> Think about it for a moment, the bird has to understand (to a degree) how an automatic door works I'm not sure I see that, that is, the "understanding" part.

> Think about it for a moment, the bird has to understand (to a degree) how an automatic door works I'm not sure I see that, that is, the "understanding" part. I mean, this is not some new kind of behavior, even if everyone here reacts with surprise. Anyone with a pet dog or cat knows the various mischief they can get into. Many of us have been at the beach and watched seagulls do all sorts of interesting stuff. Animals aren't "dumb" and I don't know anyone who would say that they are. What people do object to is the unwarranted inference that because they display what looks like clever behavior then this must entail capacity for abstract thought with concepts. I don't see how abstraction is necessary in these examples at all. Language in the fullest sense demonstrates the existence of abstract thought. Non-human language does not appear to show any sign of descriptive and argumentative function, only signalling and expression (in the Popperian sense).