4 ms·

Since we can't continue the older discussion, I'd like to comment here on the new thread. I'm discouraged by the topmost thread. In every case of (anecdotal?)

Since we can't continue the older discussion, I'd like to comment here on the new thread. I'm discouraged by the topmost thread. In every case of (anecdotal?) experiments, the researcher was attempting repeatability with the same group of dolphins. I'd like to suggest that, given the 'negative' results and the predictions of dolphin keepers, repeatability should be attempted with a different group of dolphins.

intrasight 9y ago
Dolphins are expensive. I assume it was due to insufficient research funding.
- astrodust 9y ago
  Yeah, you can't just grab a dolphin from the sea, chuck them in a tank, and run experiments on them. You'll have to build a rapport with the dolphins to get any meaningful data. There should be better ways of studying them, like passive observation in the sea, or by making a mecha-dolphin that can follow them without interfering too much.
gerbilly 9y ago
The other implication of testing this on "another group of dolphin" is the ethical dimension. Some people believe it's unethical to imprison dolphins in a small pool. I'd argue we certainly don't need to capture more dolphins to 'prove' they are intelligent. I also never understood why the barrier is set so high for giving any other species but ourselves credit for being intelligent.
- godelski 9y ago
  Could you not train wild dolphins though? It seems like they are quick learners, so even though you might not have as quick and easy access, it shouldn't take substantially longer. Assuming the dolphins want to play along.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
  > I also never understood why the barrier is set so high for giving any other species but ourselves credit for being intelligent. It is our tendency to believe things that we want to believe, and we want to believe things that align with our self interest. Since human moral understanding has come around to the concept that all human beings have inherent value, so therefore we can't just torture and kill them because they're not part of the tribe, we've had to keep inventing reasons why that same behavior is acceptable towards animals. If we were to decide that animals deserve the same moral considerations as ourselves, then we have to accept that many of the foundations for our comfortable lifestyles are immoral, and if we did that we'd have to consider giving them up.
  - flavor8 9y ago
    > we'd have to consider giving them up. Just this week there's been a round of articles on the scientific consensus that fish feel pain. Read https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/fish-feel-pain-180967764/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/fish-feel-pain..., for example, and see if the final third of the article leaves you comfortable about eating fish. I've always thought the "catch and release" practice (and the accompanying justification that fish don't feel pain, so that it's harmless sportsmanlike fun) to be bewilderingly shallow thinking - but despite that fish is a much more significant part of my diet than avian or mammal meat. I'm also deeply hypocritical about mammal meat eating; every time I go to an Indian restaurant (but never otherwise) for example, I'll order lamb, just because it's tastier than saag or tofu. As another example, I don't eat pork, with the notable exception of cured meats, which are also too damned tasty. I probably could go wholesale vegan, especially with some of the better fake-meat protein sources, and yet perhaps I don't want to enough, and/or I enjoy eating meat a few times a month too much to do so. That's hardly a well justified moral position to take, and yet I suspect it's not uncommon. [Also, the dividing line between animals and plants - while of course clearly defined - may be softer than we've assumed. (https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-01-09/new-research-plant-intelligence-may-forever-change-how-you-think-about-plants https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-01-09/new-research-plant-in...). In 25 years will we talking about eating lab grown food only instead of farmed plants?] I suspect our moral systems are still reeling from 1000+ years of Christianity completely dominating our societal thinking - even if your parents weren't religious, or theirs, their inherited "firmware" (societal norms picked up in early years of learning) probably has a lot of irrationally derived foundations. Our attempts at scientific derived moral systems haven't had particularly great results so far, but perhaps we'll get there in time.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Quite true, intelligent behavior has been observed in many species. Just because they aren't at the same level as us, speaking and writing books, doesn't mean like aren't intelligent in different ways. After all, we also needed a few million years to get here.
- snowwrestler 9y ago
  > I also never understood why the barrier is set so high for giving any other species but ourselves credit for being intelligent. Because the Western intellectual traditions of both science and philosophy arise from European Christian religious thought, which regards Man as made in the image of God, set apart from and above other animals. The psychology of animals is one of the areas of scientific study that is still today struggling out from under its cultural roots, to be truly empirical about things.
cetalingua 9y ago
One of the most fascinating experiments was done by Bastian in 1960s (our first podcast will be about it once the site goes live). It remains highly controversial but has also been replicated by others. In 2016 one Russian scientist claimed to replicate it and it resulted in huge storm and controversy. Basically it involved 2 dolphins separated visually but not acoustically. One dolphin was shown what action the second dolphins should perform so both can get a fish. It appeared that dolphins did communicate and performed above the chance level.

intrasight 9y ago

Dolphins are expensive. I assume it was due to insufficient research funding.

astrodust 9y ago
Yeah, you can't just grab a dolphin from the sea, chuck them in a tank, and run experiments on them. You'll have to build a rapport with the dolphins to get any meaningful data. There should be better ways of studying them, like passive observation in the sea, or by making a mecha-dolphin that can follow them without interfering too much.

gerbilly 9y ago

The other implication of testing this on "another group of dolphin" is the ethical dimension. Some people believe it's unethical to imprison dolphins in a small pool. I'd argue we certainly don't need to capture more dolphins to 'prove' they are intelligent. I also never understood why the barrier is set so high for giving any other species but ourselves credit for being intelligent.

godelski 9y ago
Could you not train wild dolphins though? It seems like they are quick learners, so even though you might not have as quick and easy access, it shouldn't take substantially longer. Assuming the dolphins want to play along.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
> I also never understood why the barrier is set so high for giving any other species but ourselves credit for being intelligent. It is our tendency to believe things that we want to believe, and we want to believe things that align with our self interest. Since human moral understanding has come around to the concept that all human beings have inherent value, so therefore we can't just torture and kill them because they're not part of the tribe, we've had to keep inventing reasons why that same behavior is acceptable towards animals. If we were to decide that animals deserve the same moral considerations as ourselves, then we have to accept that many of the foundations for our comfortable lifestyles are immoral, and if we did that we'd have to consider giving them up.
- flavor8 9y ago
  > we'd have to consider giving them up. Just this week there's been a round of articles on the scientific consensus that fish feel pain. Read https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/fish-feel-pain-180967764/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/fish-feel-pain..., for example, and see if the final third of the article leaves you comfortable about eating fish. I've always thought the "catch and release" practice (and the accompanying justification that fish don't feel pain, so that it's harmless sportsmanlike fun) to be bewilderingly shallow thinking - but despite that fish is a much more significant part of my diet than avian or mammal meat. I'm also deeply hypocritical about mammal meat eating; every time I go to an Indian restaurant (but never otherwise) for example, I'll order lamb, just because it's tastier than saag or tofu. As another example, I don't eat pork, with the notable exception of cured meats, which are also too damned tasty. I probably could go wholesale vegan, especially with some of the better fake-meat protein sources, and yet perhaps I don't want to enough, and/or I enjoy eating meat a few times a month too much to do so. That's hardly a well justified moral position to take, and yet I suspect it's not uncommon. [Also, the dividing line between animals and plants - while of course clearly defined - may be softer than we've assumed. (https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-01-09/new-research-plant-intelligence-may-forever-change-how-you-think-about-plants https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-01-09/new-research-plant-in...). In 25 years will we talking about eating lab grown food only instead of farmed plants?] I suspect our moral systems are still reeling from 1000+ years of Christianity completely dominating our societal thinking - even if your parents weren't religious, or theirs, their inherited "firmware" (societal norms picked up in early years of learning) probably has a lot of irrationally derived foundations. Our attempts at scientific derived moral systems haven't had particularly great results so far, but perhaps we'll get there in time.
pjmlp 9y ago
Quite true, intelligent behavior has been observed in many species. Just because they aren't at the same level as us, speaking and writing books, doesn't mean like aren't intelligent in different ways. After all, we also needed a few million years to get here.
snowwrestler 9y ago
> I also never understood why the barrier is set so high for giving any other species but ourselves credit for being intelligent. Because the Western intellectual traditions of both science and philosophy arise from European Christian religious thought, which regards Man as made in the image of God, set apart from and above other animals. The psychology of animals is one of the areas of scientific study that is still today struggling out from under its cultural roots, to be truly empirical about things.

cetalingua 9y ago

One of the most fascinating experiments was done by Bastian in 1960s (our first podcast will be about it once the site goes live). It remains highly controversial but has also been replicated by others. In 2016 one Russian scientist claimed to replicate it and it resulted in huge storm and controversy. Basically it involved 2 dolphins separated visually but not acoustically. One dolphin was shown what action the second dolphins should perform so both can get a fish. It appeared that dolphins did communicate and performed above the chance level.