4 ms·

So you're idea is that lots of living things innately perform this sort of skill, and that choosing to look at from a certain perspective lends the impression t

So you're idea is that lots of living things innately perform this sort of skill, and that choosing to look at from a certain perspective lends the impression that it's a hallmark of intellectual distinction, simply because they're choosing to look at things the wrong way? I think the idea is that it takes a bit more abstract symbolic thought to look at rival predators, then look at peers of the same species, and make eye contact and include a gesture that expresses a suggestion to stay hidden and keep quiet. If I hop a fence, hide from the cops, and then unexpectedly find you in the same place, also hiding, then for me to hold up my finger over my lips would represent my recognition of you as a fellow peer on the run also threatened with arrest and jail. That's a certain sort of interesting cognitive leap that I would not expect to see in most apes. If orangutans can do it, it's notable. I suspect you might see something like this in squid or octopoda. In bees, signaling dances aren't precisely the same kind of symbolic thought, because they don't have capacity to select what they dance about. It's a somewhat inflexible, robotic gambit of flowers, nectar, hive, honey, and nothing that deviates from the program, as complex as the program may be in its own right.

mannykannot 8y ago
This is the problem with regarding intelligence as just a collection of externally-observable behaviors. We simply don't know, at this point, the extent to which the orangutans are choosing this pattern of behavior as a result of considering the possible outcomes of the alternatives. As someone who spends a fair amount of time hiking in woodlands, I am familiar with the squeak of a chipmunk dashing for its burrow after spotting me, and I get the impression that they are silent if I have come close to them before they notice me. It is not difficult to posit how this pattern of behavior could arise from the interplay of a couple of related instinctive responses, and the same can be said for this orangutan behavior (though it does require the ability to remember a recent threat.) Whether there is more to it than that cannot be deduced from these observations.
- nicoburns 8y ago
  True, but note that this is also true of observations about other humans. How do I know that the behaviour of other humans isn't just instinctive? I'd argue only assuming that mt experience is similar to theirs. I think it is far more reasonable to extend this line of thinking to orangutans, than it is to jave different standards for humans and other apes...
  - mannykannot 8y ago
    > How do I know that the behaviour of other humans isn't just instinctive? Ultimately, you don't. If you contemplate this sort of issue long enough, you will likely go through the three stages of solipsism: 1) What a ridiculous idea! 2) There must be a way to prove that this is wrong... 3) Occam, can I borrow your razor?
    - AstralStorm 8y ago
      By our definition, instinct is something automatic and available without training. Humans and at least some apes are known to exhibit an empathy instinct, potentially tied to presence of specialized mirror neuron networks and surrounding neural architecture. Even small children down to potentially neonates have it. Contrast to something that is higher level, like the ability to recognize a reflection in the mirror as yourself, which requires inference most likely, but part of it might operate as an instinct while another may be learned. (So it makes sense that it is appearing quite late in primate life.) Forming language might be an instinct, recognizing patterns, many kinds of learning.

mannykannot 8y ago

This is the problem with regarding intelligence as just a collection of externally-observable behaviors. We simply don't know, at this point, the extent to which the orangutans are choosing this pattern of behavior as a result of considering the possible outcomes of the alternatives. As someone who spends a fair amount of time hiking in woodlands, I am familiar with the squeak of a chipmunk dashing for its burrow after spotting me, and I get the impression that they are silent if I have come close to them before they notice me. It is not difficult to posit how this pattern of behavior could arise from the interplay of a couple of related instinctive responses, and the same can be said for this orangutan behavior (though it does require the ability to remember a recent threat.) Whether there is more to it than that cannot be deduced from these observations.

nicoburns 8y ago
True, but note that this is also true of observations about other humans. How do I know that the behaviour of other humans isn't just instinctive? I'd argue only assuming that mt experience is similar to theirs. I think it is far more reasonable to extend this line of thinking to orangutans, than it is to jave different standards for humans and other apes...
- mannykannot 8y ago
  > How do I know that the behaviour of other humans isn't just instinctive? Ultimately, you don't. If you contemplate this sort of issue long enough, you will likely go through the three stages of solipsism: 1) What a ridiculous idea! 2) There must be a way to prove that this is wrong... 3) Occam, can I borrow your razor?
  - AstralStorm 8y ago
    By our definition, instinct is something automatic and available without training. Humans and at least some apes are known to exhibit an empathy instinct, potentially tied to presence of specialized mirror neuron networks and surrounding neural architecture. Even small children down to potentially neonates have it. Contrast to something that is higher level, like the ability to recognize a reflection in the mirror as yourself, which requires inference most likely, but part of it might operate as an instinct while another may be learned. (So it makes sense that it is appearing quite late in primate life.) Forming language might be an instinct, recognizing patterns, many kinds of learning.