tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196547498235237605.post2119835780733364084..comments2023-08-22T09:13:46.308-04:00Comments on Computing Ignorance: Animal Intelligence ContinuedMozglubovhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04803674886685831282noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196547498235237605.post-44460492513374240452009-05-27T15:59:48.241-04:002009-05-27T15:59:48.241-04:00As I said, I think a reasonable definition of inte...As I said, I think a reasonable definition of intelligence would be behavioural adaptability to a constructive end. To elucidate more precisely what I mean by that, the ability to react to novel circumstances in a way which is beneficial to the organism. For example, if you have the <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_and_banana_problem" REL="nofollow">classic banana-box problem</A>, only with a chicken instead of a banana and a crocodile instead of a monkey, I don't think the crocodile would manage to solve it (of course, one would have to actually test this to be sure - one of the problems with looking at the intelligence levels of other species is the vast number of species and the sparsity of funding that has actually gone into this branch of ethology).<br /><br />Does that definition make sense?Mozglubovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803674886685831282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196547498235237605.post-82630975169196607792009-05-27T02:37:33.775-04:002009-05-27T02:37:33.775-04:00Well, on that last comment of yours, I suppose the...Well, on that last comment of yours, I suppose the only thing left for me to do is inquire as to your definition of intelligence so we don't end up having a useless pissing (semantics) match.<br /><br />-reganAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196547498235237605.post-91334875229550006432009-05-26T23:29:36.553-04:002009-05-26T23:29:36.553-04:00That is why you have to be careful with definition...That is why you have to be careful with definitions (and why theoretical science so often devolves into philosophy, and philosophy so often devolves into an argument of definitions and semantics). Saying something is intelligent simply because it is well suited to its environment is recasting intelligence to a measure of a term more commonly referred to as fitness. I don't think it is necessarily anthropocentric to argue about intelligence, as long as one rigorously defines intelligence (of course, that is rarely done, and I did not actually do that myself). However, I think a reasonable definition of intelligence would be behavioural adaptability to a constructive end. Of course, that ignores other forms of intelligence (like social intelligence, which is something that is very useful in animals like people, dogs, and numerous others), so I will likely end up redefining the term in the future. There are two things, though, which you bring up that are quite pertinent: intelligence is not always an evolutionary advantage (intelligence requires a lot of investment of resources to grow and maintain the necessary brain), and intelligence is also highly dependent upon environment (an animal exposed to a complex environment tends to be more competent at dealing with novel situations and coming up with innovative responses). For an example of that last point, I was reading a study the other day in which it was demonstrated that urban sparrows on average solved puzzles measurably faster than rural sparrows. There was more to the study, and I actually plan to write about it later, but I thought that part fit in nicely into the discussion here.Mozglubovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803674886685831282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196547498235237605.post-3964335893307402892009-05-26T21:46:19.480-04:002009-05-26T21:46:19.480-04:00Just to keep the discussion going...
Do you in an...Just to keep the discussion going...<br /><br />Do you in any way find this whole discussion to be terribly anthropocentric? Isn't it a better measure of intelligence to be well adapted to the environment an organism must survive and reproduce in? We don't exactly see crocodiles doing memory problems, and yet sitting in a muddy river and biting at whatever comes close seems to have served their needs for longer than humans have been around. This is even further highlighted in the case of the chimps. Put them in an environment that rewards them getting smarter, and LO! They become smarter. They can get by in the wild with what they have, the language and customs of their culture, but change it up and they're figuring out a way to escape, they're solving the test we present for them. Would it then be fair to say humans are smarter than chimps? <br /><br />-reganUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12892168178523220926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196547498235237605.post-84466471072009525662009-05-25T18:26:46.616-04:002009-05-25T18:26:46.616-04:00I've actually read a similar study comparing the m...I've actually read a similar study comparing the memories of chimps and humans - the chimps consistently scored better in that study too.<br /><br />It is tangentially related to the topic at hand, and if my post had not already grown as large as it had I would have liked to address those sorts of memory and problem solving studies that have been done with chimps. I am glad you find the topic fascinating, because it is something that I get fairly worked up about.Mozglubovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04803674886685831282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-196547498235237605.post-30176717632545537782009-05-25T17:23:07.279-04:002009-05-25T17:23:07.279-04:00I'll post something substantial soonish. I've just...I'll post something substantial soonish. I've just got to compose my thoughts and do a little research of my own.<br /><br />Fascinating topic though. <br /><br />Also, please watch this :<br />http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/12/10/chimps-with-photographic-memories/<br /><br />It's a very short clip but I think it's quite fascinating. Not entirely relevant to the discussion at hand, but that may be due only to my inability to tie it to a coherent argument.<br /><br />-reganUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12892168178523220926noreply@blogger.com