4 ms·

Wasps are fascinating smart, eusocial animals. We should study them, admire them, but not kill or eat them. Yeah for the record I'm vegan.

Eisenstein 4y ago
I am of the opinion that insects and roombas only diverge in their ability (or lack thereof) to make more of themselves. When someone creates a roomba that can make more roombas would you object to turning said roombas off? If you don't agree with this comparison, what makes an insect and self-reproducing roomba different that we should not consider the roomba just as alive as the insect?
- beebeepka 4y ago
  - Eisenstein 4y ago
    Interesting reply to a thought experiment. I would take offense but I think maybe you honestly think I am trolling? I will give you another chance not to be rude and dismissive.
    - beebeepka 4y ago
- 7952 4y ago
  But people don't make these decisions about what to eat on the basis of bizzare thought experiments.
- latexr 4y ago
  What separates humans from insects¹? And by extension, what separates us from a self-reproducing Roomba? Every time we think we figured out what makes humans special, we discover another animal can do it too. Insects included². Heck, they can do stuff we can’t like fly without tools or communicate intricate information by dancing² without having to be taught. We know everything about Roombas yet are from from knowing everything about insects, despite having known about and having studied the latter for as long as we’ve been a species. Insects (and life in general) is way more interesting and complex than you seem to be giving it credit for. I recommend The Zoologist's Guide to the Galaxy³. ¹ Physical comparisons notwithstanding, as those would apply to your Roomba example too. ² https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/i-asked-leading-entomologists-whats-the-smartest-bug-in-the-world https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/i-asked-leading-entomo... ³ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zoologist%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zoologist%27s_Guide_to_the...
  - Eisenstein 4y ago
    But if we were given a roomba and had no basis of knowledge for electronics wouldn't it be just as mysterious as an insect?
    - latexr 4y ago
      When one knows nothing, everything is equally unknown and mysterious. That has no bearing on the complexity of the subject. There is a finite amount of knowledge on Roombas, and we have all of it. We don’t know if there’s a finite amount of knowledge on insects¹ but what we do know is already sufficient to eclipse the knowledge on Roombas, especially as it intertwines with the rest of biology and life. I ask again: > What separates humans from insects? And by extension, what separates us from a self-reproducing Roomba? Your answer to that question is paramount to understanding the basis of your initial argument and have a continued productive discussion. ¹ Especially with evolution and the environment constantly mixing things up.
      - Eisenstein 4y ago
        What separates humans from insects, I would say is consciousness. The same thing with the roomba.
        latexr 4y ago
        There is no conclusive evidence insects aren’t conscious. On the contrary: ants can pass the mirror test¹, which is one of the ways we test for consciousness². ¹ https://www.scinapse.io/papers/2180773430 https://www.scinapse.io/papers/2180773430 ² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_consciousness#Mirror_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_consciousness#Mirror_te...
        Eisenstein 4y ago
        You asked me and I answered. I firmly believe that insects are not conscious.
slothtrop 4y ago
I think anything without a cerebral cortex is fair game.
- henearkr 4y ago
  You'd be surprised by the level of consciousness of e.g. octopuses.
  - slothtrop 4y ago
    I think this is often misunderstood and overstated. Evidenced by the fact that most species don't live very long. The longest living lasts 3-5 years. Dexterity is one aspect of intelligence, but it's insufficient to infer high-level consciousness.
    - henearkr 4y ago
      Just to give you a blow of reality check, an octopus is considered as least as smart (including sociability and all) as a cat. If not even more, considering its capacity for problem-solving. I see intelligence/consciousness as orthogonal to lifespan. Sure it's cruel that such a smart species would die after mating (by the way if they don't mate they live several decades), but that does not remove their capacity of planning, self-reflection, empathy, etc etc. But if you really want an other example that would escape your argument, take the crow. (no cortex, but a wurst)
      - slothtrop 4y ago
        > an octopus is considered as least as smart (including sociability and all) as a cat You're misconstruing your source, if you have one.
        henearkr 4y ago
        There are tons of sources if you just type anything in Google, but here is just a snack as an example: octopuses recognize individual people: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20563906/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20563906/ There are also articles about how they use tools, estimate intent, etc. Here is one about how they use deception: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3440998/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3440998/ This entails that they have a mental model of what others think of them, which ranks very high on the evaluation of animal consciousness.

Eisenstein 4y ago

I am of the opinion that insects and roombas only diverge in their ability (or lack thereof) to make more of themselves. When someone creates a roomba that can make more roombas would you object to turning said roombas off? If you don't agree with this comparison, what makes an insect and self-reproducing roomba different that we should not consider the roomba just as alive as the insect?

beebeepka 4y ago
- Eisenstein 4y ago
  Interesting reply to a thought experiment. I would take offense but I think maybe you honestly think I am trolling? I will give you another chance not to be rude and dismissive.
  - beebeepka 4y ago
7952 4y ago
But people don't make these decisions about what to eat on the basis of bizzare thought experiments.
latexr 4y ago
What separates humans from insects¹? And by extension, what separates us from a self-reproducing Roomba? Every time we think we figured out what makes humans special, we discover another animal can do it too. Insects included². Heck, they can do stuff we can’t like fly without tools or communicate intricate information by dancing² without having to be taught. We know everything about Roombas yet are from from knowing everything about insects, despite having known about and having studied the latter for as long as we’ve been a species. Insects (and life in general) is way more interesting and complex than you seem to be giving it credit for. I recommend The Zoologist's Guide to the Galaxy³. ¹ Physical comparisons notwithstanding, as those would apply to your Roomba example too. ² https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/i-asked-leading-entomologists-whats-the-smartest-bug-in-the-world https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/i-asked-leading-entomo... ³ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zoologist%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zoologist%27s_Guide_to_the...
- Eisenstein 4y ago
  But if we were given a roomba and had no basis of knowledge for electronics wouldn't it be just as mysterious as an insect?
  - latexr 4y ago
    When one knows nothing, everything is equally unknown and mysterious. That has no bearing on the complexity of the subject. There is a finite amount of knowledge on Roombas, and we have all of it. We don’t know if there’s a finite amount of knowledge on insects¹ but what we do know is already sufficient to eclipse the knowledge on Roombas, especially as it intertwines with the rest of biology and life. I ask again: > What separates humans from insects? And by extension, what separates us from a self-reproducing Roomba? Your answer to that question is paramount to understanding the basis of your initial argument and have a continued productive discussion. ¹ Especially with evolution and the environment constantly mixing things up.
    - Eisenstein 4y ago
      What separates humans from insects, I would say is consciousness. The same thing with the roomba.
      - latexr 4y ago
        There is no conclusive evidence insects aren’t conscious. On the contrary: ants can pass the mirror test¹, which is one of the ways we test for consciousness². ¹ https://www.scinapse.io/papers/2180773430 https://www.scinapse.io/papers/2180773430 ² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_consciousness#Mirror_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_consciousness#Mirror_te...
        Eisenstein 4y ago
        You asked me and I answered. I firmly believe that insects are not conscious.

slothtrop 4y ago

I think anything without a cerebral cortex is fair game.

henearkr 4y ago
You'd be surprised by the level of consciousness of e.g. octopuses.
- slothtrop 4y ago
  I think this is often misunderstood and overstated. Evidenced by the fact that most species don't live very long. The longest living lasts 3-5 years. Dexterity is one aspect of intelligence, but it's insufficient to infer high-level consciousness.
  - henearkr 4y ago
    Just to give you a blow of reality check, an octopus is considered as least as smart (including sociability and all) as a cat. If not even more, considering its capacity for problem-solving. I see intelligence/consciousness as orthogonal to lifespan. Sure it's cruel that such a smart species would die after mating (by the way if they don't mate they live several decades), but that does not remove their capacity of planning, self-reflection, empathy, etc etc. But if you really want an other example that would escape your argument, take the crow. (no cortex, but a wurst)
    - slothtrop 4y ago
      > an octopus is considered as least as smart (including sociability and all) as a cat You're misconstruing your source, if you have one.
      - henearkr 4y ago
        There are tons of sources if you just type anything in Google, but here is just a snack as an example: octopuses recognize individual people: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20563906/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20563906/ There are also articles about how they use tools, estimate intent, etc. Here is one about how they use deception: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3440998/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3440998/ This entails that they have a mental model of what others think of them, which ranks very high on the evaluation of animal consciousness.