by no means special yet he asks 'Why?'. He plans, hopes, and most definitely has and could express wishes. And while his intelligence is limited and very material in a pragmatic way he does possess a language (that I'm still learning) and he could reason. He is not into abstractions, but, perhaps, could master one or two with a sufficiently tasty motivation. But he understands generalisations, conditionals and iterations.

sqeaky 9y ago

I think you are confusing inability to communicate with inability to think. Many animals are dumb, Many are smarter than we give them credit for. In past few decades there have been a great many papers indicating some animals can do things just short of what we can do and many people used to think that animals could think, feels emotions, learn by trial/error or even communicate. You are making an assertion "No animal thinks 'Why?'" without evidence. You could be right or wrong, but you have chosen an odd place to stand. You are inside an ever receding pocket of ignorance.

coldtea 9y ago

>Dogs and animals can't ask "why?" "Why?" is beyond their limit of expression because they do not possess language. Citation needed.

woodandsteel 9y ago

>The core difference between humans and animals is that humans can reason; we possess cogitative powers. I agree that human language makes it possible for human beings to do all sorts of cognitive things that animals can't. That said, you are making the term "reason" have a single meaning, whereas there are actually many types of cognitive activity, some of which animals can do, and some of which they can't. You really need to be more specific about the different types of reasoning, and each different type of reasoning should get a distinctive label.