7 ms·

I learned several years ago that what most people are thinking when they say "sentient" is actually "sapiant".

by rockemsockem 4y ago

epgui 4y ago
That would be "sapient", but I think most people: 1) make a false dichotomy: either it has it or it doesn't. This doesn't really match the range of behaviour, expression and characteristics we observe in nature. None of the words "sentience", "sapience", "consciousness", really map all that well to the nuances of reality. 2) vastly overestimate the level of sophistication of the human brain in relation to other brains (and even in relation to AI, I would argue), and vastly underestimate the level of sophistication of non-human brains. There is a powerful bias in play here: religion teaches us that we play a special role in the world, we're actually on top of the food chain, we have very sophisticated societies, etc... But the idea that other animals have feelings, or are "just as soulful as us" (whatever "soul" means haha), or have rich inner experiences and sophisticated modes of thinking... That's an uncomfortable thought (especially as we commoditize and eat them, but would find the idea of doing the same to humans quite revulsive). Not only are cats almost certainly both sentient and sapient, but so are crows, and probably birds and reptiles in general, at least to some extent. A not-unreasonable case could even be made for insect sentience.
TuringTest 4y ago
Even in that case that you refer to "sapience", it wouldn't apply only to mammals. Octopuses and ravens are recognized to have high-level cognitive processes as capable as those existing in primates. The only characteristic of sapience limited to humans that we know of is the capability to build and communicate narratives about future through complex language. And we are not even sure about our uniqueness in that.

7 ms·

I learned several years ago that what most people are thinking when they say "sentient" is actually "sapiant".

by rockemsockem 4y ago

I learned several years ago that what most people are thinking when they say "sentient" is actually "sapiant".

epgui 4y ago
That would be "sapient", but I think most people: 1) make a false dichotomy: either it has it or it doesn't. This doesn't really match the range of behaviour, expression and characteristics we observe in nature. None of the words "sentience", "sapience", "consciousness", really map all that well to the nuances of reality. 2) vastly overestimate the level of sophistication of the human brain in relation to other brains (and even in relation to AI, I would argue), and vastly underestimate the level of sophistication of non-human brains. There is a powerful bias in play here: religion teaches us that we play a special role in the world, we're actually on top of the food chain, we have very sophisticated societies, etc... But the idea that other animals have feelings, or are "just as soulful as us" (whatever "soul" means haha), or have rich inner experiences and sophisticated modes of thinking... That's an uncomfortable thought (especially as we commoditize and eat them, but would find the idea of doing the same to humans quite revulsive). Not only are cats almost certainly both sentient and sapient, but so are crows, and probably birds and reptiles in general, at least to some extent. A not-unreasonable case could even be made for insect sentience.
TuringTest 4y ago
Even in that case that you refer to "sapience", it wouldn't apply only to mammals. Octopuses and ravens are recognized to have high-level cognitive processes as capable as those existing in primates. The only characteristic of sapience limited to humans that we know of is the capability to build and communicate narratives about future through complex language. And we are not even sure about our uniqueness in that.