Which is the most 'intelligent' animal, in your opinion?

Paralith · May 9, 2007

One of the popular (but accurate? who knows) hallmarks of intelligence is some form of self consciouness, usually tested by seeing if an animal knows he/she is looking at him/herself whey they are looking in a mirror, and not at a different individual. By this test we have great apes, dolphins, elephants, and I believe some parrots (though I'm not positive about that) as being conscious of the self.

foodchain · May 10, 2007

Survival instinct and adaptability are not equivalent to intelligence.

QUOTE]

Pretty relative statement there I think. If you or I could not adapt to an environment I think we would perish, and we basically do this via learning. I mean I cant go out into the artic anymore then another animal and simply change biologically on some genetic level really to match the environment in my lifetime, I don’t know any organism that really could.

I think the ability to make adaptations would be rather key actually in gauging intelligence. For instance a zoo has to go through a great deal to make a livable habitat for a particular animal they may hold, and the reason for this is they simply cant make a carpeted box and keep it in there, why this is probably has numerous reasons but one thing it shows is that animals cant simply be exposed to a new environment and be expected to carry on like normal. To date I think people have only managed on one occasion to get a platypus to breed in captivity for instance. So its another complex aspect of animal behavior, the field in which has many such complex questions still waiting to be answered. The field also goes by the title of ethology if memory serves. Another example is hand rearing an organism, say a wolf for instance, and then realizing it cant survive as wolfs in the wild do. It did not “learn” how to be a wolf so to speak in short, or the environment turned off certain genes, I really don’t know save for the fact that it occurs with a great many species.

Lastly one aspect I think that can be used to gauge animal behavior is repetition of behavior giving a certain criteria. For instance a fly or a microbe only has a certain range of behavior it will express. Compared to a canine or a housecat the amount of behavior can vary giving the same criteria, such as showing the animal a "play" toy. The play toy plus cat will not always give the same result, nor will presenting it with food, or many other variables in short. The aspect is visible in many other arenas also. One is in Florida with a person that makes a living showing people barracuda fish. He can basically go into flocks of these fish without having to worry of immanent mortal danger. I don’t think you can reach that with a simple on or off switch, in relation to your position how would a bunch of no nothing and simply process neurons account for this, or for human behavior in that sense even?

To close, the reality of intelligence and using it to gauge life really brings up many more profound questions overall. Such as why does a lion happen to do what it does? The volume of material on this subject is large and wide, and the scary idea is lions will actually work in organized ambushes to take humans down in tactics not displayed on other types of prey... I mean many times over you simply just claim something, that does not sound very scientific either.

theCPE · May 10, 2007

Ignore this:)

theCPE · May 10, 2007

I think the ability to make adaptations would be rather key actually in gauging intelligence.

So a deep sea tube worm must be very intelligent. It adapted to living thousands of feet under the sea away from sunlight and in immense pressure.

Or of course evolving to your environment != evolving intelligence.

I don’t think you can reach that with a simple on or off switch, in relation to your position how would a bunch of no nothing and simply process neurons account for this, or for human behavior in that sense even?

How can a barracuda brain recognize and learn behavioural patterns? That is what neurons do, they form/recognize patterns and associations.

is lions will actually work in organized ambushes to take humans down in tactics not displayed on other types of prey... I mean many times over you simply just claim something, that does not sound very scientific either.

I performed some experiments actually so my findings are scientific, I have yet to get an animal to play me in chess;)

I imagine it can be difficult for some to gauge what is more intelligent, an animal that adapts and learns hunting tactics (through neural pattern matching and association) to one that understands how to create mathematical equations (abstract) to describe and predict motion of objects, create 'things' called transistors that depend on electrons to manipulate data, or build machines and vehicles that defy gravity and move faster than sound.

It is a pretty close call.

foodchain · May 10, 2007

So a deep sea tube worm must be very intelligent. It adapted to living thousands of feet under the sea away from sunlight and in immense pressure.

Or of course evolving to your environment != evolving intelligence.

How can a barracuda brain recognize and learn behavioural patterns? That is what neurons do, they form/recognize patterns and associations.

I performed some experiments actually so my findings are scientific, I have yet to get an animal to play me in chess;)

I imagine it can be difficult for some to gauge what is more intelligent, an animal that adapts and learns hunting tactics (through neural pattern matching and association) to one that understands how to create mathematical equations (abstract) to describe and predict motion of objects, create 'things' called transistors that depend on electrons to manipulate data, or build machines and vehicles that defy gravity and move faster than sound.

It is a pretty close call.

I don’t know where I have stated that humans are not the most intelligent animal, and that’s really not what I am talking about either. As for the ability to do all of those things you listed, I don’t really know what that has to do with attempting to understand the fact that comparative physiology exists as a field of study or animal behavior for that matter. No, a tubeworm may not be as intelligent as you, but for what its worth that really does not say much anything about a tubeworm.

I mean in one instance, you state that neurons are like cells in species that have them, and that all they do is process impulses. Then on another tip you desire to combat the idea of predetermination from a biological perspective, its just somewhat confusing really. I mean does it take just a certain amount of neurons before you can stack blocks, what if they animal has a lot of neurons but none of them process for color vision? I mean some whales have rather large brains, and a complex language we cant decipher, and have social relationships, elephants have been known to even "mourn" a death of a fellow elephant. Yet it seems your ideation of intelligence on a biological scale basically means if you are not human, you might as well be a microbe overall, and just simply have a 1 or a 0 brain of blind processors, but not humans?

I mean if you remove the neocortex, I think that gives you all the data you need to understand the idea of biological predetermination, but I mean its as simple to notice that as its simple to realize a beetle is not going to play you at chess. On that note though, that our brain as an organ gives us a cognitive perception of reality, it must not for other animals, and that perception probably is not influence by the biology of that organ or the organism. So in reality, its kind of pointless to compare intelligence in some regards, because its basically asking what’s a better force, strong or weak?

For what its worth in all of our grand intelligence, we have very massive problems looming on our horizon that can spell out for mass death if not extinction. For what its worth if we simply allow this to come and pass, it does not speak very highly of us as that stupid tubeworm is still going to be doing its things if the ocean is not so drastically changed. I mean natural selection being what it is, if you cant make it then you happen to get deleted in time.

theCPE · May 10, 2007

I don’t know where I have stated that humans are not the most intelligent animal.

You didn't, a previous poster did.

In your post it appeared you were suggesting it is difficult to gauge degrees of intelligence.

I mean in one instance, you state that neurons are like cells in species that have them, and that all they do is process impulses. Then on another tip you desire to combat the idea of predetermination from a biological perspective, its just somewhat confusing really.

Predetermination?

What are you referring too?

I mean does it take just a certain amount of neurons before you can stack blocks, what if they animal has a lot of neurons but none of them process for color vision?

Number of neurons is important for memory capacity and possibly associative pattern recognition complexity. The connection strength of a neuron and thus ability to 'remember' patterns relates to intelligence.

Color vision stems from the rods/cones in the eye.

Yet it seems your ideation of intelligence on a biological scale basically means if you are not human, you might as well be a microbe overall, and just simply have a 1 or a 0 brain of blind processors, but not humans?

Um no. I have never asserted that outside of humans all animals are equally intelligent. In fact if you go back to page 5 you can say where I explained which animal outside of humans I thought was most intelligent.

but I mean its as simple to notice that as its simple to realize a beetle is not going to play you at chess.

That was a joke.

So in reality, its kind of pointless to compare intelligence in some regards, because its basically asking what’s a better force, strong or weak?

Huh?

For what its worth in all of our grand intelligence, we have very massive problems looming on our horizon that can spell out for mass death if not extinction. For what its worth if we simply allow this to come and pass, it does not speak very highly of us as that stupid tubeworm is still going to be doing its things if the ocean is not so drastically changed.

Haha, like what, GW? For that matter, being intelligent or the MOST intelligent does not mean you can't do stupid things. And survival is not a direct function of intelligence either, which you seem to not keep separated, obvios through your little snip about the tubeworm possibly out lasting us. That has zero to do with its intelligence.

I mean natural selection being what it is, if you cant make it then you happen to get deleted in time.

Yeh, humans have kinda eliminated the ability for natural selection to run its course. Medecine, socialism, technology.....natural selection isn't very natural for humans anymore.

foodchain · May 10, 2007

You didn't, a previous poster did.

In your post it appeared you were suggesting it is difficult to gauge degrees of intelligence.

Predetermination?

What are you referring too?

Number of neurons is important for memory capacity. The connection strength of a neuron and thus ability to 'remember' patterns relates to intelligence.

Color vision stems from the rods/cones in the eye.

Um no. I have never asserted that outside of humans all animals are equally intelligent. In fact if you go back to page 5 you can say where I explained which animal outside of humans I thought was most intelligent.

That was a joke.

Huh?

Haha, like what, GW? For that matter, being intelligent or the MOST intelligent does not mean you can't do stupid things. And survival is not a direct function of intelligence either, which you seem to not keep separated, obvios through your little snip about the tubeworm possibly out lasting us. That has zero to do with its intelligence.

Yeh, humans have kinda eliminated the ability for natural selection to run its course. Medecine, socialism, technology.....natural selection isn't very natural for humans anymore.

Maybe so, maybe not, we still have to make it like everything else, which basically means being able to persist in any giving environment. All the above material means is that kind of an envionrment, we make nukes, we almost have nuke death during cold war, you see where I am getting with this? As for global warming, well, I could only see what some lasting drought might do to motivate people, or changing vectors of disease for that matter, its still just simply if you can survive or not regardless of flavor.

I mean in most all of my posts, all I am trying to point out is comparing life in regards to intelligence really does not mean a whole lot in explaning anything. You can say we are smarter then x, but it simply does not say anything close as to why, or what that even means. It also totally cirumvents the simple reality that a different brain and structure is probably going to yield a different result, it takes really none of any of that into account, and thats really what I am trying to argue.

"The number of neurons in the brain varies dramatically from species to species. One estimate puts the human brain at about 100 billion (1011) neurons and 100 trillion (1014) synapses. By contrast, the nematode worm (Caenorhabditis elegans) has just 302 neurons making it an ideal experimental subject as scientists have been able to map all of the organism's neurons. By contrast, Drosophila melanogaster (the fruit fly) has around 300,000 neurons (which do spike) and exhibits many complex behaviors. Many properties of neurons, from the type of neurotransmitters used to ion channel composition, are maintained across species, allowing scientists to study processes occurring in more complex organisms in much simpler experimental systems."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuron

"The authors note that spindle neurons probably first appeared in the common ancestor of hominids about 15 million years ago, since they are observed in great apes and humans, but not in lesser apes and other primates; in cetaceans they evolved earlier, possibly as early as 30 million years ago. It is possible that they were present in the ancestors of all cetaceans, but were retained only in those with the largest brains during their evolution. It may also be that they evolved several times independently in the two cetacean suborders; part of this process may have taken place at the same time as they appeared in the ancestor of great apes, which would be a rare case of parallel evolution.

"In spite of the relative scarcity of information on many cetacean species, it is important to note in this context that sperm whales, killer whales, and certainly humpback whales, exhibit complex social patterns that included intricate communication skills, coalition-formation, cooperation, cultural transmission and tool usage," the authors state. "It is thus likely that some of these abilities are related to comparable histologic complexity in brain organization in cetaceans and in hominids."

The authors conclude: "Cetacean and primate brains may be considered as evolutionary alternatives in neurobiological complexity and as such, it would be compelling to investigate how many convergent cognitive and behavioral features result from largely dissimilar neocortical organization between the two orders." They also suggest that the current study provides a framework for further investigations into the brain and behavior of cetaceans, which are naturally elusive, poorly documented and often endangered."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/11/061127111607.htm

theCPE · May 10, 2007

This thread was about the most intelligent animal outside of humans, not the most adaptable, and not about 'explaining' things.

So, heh.

dttom · May 10, 2007

Intelligence is the living method for humans. When a snail builds a shell, it doesn't build it using intelligence, it builds it like we do our teeth, by secreting a mineral matrix with specialized cells.

Though, snails building their shell, from our point of view, is their instinct; then could some other living things look our so-called intelligence as our instinct? Actually, intelligence WE define is relatively subjective, as we are using our way to define it, and it is possible that we are using our intelligence to define it, so such definition would not be accurate enough. So, I think we could not discuss which living thing is the most intelligence, in the case that even the definition is not strong enough.

Paralith · May 10, 2007

So a lot of people seem (forgive me if I'm making assumptions here) to be going with the idea that adaptibility can be an indicator of intelligence. Well, a tubeworm may be highly adapted to its specific environment, but can a given individual tubeworm adjust to a radically new environment within its lifetime? No. I think foodchain was kind of making this point a few posts back; what highly intelligent animals can do that less intelligent animals cannot is to adapt within an individual's lifespan. Human behavior is highly plastic, and especially with the use of technology, we can adjust to wildly changing conditions and still go on as normal; relatively speaking, at least. Whereas you plop a penguin the jungle and it's not going to do so well. With most animals generations have to pass and natural selection has to take place before they can tolerate the types of changes people can tolerate.

When you're talking about non-human animals, gauging intelligence by this standard can be somewhat difficult, since humans are leaps and bounds beyond most other animals in this regard, and some of the most intelligent animals are still bound to specific environments due to their physiological requirements. But I think the presence of cultural adaptation, with behaviors generating within a lifespan and spreading horizontally to other individuals, can be a good indicator. Chimpanzees and the latest example of fashioning spears to hunt bush babies is a strong sign of their intelligence.

lucaspa · May 14, 2007

Hmm, good point. However how are we going to discuss this in any way other than anthropomorphism. Were humans, unless we were raised by animals, or have clinical lycanthropy we can't see things from animals perspectives without making a shit load of assumptions and guesses.

And this is why the thread is silly. We don't have a precise definition of "intelligence", much less an objective measurement of "intelligence" so that we can compare species. All the criteria proposed here have been judgement calls on what the individual (all humans) consider as important.

As far as we know, we are the only species on the planet that would even consider such a comparison. But then, can we really communicate with other species? Maybe dolphins and whales hold colloquia and discuss the subject.

lucaspa · May 14, 2007

Survival instinct and adaptability are not equivalent to intelligence.

QUOTE]

Pretty relative statement there I think.

Not really. Think about it: every species on the planet is adapted to its environment. Plus' date=' since "adaptability" in the evolutionary sense involves natural selection, it obviously does NOT involve "intelligence". Why? Because the species is not manipulating its environment.

Remember, evolution happens to [i']populations[/i], not individuals. So now, throw 1,000 humans naked into the Arctic and forbid them to use any technology, they all will die. Throw 1,000 rats into the Arctic, probably 990 of them will die, but the behavior to burrow combined with the luck to have thicker fur will probably keep 10 of them alive. However, that behavior is not conscious, but simply part of the genetic variability in the population.

I think the ability to make adaptations would be rather key actually in gauging intelligence.

Now you are starting to get something when you say "make adaptations". You are talking about manipulating the environment. The adaptations you are talking about are those individuals can make within their lifetime -- by altering their behavior and/or their environment. By this criteria of "adaptability" -- which is flexibility in conscious behavior AND technology, humans are by far the most "intelligent" species on the planet.

It did not “learn” how to be a wolf so to speak in short, or the environment turned off certain genes, I really don’t know save for the fact that it occurs with a great many species.

It's learned behavior. The environment in the sense you are using it does not turn off genes.

Lastly one aspect I think that can be used to gauge animal behavior is repetition of behavior giving a certain criteria. For instance a fly or a microbe only has a certain range of behavior it will express.

Again you are back to a repertoire of behavior.

I don’t think you can reach that with a simple on or off switch, in relation to your position how would a bunch of no nothing and simply process neurons account for this, or for human behavior in that sense even?

It's called "neural nets". A single neuron may only have an on/off switch, but in a neural net decisions are based on which and how many of the neurons (and there can be millions in a neural net) are firing. Thus different input can give different outcomes, such as the input of humans as prey and the different hunting techniques used by lions on the humans. Since other prey do not exhibit the same behavior as humans, having the input of human on the neural net gives a different outcome.

If you want to learn more about the subject, the following articles would be a good place to start:

4. M Morange, The Misunderstood Gene. Harvard University Press, 2001. "the genes involved in learning are not specific to this process; they code for ordinary proteins that are involved in intercellular interactions and intracellular signaling pathways. There are no proteins specific to learing and memory but rather proteins that, through their function as relays or transmitters, have been harnessed by evolution in the development of cognitive processes."

1. GM Edelman and G Tononi, A Universe of Consciousness How Matter Becomes Imagination, Basic Books, 2000. Argue that a Darwinian model can be applied to neural activity to explain consciousness. In this "neural Darwinism", selective mechanisms on various scales arise, favoring certain neuronal firing patterns over others.

2. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/294/5544/1030 Review of memory and learning as chemical processes.

3. Genes involved in memory formation: http://main.uab.edu/show.asp?durki=106076

4. JG Nicholls, AR Martin, BG Wallace, PA Fuchs From Neuron to Brain, 2002

dichotomy · August 20, 2007

I go for the various species of bacteria and virii.

Why?

1. Ability to live in the most extreme environmental conditions, i.e. volcanoes, outer space, deep sea, deep earth, deep ice.

2. Ability to adapt and evolve more quickly than other animals.

3. Self contained, robust.

4. They have been around billions of years before any other animals, and are still around today.

5. Humans rely on the good ones for our very survival, and fear the most dangerous ones.

6. All animals probably evolved from them, which of course makes us the ultimate microbe thus far.

7. They are by far the most widespread and successful, population wise, of animal species.

8. They use all humans as a comfy hotel.

So, as far as unconscious intelligence goes, they blitz.

Please feel free to add to this list of microbe advantages, I'm sure there are many more.

Cheers.

CDarwin · August 20, 2007

I go for the various species of bacteria and virii.

Why?

1. Ability to live in the most extreme environmental conditions, i.e. volcanoes, outer space, deep sea, deep earth, deep ice.

2. Ability to adapt and evolve more quickly than other animals.

3. Self contained, robust.

4. They have been around billions of years before any other animals, and are still around today.

5. Humans rely on the good ones for our very survival, and fear the most dangerous ones.

6. All animals probably evolved from them, which of course makes us the ultimate microbe thus far.

7. They are by far the most widespread and successful, population wise, of animal species.

8. They use all humans as a comfy hotel.

So, as far as unconscious intelligence goes, they blitz.

Please feel free to add to this list of microbe advantages, I'm sure there are many more.

Cheers.