Xref: utzoo sci.psychology:109 rec.birds:493 sci.bio:1019
Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!sigrid
From: sigrid@geac.UUCP (Sigrid Grimm)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,rec.birds,sci.bio
Subject: Re: Intelligent Parrots, or Self-deception and Gullibility.
Message-ID: <2495@geac.UUCP>
Date: 25 Mar 88 19:47:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: geac.2495
Posted: Fri Mar 25 14:47:24 1988
References: <1988Mar4.162334.18184@utzoo.uucp> <4299@blia.BLI.COM> <1988Mar9.132722.3364@mntgfx.mentor.com>
Reply-To: sigrid@geac.UUCP (Sigrid Grimm)
Organization: The little blue rock next to that twinkly star.
Lines: 59

In a previous article Mike Sellers wrote:

> If you or anyone else can, without gross anthropomorphism, show evidence 
> that some animals do show unexpectedly human traits, please do so. Otherwise, 
> there is no *reason* to believe that such behavior exists.  

Seems to me that this is an interesting challenge ... For a trait to be
considered *human* (as compared to say, "mammalian"), it must be a trait 
which is somehow unique or characteristic of humans. And the more isolated
to humans a trait is, the more *human* it becomes ...

So, how would one ever go about showing that a *non-human* animal shows these
human traits *without* anthropomorphism, or if the trait is *really* "human",
without *gross* anthropomorphism?? 

If we say that for a behaviour to be intelligent it must be somehow human, 
BUT that to compare the possibly intelligent behaviour of a non-human to 
humans is anthropormorphistic (sp?), thereby discounting the intelligent
potential, then we are in effect, sealing up our Only-Humans-Are-Intelligent 
argument very nicely aren't we?

I think an animal is just trying to be the best animal it can... A dolphin
is striving to be a better dolphin ... not a human. This doesn't mean that
an animal cannot exhibit and use intelligence!!! I'll agree that no non-human
animal can exhibit *human* intelligence, but that's like saying that no
non-human animal is a human ... no revelation there. As for the question as
to whether animals *think* about things, how would a pride of lions or a
pack of wolves ever successfully cooperate to hunt down prey without some
kind of intentionally-oriented thinking?

For all we know intelligence is *instinctive* in which case our own version of 
it is no more a big deal than any of the fabulous behaviour of other animals 
which we attribute to instinct (as in "oh, that's not *intelligent behaviour* 
[god forbid!!], it's just instinct"). Why do we have such a difficult time
envisioning intelligence in non-humans??? Especially when you start to consider
animals like the primates and the dolphins, it seems that we do not have a
monopoly on intelligence, although we seem to develop it in unique (i.e., 
human) ways.

The whole Conditioning-Only argument as "proof" that an animal has not 
exhibited intelligence behaviour is also becoming a tired one (in my humble
opinion). Sure, there are cases when this argument is valid, however, in the
case of a bird who recognizes similarities and differences in shape and colour
(dolphins do this too, by the way), I think the hurried application of this
argument is a little suspect.

I mean every single one of us only understands and does what we do because of 
the example set by some other human(s) at some time in our life. Does this mean 
that we ourselves are also outside the realm of intelligence?

Sigrid
p.s., I have a friend who has been doing work in Dolphin Communication for
      the University of Hawaii. He has some interesting anecdotes and thoughts
      about intelligence in animals ... I'm sending him all these articles 
      hoping maybe he will be interested in commenting ...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        "The principal discovery in biology over the last hundred years 
         is that we are profoundly ignorant about nature"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------