Are there, or are there not, sentient animals.

[Raider5678]

Is civilization-level technological progress a requirement for advanced intelligence, though?

 

We're humans not sapient before we started wiring things for electricty?

No it isn't. But for advanced intelligence, I would say a requirement should at least be a societal order.

Whether it's like ours, or a hive mind, or even some weird telepathic mind, I don't care.

The individuals should be able to communicate or work together in some form through communication.

[Delta1212]

No it isn't. But for advanced intelligence, I would say a requirement should at least be a societal order.

Whether it's like ours, or a hive mind, or even some weird telepathic mind, I don't care.

The individuals should be able to communicate or work together in some form through communication.

Is a lone human not intelligent when separated from the group?

[Raider5678]

Is a lone human not intelligent when separated from the group?

Seperate a human from other humans from birth, and the answer is yes. Look at case where the kid was raised by wolves or things like that.

Their intelligence is much much lower then a human raised in a social setting.

[Delta1212]

Seperate a human from other humans from birth, and the answer is yes. Look at case where the kid was raised by wolves or things like that.

Their intelligence is much much lower then a human raised in a social setting.

Is that the same thing as no longer being sapient?

[zapatos]

Seperate a human from other humans from birth, and the answer is yes. Look at case where the kid was raised by wolves or things like that.

Their intelligence is much much lower then a human raised in a social setting.

 

Is it? Or are they just uneducated?

[dimreepr]

No it isn't. But for advanced intelligence, I would say a requirement should at least be a societal order.

Whether it's like ours, or a hive mind, or even some weird telepathic mind, I don't care.

The individuals should be able to communicate or work together in some form through communication.

 

Then why do you dismiss dolphins?

[Raider5678]

 

Is it? Or are they just uneducated?

A much lower capability in logic.

Logic, I assume, isn't education, but the actual measure of intelligence.

Is that the same thing as no longer being sapient?

No. But you said intelligent life. Separate humans from other humans at birth and they are barely much smarter then a primate.

Then why do you dismiss dolphins?

I didn't.

[Delta1212]

 

Is it? Or are they just uneducated?

No, he's right that there is at least some evidence of long term or permanent learning disability in cases where children have been isolated during their earliest years.

 

That said, I haven't done a lot of research into the validity of that beyond what I learned in a high school psychology course, a lot of the information from which I have since discovered to be spurious.

[Raider5678]

No, he's right that there is at least some evidence of long term or permanent learning disability in cases where children have been isolated during their earliest years.

 

That said, I haven't done a lot of research into the validity of that beyond what I learned in a high school psychology course, a lot of the information from which I have since discovered to be spurious.

The idea is child development.

When you're a child, that is when things are most impact to how you will turn out. Because you're still growing.

There's not a lot of experiments where if you don't teach a child anything that it will be dumb because typically that would be considered inhumane. But from uncontrollable cases, there's evidence that the children will have less learning capacity because they didn't develop the mind during the young age. There are however experiments involved with teaching children a lot during a young age, and its been proven that they are smarter then their peers raised normally.

[Strange]

True. But it'd be a lot easier to assume something can experience sensation if they have language and can talk about the sensations.

 

 

You could program a computer, even without advanced AI, to pretend it experienced the same sensations.

[Raider5678]

 

 

You could program a computer, even without advanced AI, to pretend it experienced the same sensations.

But can it pass a psychology test?

[Delta1212]

But can it pass a psychology test?

What is a psychology test?

[Raider5678]

What is a psychology test?

Like an evaluation.

[Delta1212]

Like an evaluation.

An evaluation of what?

[quickquestion]

Which is why the three things I asked for included A: The ability to think logically.

Ravens have that ability.

Also, since we can't seem to be able to agree whether it should be intelligent, sentient, etc, we should come up with some way to class animals based on their mental and social abilities. I'm gonna try to come up with a class system. Give me some slack, it's basically so we can have some guidelines. We can change it if need be.

 

Like humans would be a class 5. Not because I think humans are perfect and beat everything, but we have A: The ability to think logically. B: The ability to create language. C: The ability to feel emotion. D: The ability to question our own orgins. E: A lot of other things. Either way, here goes.

 

Animal Conscientiam Classes

 

Class 1 Animal: Little to no logical ability, no ability to communicate, operates mainly on instinct.

 

Class 2 Animal: Small to little logical ability, little to no ability to communicate, Sometimes reasons against instinct.

 

Class 3 Animal: Moderate logical ability, small ability to communicate, Can reason against instinct, little to no emotions.

 

Class 4 Animal: Large to Moderate logical ability, moderate ability to communicate, doesn't rely on instinct, has emotions.

 

Class 5 Animal: Large logical ability, Ability to communicate with a complex language, doesn't rely on instinct, has emotions.

 

 

Now to clear some things up.

 

A complex language can include sign language, but it has to have nouns, adjetives, verbs, etc. Even ancient languages, simple as they were compared to today, would easily be considered a complex language. A moderate ability to communicate can include Apes, which some have been taught some sign language. While not overly complex, it's a fairly decent ability to communicate. Dogs, I would say have small ability to communicate. They whine when they want something, bark to signal somethings up, they have play bows, etc. Fish I would say have little to no ability to communicate. Maybe I'm wrong, correct me here. And for no ability to communicate, I'd say worms or germs. Stuff like that.

 

As for the instinct part. I didn't say humans have no instincts. I said we can reason against them, and we do on a fairly common basis. The strongest instincts obviously, like fear, is a different matter. Other animals, like snakes, rely on instinct much more.

 

I'd also say, any animal capable of using a complex language, would be considered a class 5.

 

Tell me what you think about this. Remember, it's not a scientific thing. It's just something I figured would be useful. We can figure out specifics later.

Languages have varying complexity.

Some primitive tribal languages lack abstract concepts such as words that describe Time that is not in the present. (no future/past kind of verbiage.)

if dogs had a language, it would be caveman language. Dog eat...eat good. Squirrel. Chase squirrel. Chase...good. Bark = Open the door because you left me outside.

For this reason, dogs never evolved much talking other than barking. Emotions would serve the same purpose as their simple language. Emotions are a simple, yet somewhat complex language. Somewhat complex because they have so many subtle nuances. Like smells or music.

Edited April 23, 2017 by quickquestion

[Strange]

Languages have varying complexity.

Some primitive tribal languages lack abstract concepts such as words that describe Time that is not in the present. (no future/past kind of verbiage.)

 

 

Citation needed.

 

I know there was some typically dodgy reporting about the Amondawa language in despicable rags like the Daily Mail that completely misrepresented things. Maybe that is what you are thinking of.

https://stancarey.wordpress.com/2011/05/21/amondawa-has-no-word-for-time/

[Delta1212]

 

 

Citation needed.

 

I know there was some typically dodgy reporting about the Amondawa language in despicable rags like the Daily Mail that completely misrepresented things. Maybe that is what you are thinking of.

https://stancarey.wordpress.com/2011/05/21/amondawa-has-no-word-for-time/

There is a long-standing myth that the Hopi language has no concept of time originating with Whorf (of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis fame) that still gets taught in some entry level classes in high school and occasionally even college despite not actually being true. I assume this is what is being referenced.

[Moontanman]

Amazing three pages of definitions but no concrete answers. Many would say that ascribing human attributes to animals is a mistake, I think it's a mistake to assume animals do not have such attributes. I do not think there is a line with humans on one side and animals on the other. I think the idea of qualities like sapience are too human centered to be applied to animals.

 

I've had interactions with fish, both wild and in captivity, that would convince me they are aware of reality in much the same way I am. Dogs most certainly are rational self aware beings. From zebra to apes the world is full of examples of animals who qualify as sapient in human terms, the problem is that humans make that decision.

 

I often wonder if elephants think we are rational beings...

[quickquestion]

There is a long-standing myth that the Hopi language has no concept of time originating with Whorf (of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis fame) that still gets taught in some entry level classes in high school and occasionally even college despite not actually being true. I assume this is what is being referenced.

Think it was some African tribes, so not Hopi or Amondawa. Zulu if I remember correctly.

[Delta1212]

Think it was some African tribes, so not Hopi or Amondawa. Zulu if I remember correctly.

Zulu has separate tenses for both immediate and far future events, so it's definitely not Zulu. I haven't heard of a language that lacks the ability to communicate time aside from a couple of famous mistakes/misunderstandings as already mentioned.

[Strange]

Think it was some African tribes, so not Hopi or Amondawa. Zulu if I remember correctly.

 

 

So, once again, we have to rely on your vague memory of something you once read. You need to start providing better sources of information.

 

I think I read once that invisible pink (or maybe blue) unicorns (or was it dinosaurs) were able to influence gravity. Or read minds. Or control the weather.Or something. I don't know where I read it but I'm sure it was true.

[Raider5678]

Amazing three pages of definitions but no concrete answers.

Maybe such is true, but we're still figuring out how to describe sapience more detailed then "Human."

If you don't like this process, then wait until we've figured out a way to describe sapience without it being so human centered.

Then we can classify the animals and decide which ones are sapient or not.

 

Humans are animals.

So what?

Animals aren't all the same.

We're trying to figure out the ones with qualities that may show that they're more aware then the rest.

[quickquestion]

Maybe such is true, but we're still figuring out how to describe sapience more detailed then "Human."

If you don't like this process, then wait until we've figured out a way to describe sapience without it being so human centered.

Then we can classify the animals and decide which ones are sapient or not.

 

Humans are animals.

So what?

Animals aren't all the same.

We're trying to figure out the ones with qualities that may show that they're more aware then the rest.

Intelligence, is not really a correct means of determining awareness.

Bored people, are often bored because they don't wish to participate in intellectually stimulating activities.

But boredom, is a very intense form of awareness.

Same with pain.

Feeling pain, I am very aware.

But the amount of pain someone feels has very little correlation with their intelligence level.

[unknownorigin]

If there's nothing that can claim what is sentient or not except what is sentient, then we are sentient. We can choose if we consider ourselves sentient without going based on a literal English definition of the word, but to do so limits belief in our own sentience. I think the closest thing to a sentient animal is one of a certain level of complexity, like a rat, human, and everything in between. A plant is obviously not sentient because it can't be aware of it's own existence, but a human, and other more complex organisms are capable of self awareness.

 

In the end though it's just a game of complexity. Whoever can survive more extravagantly wins.

[EdEarl]

I often wonder if elephants think we are rational beings...

I wonder if elephants understand what rational though is; if not, then they can't think of us as rational. Moreover, I don't always think of people as rational, many seem to make emotional decisions.

Edited April 25, 2017 by EdEarl