3 ms·
Because they we have a hundred billion neurons and they have a few thousand. Also, because humans are known to anthropomorphize an awful lot. One common example
by goatlover 5y ago
Because they we have a hundred billion neurons and they have a few thousand. Also, because humans are known to anthropomorphize an awful lot. One common example is thinking that dogs feel guilty when you scold them for naughty behavior. Instead, they are reacting to the scolding.
- mdp2021 5y agoBoth reasons weigh very little. The first one makes a jump from quantity to quality. But, counting to three and counting to whatever is not a qualitative difference. A definition of "personality" is required to define where it starts, and it is easy to conceive interpretations which allow for broad labelling. The second one is just a caveat. As John had to tell his wife as he surprised her in bed with Frank, and she went "Yes but you know you are jealous and a bit paranoid".
- throwanem 5y agoYour numbers are off, for a start. Neuron count is in the order of hundreds of thousands to millions for the more socially complex species, including the Asian giant hornet. These are known to have cognitive abilities that might surprise you, including in many species the ability to recognize familiar conspecifics by sight. And in any case, why shouldn't that size of brain be enough to sustain a personality? They aren't clones, after all, except in rare cases, and even then you have to take mutation, epigenetics, and developmental effects into account. But hey, I'm not the one implicitly advancing the claim that anything not clever enough to be human is a meat robot. You're the one doing that, and so far you've done nothing but assert it. Why don't you source it and actually defend it, instead? Until then I don't see why anyone should take it all that seriously.
- genewitch 5y agoOh a hornet can recognize a conspecific, huh? Can you describe the house you grew up in?
- throwanem 5y agoNot just a conspecific, a nestmate, and to be entirely clear that's known in polistid wasps [0] but not, so far as I'm yet aware, in vespids, which are understood primarily to use scent cues instead. That said, with regard to V. mandarinia it's not easy to be familiar with current research unless you read Japanese, which I don't; probably in a decade or so there will be a great deal more in the way of English literature, given the rate at which I expect they will establish across at least the western half of the continent. Maybe a decade after that we'll have a reasonable depth of English-language papers that have to do with something other than unsuccessful extirpation strategies; I expect it depends first on how quickly they find a way across the Rockies, and second on whether anyone actually cares to fund entomology departments for something other than bee husbandry and "pest" management. In any case, if you're attempting to make an argument here, its thesis could stand considerable clarification. I'm not even sure whether you're intending to agree or not with my own argument, so would you like to elucidate a bit on what point you're trying to make and how you support it? [0] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11243513_Visual_signals_of_individual_identity_in_the_wasp_Polistes_fuscatus https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11243513_Visual_sig...