Comment

Obama Campaign Ad: Sarah Palin and the Far Right

793
Prononymous, rogue demon hunter3/11/2012 5:27:34 pm PDT

re: #791 Obdicut

Are personal jabs really adding anything here?

Jabbing is not my intention. Let me go back to your response to ggt. I actually agree in principle, for the most part. But not in the details. If humans aren’t the only source of good or kindness in the entire universe does not your other points still stand?

I agree that some people’s need for connection to something greater is a feeling that’s biologically driven. So why not satisfy the emotion rather than suppress it? We can be rational while recognizing that, in fact, we are part of many greater things.

Yes.

So someone in need should value the assistance they receive differently depending on the configuration of the giver’s neurons?

This is a change; previously you agreed kindness was not an emotion.

It isn’t a change, I just wasn’t very clear. Kindness isn’t an emotion, but it can come about as a response to an emotion. What sort of kindness requires abstract thought?

No, not any more than making sounds that communicate content is a form of language.

I would call this animal language, and I am in good company.

I’m saying that analoging is a part of abstract thought. I can’t really be any clearer about that.

What are the other parts of abstract thought?

Are you saying you think that parrots engage in abstract thought the way humans do?

The way humans do? No.

It’s kind of odd to me that you keep referencing birds. Do you believe birds have cognition in the same way humans do?

I find them to be interesting subjects and non-mammals. I try to look for examples outside the ape lineage because articles about them can be more easily found with google by anybody.

Would you prefer cetaceans? Cephalopods?

The last thread of that article says:

The cautious approach is always called for in science.

How about the followup article to that one:
physorg.com

The experiments showed the performance of the birds in solving the problem was consistent with a thought process — tools can be used to retrieve unreachable objects — rather than a process of trial and error and learning from mistakes.

I’m asking you if you think that magnitude argument applies all the way down the line; are we just much better at cognition than a protozoa? Is there any line of demarcation for you— not a bright line, of course, but is there any difference other than magnitude?

As to cognition specifically, I think there is a minimum requirement of at least one brain. Without a brain it would be difficult to unify the whole suite of processes we describe as cognition. But even bacteria can learn and respond to, for example, periodicity in stimuli through epigenetics.

I think that organisms evolve abilities that are suited to their environmental niche. Do I think parrots have the same cognitive faculties as humans? Of course not. Humans are bipedal ground dwelling apes. Parrots are airborne tree dwelling birds. They will evolve cognition that best suits their lifestyle. I think that many social animals will evolve certain emotional and cognitive traits that are similar but not exactly the same as ours.