A neat discovery of a fish that uses rocks to break open shells.
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceno...-of-fish-.html
|
|
A neat discovery of a fish that uses rocks to break open shells.
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceno...-of-fish-.html
Completely fascinating. Now how do we go about determining the degree of reason and/or hard wired selection involved in the behavior?
Is common for birds to use stones in crop to be grinding hard foodstuffs, sea otters are known to use stones to bash open shellfish.
None of these examples have been shown to modify selected stones, so are these truly "tools" in most rigorous sense?
Whole history of humanity has been one of using tools to make more sophisticated tools. Prince extends compliments to all and thanks for a promising thread.
The first thing we need before we continue is your definition of "tool".Originally Posted by The Finger Prince
Although Sea otters don't modify their stones, they do choose their own unique stones for use. They don't just randomly use rocks that are there because they are convenient, to me this is tool usage.Originally Posted by The Finger Prince
That's history. Contemporary humans, when faced with a broken pencil and no pencil-sharpener, are as likely to seek a new pencil as use a (probably dullOriginally Posted by The Finger Prince
) knife to re-point the pencil. What % of the tools you use did you make yourself?
Now we have fish using tools. We also have birds and chimps using tools. We also have prairie dogs using a grammatical language that describes what kind of predator is coming and from what direction. How can one doubt that we all came from a common ancestor?
Prairie dogs have a language all of their own and 'can describe what humans look like' | Mail Online
The prairie dog's barks, yips and chirping sounds are really a sophisticated form of communication that contains a vocabulary of at least 100 words, Professor Slobodchikoff claims.
'The little yips prairie dogs make contain a lot of information,' he said.
Professor Con Slobodchikoff, of Northern Arizona University, has been studying prairie dogs for 30 years
'They can describe details of predators such as their size, shape, colour and how fast they are going.
'They also can discriminate whether an approaching animal is a coyote or a dog, and they can decipher different types of birds.'
The current definition of a 'tool', is a device or implement used to carry out a particular function, but would suggest
that definition not entirely appropriate within the context of the thread proposed by Lynx-Fox, who feel had tongue
in cheek when starting it.
Most animals are not 'dumb', and have an innate ability to find a solution to problems involved in getting food
and surviving.
Used to have a blackbird in the garden who would pick up a snail, fly up 10 feet, then drop it on the concrete
patio to break its shell, then enjoy the inside. Which begs the question, what do we define as intelligence?
Intelligence as I understand it, is the ability to acquire knowledge and skills. However, the ability to grasp concepts
is the forte of Homo sapiens.
nokton.
please supply support for this statementOriginally Posted by nokton
Oh my, Paleo.
With respect, who taught you how to think? The ability to grasp a concept is an
innate ability of humankind only. Thats how we have cell phones, computers, and a space station.
No other lifeform on this planet shows evidence of grasping concepts as we understand them.
Hope, Paleo, you understand my statement.
Thanx your reply, enjoy discourse with you.
nokton.
yay for a non-reply. Conceptual thinking is evident in a number of other species, such as dolphins and parrots.
I think it was Bertrand Russell who once said, in the search for truth, language is suspect.
Are we speaking here of degrees of conceptual thinking? The intention of my comment
on homo sapiens capacity for conceptual thinking was the innate ability of humans to adapt
the environment they are in, to suit themselves, and develop abstract ideas that result in
physical existence with the development of technology, I know of no other lifeform on this
planet that has that capability.
Dolphins and octopi are both known for tool usage and adapting to their environments.
Paleo, of course, but developing that usage for adaptation is one thing, developing it for
realising a concept is another.
Paleo, I have an idea, and a concept that my 'brain' tells me to explore, neither dolphins
or octupi can emulate that.
Respect your opinion, and value your comment.
nokton.
What proof do you bring to the table to support this opinion?
Humanity is unique in being the only species to use more than basic technology.
'More than basic' I define as anything from knapped stones plus everything more sophisticated than knapping. Not sticks bitten to make a point.
As pointed out, other species have been shown to have quite sophisticated concept formation, and even language. Recent work shows that bottlenose dolphins have a vocal signature they use to identify each as individuals, and their fellow dolphins may preface a whistle burst with that vocal signature if they find themselves separated from that individual. Like they are calling out : "Where are you?" Thus, those dolphins can be said to have names for themselves as individuals.
With serious respect Paleo, you misinterpret my post.
Appreciate your point of view, my point was, and is, only homo sapiens is able to grasp an
esoteric concept or idea, and to create the technology to bring it to fruition.
Dolphins and octupi been around a good long time now, but they don't seem to have progressed
to a technology based on an advancement of science as we know it, to make serious use of their
environment.
nokton
Thanx your post skeptic, once again my post not understood. I am not speaking of a kind of intelligence here, but
that only Man can grasp a concept, and with science and technology develop it.
There are many examples of animal 'intelligence', point out to me where this has changed the environment they
live in.
respect.
nokton
| « And we thought Solent Green was bad | UK members! » |