|
Others ~ Selected Correspondence Intelligence
Recently you wrote on intelligence in animals. A few points occurred to me, as well as some questions: I wrote –
It should read –
The most strident claims for other animals being intelligent seem to relate to training animals to do something other than stalk and kill for their food, like push a button or do tricks for humans. ‘Dolphin intelligence’ gets the most press but no one has yet discovered a dolphin shelter let alone an underwater city or hospital. Chimps are another favourite, despite the fact that they live in trees and indulge in rape, infanticide and cannibalism and wage wars with neighbouring tribes. To call the basic rudimentary adaptive instinctual reactions exhibited in other animals intelligence is to mightily abuse both the word and the attribute. While chimps certainly engage in brutal behaviour to other chimps, I am also aware that chimpanzees exhibit the use of crude tools, for instance, the use of small sticks and other objects to extract for example small insects from all-too-tight spots that the fingers and hands cannot reach. Also, I saw a segment on TV of a chimpanzee using a club to attack a mock tiger lying in its’ domain. Don’t you think that these examples might indicate a form of intelligence, albeit crude by human standards, but intelligence nonetheless? A look at the definition of intelligence in my desktop computer dictionary yields the following definition:
I am leaving out the other definitions of intelligence, as they do not really seem relevant to the matter at hand. If intelligence is regarded solely as the ability to engage in abstract thinking, manipulation of symbols, ability to communicate by symbols, etc, that leaves the dolphins and chimps behind humans by a country mile, and in those terms they would not be considered ‘intelligent’. But by the dictionary definition of intelligence, I think we can regard these higher life forms as having a type of intelligence. Now, it is true that dolphins can administer to and care for sick kiddies swimming in their pool, but I am not sure I would regard that behaviour as a form of intelligence as some people do. Rather, I personally would view it as instinctual behaviour. Returning for a moment to the chimps using tools and objects to obtain food in their natural environment, don’t you think that that would indicate an ability to reflect on the demands of the situation and also perchance to communicate those findings to other chimps, including the young? Just a few thoughts... Gary to Peter
In answer to my question regarding intelligence in animals, you wrote: I have seen chimps using sticks to dig insect out of holes, even stripping leaves off the stick before using it. However to call a stick a tool does seem to be a case of stretching one definition in order to prove another. In a similar vein, to call a tree branch a club or weapon is to ignore that the chimp does nothing to fashion or improve the stick or rock as a tool or a weapon. I have also seen chimps using rocks to break open food and they have to spend a great deal of time teaching their young to do even this simple task. Any intelligence present in chimps operates at a very basic level, inhibited by physical incapacity, not opportunity, education, desire or will. It may seem like a minor point to debate, but I think that there is a very slight intelligence in animals. However, even our closest relatives, the apes, notably lack those important attributes of human intelligence that you remark on as ‘the ability to cogitate, reflect, and communicate’. As far as the ability to communicate, I assume you mean communicate symbolically, through words and language. In an article by William H. Calvin, entitled ‘The Emergence of Intelligence’, in Scientific American (November 1998), the author expounds on a rather advanced aspect of human intelligence: the ability to engage in advance planning. He also commented on the lack of the advance planning ability in animals by saying: ‘Aside from hormonally triggered preparations for winter, animals exhibit surprisingly little evidence of advance planning. For instance, some chimpanzees use long twigs to pull termites from their nests. Yet as Jacob Bronowski observed, none of the termite-fishing chimps ‘spends the evening going round and tearing off a nice tidy supply of a dozen probes for tomorrow.’ So much for this facet of intelligence in chimps. It is obviously very rudimentary. I suppose that I was, in part, reacting to the statement: ‘The human brain with its ability to cogitate, reflect and communicate is the only intelligence known to be currently manifest in the universe.’ My reaction was to the words ‘only intelligence’. The human brain, with its’ ability to cogitate, reflect, and communicate, is the only intelligence of its’ type known to be currently manifest in the universe. I have no trouble at all agreeing with this statement. By ‘administer to and care for’ do you mean rub up against and nuzzle, rather like our family cat used to do when it was feeding time or when it would sit in someone’s lap when it wanted a warm soft place to lay and maybe get stroked? Precisely. We have a Golden Retriever that licks our feet after a hard day of confinement in their shoes. This is an administering to that we willingly encourage. It feels damn good after being on your feet all day. I seriously doubt there is any intelligence about it. He likes doing it, and we like having it done. Smart dog? Smart people? I used to see this as the clever behaviour of a tame friendly animal but was also aghast when it would quickly turn into a little tiger when defending its territory or into a monster when torturing its prey for hours and hours. Later in life I came face to face with a feral cat in the desert and I saw for myself that the difference between tame and friendly and wild and ferocious was solely due to a change in circumstance. It is common for people to see the instinctual passions in operation in other animals as a sign of intelligence as they often exhibit similar emotions and behaviour as humans. In this empathetic viewpoint, they focus on the tender animal passions and the savage animal passions are always ignored. The practice of highly selective over-emphasis, combined with highly selective denial, is a prime example of intelligence blinded by self-centred passion. Just to be clear: in the case of dolphins what I was referring to was their use in various ‘healing’ activities whereby they are used to play with and nurture disabled children in a pool. While this is delightful to watch and may confer some benefits to the child, I do not see the dolphin’s behaviour so much as a matter of intelligence as it is a demonstration of instinctual behaviour, in this case the instinct of nurture. I have no trouble at all if someone wants to assign a crude or rudimentary form of intelligence to some other animals. Good. I think that was my point entirely. After I did some looking around on the Internet regarding intelligence in animals, humans included, I think I revised my opinion of the intelligence of our primate cousins downward somewhat. I think there is a rudimentary form of intelligence in animals, including family pets. But a lot of animal behaviour is instinctual. Prior to my involvement in the Actual Freedom mailing list, I think I greatly underestimated or ignored the instinctual basis for much of human behaviour. This is an example of what the ethnologists call ‘instinct blindness’. Personally I think the intelligence gulf is so vast that I prefer to make a very clear distinction. I have met many people who assign intelligence and a human-like persona or personality to all sorts of animals, plants, innate objects or even machines. In primitive humans this misinformation or lack of factual understanding gave rise to rampant anthropomorphism, which is the basis of the earliest recorded instance of religious/spiritual belief in humans. These myths and beliefs still hold a stranglehold over Humanity and shackle intelligence to ignorance and superstition. Yes, I see your point. There is a good deal of anthropomorphising that goes on. One sees this in the New Age love affair with ‘innocent’ animals. The anthropomorphising tendency is carried to a ridiculous extreme by those who cherish ‘Mother Earth’, attributing human-like intelligence to the very ground we walk on. In a past post, you referred to shamanism. The tendency to worship the sky, earth, and attribute human-like abilities, and magical ‘powers’ to animals is an attribute of shamanism that many people are into nowadays. Gary to Peter
Recently you wrote on the topic of intelligence vs. instinctual behaviour: <snip> In an article by William H. Calvin, entitled ‘The Emergence of Intelligence’, in Scientific American (November 1998), the author expounds on a rather advanced aspect of human intelligence: the ability to engage in advance planning. From observing documentaries on humans who, due to isolation, still live a primitive hunter-gathering lifestyle, they also engage in planning – they make shelters, they store food, they share workloads, they make tools and weapons, they plan attacks, they organize defences, etc. It is clear that it is human knowledge that has advanced and not human intelligence given that that modern humans still fight and kill each other – ‘excepting they fight with cruise missiles ’stead of spears’ ... to plagiarize Banjo Patterson. <snip> But the advancement of human knowledge is intelligence, is it not? Again, the first definition of intelligence in my dictionary is:
You seem to be making a somewhat arbitrary distinction between the advancement of knowledge and intelligence. Whereas I see them as the same thing. Using the example that you outline above – humans engaging in extensive defensive preparations, making tools and weapons, etc. – I see that as a definite sign of intelligence, according to the definition of intelligence I have provided. Given that humans still fight and kill each other, we are looking at the instinctual passions in operation, chiefly the savage passions of fear and aggression. The use of tools and weapons is intelligence – the savage passions blindly impel us to engage in aggressive, warlike actions that ultimately destroy us and others. This is what is killing people throughout the world, not intelligence. In a war, nobody really wins. But to get back to the main point I am trying to make – why separate the advancement of human knowledge from intelligence? Going back to the making of tools and weapons- these things allowed humans to advance in their societal and cultural development beyond the point of huddling in dark caves, starving for the most part. They have allowed a level of material comfort and ease of living, and I myself am not prepared to hurl all the tools and weapons on the bonfire just because they are also put to destructive uses. On the other hand, tools and weapons are a ‘double edged sword’ because the human being is still fettered to a Bronze Age mentality when it comes to the operation of the instinctual passions. When a human being becomes freed from the Human Condition, the instinctual passions no longer drive behaviour blindly and intelligence is freed from the domination by emotions and passions. Gary to Peter Web page designed by The Actual Freedom Trust |
