6 ms·

Assuming for a moment that psychology is pap, not science... And assuming EQ is based on some objective anatomical comparison of the brain... Then Dolphins ar

• gord 17y ago
  With anonymous downvoting comes an ethical responsibility : clarify your position with counter argument. My position is that psychology is not [yet] a science. Falling back on what we actually objectively know about dolphin anatomy [and subjective behaviour which does not contradict that] you would have to admit dolphins are possibly 75% as intelligent as humans, accounting for the huge difference in environment. Does it not follow that they should have some form of protection under law as semi-intelligent beings?
  • colanderman 17y ago
    I think the downvote (not mine) came from your implicit suggestion that less-intelligent humans should be afforded fewer rights. Unless you're being satirical, which isn't entirely clear without more context.
    • gord 17y ago
      No, I didnt mean to imply that, not least because we have no good way of measuring intelligence. One reasonable way to get a ballpark is to look at brain fold anatomy - I assume that's what EQ quotient in the OP is roughly equivalent to. Rather than reduce human rights, I'm suggesting we act responsibly to all intelligent species. If a reasonable physical measure of dolphin IQ puts it within an order of magnitude of a humans, we should probably not be killing such a species, for example.