Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    05 Dec '13 08:42
    http://phys.org/news/2013-12-humans-smarter-animals-experts.html

    Something I have thought of for a long time, this supposed superiority of humans.
  2. Standard member caissad4
    Child of the Novelty
    05 Dec '13 08:46
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://phys.org/news/2013-12-humans-smarter-animals-experts.html

    Something I have thought of for a long time, this supposed superiority of humans.
    We must strive to gain a perspective on our perspective.
  3. 05 Dec '13 12:42
    Doesn't it depend on which human you compare them with?
    If compere with Einstein then animals are pretty stupid. If compare with JR then animals are smarter than us.
  4. 05 Dec '13 13:07
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://phys.org/news/2013-12-humans-smarter-animals-experts.html

    Something I have thought of for a long time, this supposed superiority of humans.
    Measuring intelligence is always difficult, but by just about any measure, the average human is smarter than all known animals.
    Many people do underestimate the intelligence of animals - especially people that do not have pets.

    I also don't get his references to the agricultural revolution and religion. I am sure that humans thought they were more intelligent long before those events and that those events had little or no impact on peoples views on the matter.
    And this sentence:
    While animal rights began to rise in prominence during the 19th century, the drive of the Industrial Revolution forestalled any gains made in the awareness of other animals.

    Makes no sense whatsoever.
  5. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    05 Dec '13 13:26 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Measuring intelligence is always difficult, but by just about any measure, the average human is smarter than all known animals.
    Many people do underestimate the intelligence of animals - especially people that do not have pets.

    I also don't get his references to the agricultural revolution and religion. I am sure that humans thought they were more int ...[text shortened]... orestalled any gains made in the awareness of other animals.[/quote]
    Makes no sense whatsoever.
    It does make sense in the idea that it was ok to use primates for medical experiments which would leave the poor primates crippled, disease ridden or dead and they would have no idea why. The fact it helped humans with new medicines and such did nothing to reduce the suffering of these animals.

    The entire reason we would use such beings for medical experiments was much like the Nazi use of Jews for THEIR experiments: Nazi's thought of Jews as subhuman and therefore it was morally all right to do anything they wanted to them.

    It is pretty clear the parallels of that era of animal experimentation, the moral connection to the Nazi idea it was ok to experiment on Jews back in the early 20th century.

    Early human cultures and modern indigenous isolated cultures of today even, use animals as their power beings, be like the Jaguar, take on aspects of the Eagle and so forth, illustrating the idea that early Humans did not think of themselves as manifestly superior.

    And that would have been because all we had was our tools, spears and so forth, crafted from rocks and flint and so forth. They knew full well the basic INFERIORITY of humans in many regards compared to the animal kingdom. Like the speed of the cobra strike or how fast the Cougar can attack and so forth. Bears, for instance, whom they had to share space with.

    They had no such thoughts of automatic human superiority to animals.

    Now of course, you go into the woods, maybe armed with a 50 caliber 5 shot magnum pistol and you can stop attacks from almost anything except maybe a ticked off hippo or rhino or elephant, but any forest in North America the human would win 99% of such bouts with bears or cougars.

    10,000 years ago, 20,000 years ago, that was not even CLOSE to the truth, which was, you encounter a bear in the woods, and if you are alone and the bear is hungry for flesh, there will be one less human on the planet and one not hungry bear.

    So it was the advent of agriculture and the attendant build up of weapons of war that came out of the idea that man OWNED the land they lived on and therefore would fight to the death over, the male dominated religions that came about as a result of that transition insured that humans would begin to think of themselves as way superior to any animal. 10 humans armed with spears is equal to a ticked off bear and they knew it.

    So that was the beginning of the idea that humans were innately superior to animals but it was in fact only the advent of weapons animals could never build that started that pervasive attitude in humans.
  6. 05 Dec '13 21:23
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Early human cultures and modern indigenous isolated cultures of today even, use animals as their power beings, be like the Jaguar, take on aspects of the Eagle and so forth, illustrating the idea that early Humans did not think of themselves as manifestly superior.
    I disagree. I think people who work with animals regularly such as hunters, farmers and pet owners, have more respect for them than others, and that in the past there were various spiritual beliefs with regards to animals, but I don't buy your claim that humans did not consider themselves superior, nor is superiority equivalent to intelligence. I have no doubt that humans have always known that they are more intelligent than animals. its kind of obvious.
  7. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    06 Dec '13 09:10 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I disagree. I think people who work with animals regularly such as hunters, farmers and pet owners, have more respect for them than others, and that in the past there were various spiritual beliefs with regards to animals, but I don't buy your claim that humans did not consider themselves superior, nor is superiority equivalent to intelligence. I have no ...[text shortened]... that humans have always known that they are more intelligent than animals. its kind of obvious.
    Superiority is a relative term. Would you EVER say you were superior to an elephant in terms of physical strength? I don't think so.

    Do you think humans would be able to remember dozens of places a squirrel stores its food in preparation for winter?

    A lowly squirrel has better memory for these kind of specific tasks so they are superior in that regard.

    A dolphin has the ability to peer directly into a body using its sonar, thus giving it a chance to see a diseased organ directly. You think ANY human can do that without a machine?

    I would regard that as a definite superiority for that specific task.

    Granted, we have the ability to work together to achieve results not achievable otherwise but some animals work together also, like lions on the hunt and so forth.

    Of course we can build stuff animals can't so of course in that regard we are superior and we can through our technology theoretically avoid an extinction event that for instance, killed the dinosaurs and that is a real superiority.

    But individually, a person stuck on the savanna, good luck with all that superiority....
  8. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    06 Dec '13 12:00
    http://phys.org/news/2011-05-animals-video_1.html#nRlv