Life Sciences Despite smaller brains, ravens as intelligent as chimps

[Capstan]

That's a very humancentric way of looking at it.

Humancentric, as a term, doesn't seem to be listed in dictionaries (Merriam-Webster, Oxford, Cambridge, Yourdictionary.com,) so I don't know what you mean. In any case, I wasn't expressing a point of view. I was asking a question. Any thoughts about that?

 

[Mischief]

Humancentric, as a term, doesn't seem to be listed in dictionaries (Merriam-Webster, Oxford, Cambridge, Yourdictionary.com,) so I don't know what you mean. In any case, I wasn't expressing a point of view. I was asking a question. Any thoughts about that?

I'm surprised that, as a vegan, you haven't encountered the term before.

I think that using the use of tools/manipulation of one's environment as the measure of intelligence is to limit intelligence to a human based model.

It's sort of like venture capitalists defining intelligence by the qualities it takes to succeed as a venture capitalist, while considering a human who has the ability to survive on her own on the proverbial deserted island/wake of a worldwide catastrophe to be less intelligent if that person didn't also have the capacity to succeed as a venture capitalist.

 

[Capstan]

I'm surprised that, as a vegan, you haven't encountered the term before.

I think that using the use of tools/manipulation of one's environment as the measure of intelligence is to limit intelligence to a human based model.

It's sort of like venture capitalists defining intelligence by the qualities it takes to succeed as a venture capitalist, while considering a human who has the ability to survive on her own on the proverbial deserted island/wake of a worldwide catastrophe to be less intelligent if that person didn't also have the capacity to succeed as a venture capitalist.

Interesting point. Thank you.

Yes, my question comes from a human point of view. I can't help that, because I'm human, and lack the ability to observe life as another species does, at least, not without becoming subjective about it. Specifically, from a standpoint of logic, which may or may not be exclusive to humanity, what is there, besides the inventions of technology, that can be objectively observed and noted (measured,) without any conclusions drawn being tainted by subjectivity? Take problem-solving, as an example. A tiger, like all creatures, faces the problem of survival and what to eat, so it kills and eats another animal. Problem solved. But does this make the tiger intelligent, just because it has prolonged its life? If so, could we not say that any act that promotes survival, or otherwise solves a life-problem, is an act of intelligence? That seems like a pretty broad definition, perhaps too broad, because it provides no distinction between intelligence and the survival instinct. Are they the same thing? Is intelligence just survival taken to its most successful point?