Life Sciences Despite smaller brains, ravens as intelligent as chimps

Second Summer

Second Summer

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Reaction score
9,034
Location
Oxfordshire, UK
Lifestyle
  1. Vegan
A study led by researchers at Lund University in Sweden shows that ravens are as clever as chimpanzees, despite having much smaller brains, indicating that rather than the size of the brain, the neuronal density and the structure of the birds' brains play an important role in terms of their intelligence.
Click to expand...
Full story: http://phys.org/news/2016-04-small-brainsravens-clever-chimps.html (April 26, 2016)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dedalus, KLS52 and ledboots
I've never really seen a satisfactory definition of what intelligence is. Descriptions of intelligence have seemed a little vague. The thought occurred to me a while back, and I've no idea that it's right, that maybe the only objective, observable measurement of intelligence might lie in a being's capacity to invent technology, to manipulate the natural universe by artificial means, essentially, to use tools. For example, a bird that uses grass and leaves to build its nest might be considered to be engaging in an act of intelligence, because it's rearranging the universe to its advantage. Or an ape that grasps a twig and inserts it into an ant-hole, so it can extract the ants, without having to paw into the dirt.

I'm not sure that behavior (the successful attainment of a goal) is necessarily a valid way to assess intelligence. The tube test cited in the study seems to be based on visual acuity alone. It doesn't take into consideration that, while the tube is transparent, it effectively blocks the smell of the food. How do we know the animal isn't just following its nose to the food?

Where do we draw the line between what is instinctual and what is intelligent? Any thoughts?
 
I think nest building is too instinctive to be a test of intelligence.....it should be something original and improvised, I think, to test someone.
 
Blobbenstein said:
I think nest building is too instinctive to be a test of intelligence.....it should be something original and improvised, I think, to test someone.
Click to expand...

I wonder. Is nest-building instinctual, or is it a learned activity? People have been using wheels and axles since before recorded history. Should rolling on wheels be regarded as a human instinct?
 
Capstan said:
I wonder. Is nest-building instinctual, or is it a learned activity? People have been using wheels and axles since before recorded history. Should rolling on wheels be regarded as a human instinct?
Click to expand...

it's not really about how long a species does something, it is whether it is somehow encoded into its behaviour by inheritance. Riding in a car isn't a behaviour we inherit from our parents.
Some nests are quite complex, and I don't see the ability to make them as learnt. Do you see birds practising their nest building, or do they just go right to it?
 
Blobbenstein said:
it's not really about how long a species does something, it is whether it is somehow encoded into its behaviour by inheritance. Riding in a car isn't a behaviour we inherit from our parents.
Some nests are quite complex, and I don't see the ability to make them as learnt. Do you see birds practising their nest building, or do they just go right to it?
Click to expand...

What I'm wondering is, is nest-building for birds an instinct, or is it a technology birds invented? And no, riding in cars is not something we inherit, but it is something we are taught.
 
some structures maybe learnt; some nest look quite primitive, but look at the bowerbird structure; it's not a nest but meant to attract a partner.
bowerbird-756720.jpg


That behaviour is specific to that species, so I think it must be inherited.
 
Capstan said:
I've never really seen a satisfactory definition of what intelligence is. Descriptions of intelligence have seemed a little vague. The thought occurred to me a while back, and I've no idea that it's right, that maybe the only objective, observable measurement of intelligence might lie in a being's capacity to invent technology, to manipulate the natural universe by artificial means, essentially, to use tools. For example, a bird that uses grass and leaves to build its nest might be considered to be engaging in an act of intelligence, because it's rearranging the universe to its advantage. Or an ape that grasps a twig and inserts it into an ant-hole, so it can extract the ants, without having to paw into the dirt.

I'm not sure that behavior (the successful attainment of a goal) is necessarily a valid way to assess intelligence. The tube test cited in the study seems to be based on visual acuity alone. It doesn't take into consideration that, while the tube is transparent, it effectively blocks the smell of the food. How do we know the animal isn't just following its nose to the food?

Where do we draw the line between what is instinctual and what is intelligent? Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

That's a very humancentric way of looking at it.
 
Joe said:
I guess we cannot go around calling dumb people "bird brains" any longer.
Click to expand...

Anyone who has observed birds closely has long concluded that that saying is nonsense.

It's the same with using the word "chicken" to describe cowardice. Chickens are actually quite bold and adventurous, and a hen will give her life to protect chicks in her care, as will a rooster to protect the hens in his flock.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dedalus and ledboots
Blobbenstein said:
pheasants aren't that bright. The walk all over the road in front of cars.
Click to expand...

They don't have any understanding of something that is completely alien to them. I don't know that humans would fare any better in similar circumstances. After all, we build and rebuild on flood plains, in hurricane zones, etc. We drive drunk, we smoke cigarettes, eat unhealthy diets, pollute our environment, etc. A disinterested observer wouldn't describe us as "very bright."
 
Top Bottom