Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Just how smart is an octopus?

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 329 posts

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#131

Post by toisanji »

donretag wrote: post #122
maxxxxx wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having dealt with both I would rate pigs higher in personality than dogs. They are very smart, learn stuff quickly and definitely have individual personalities. I always find it very hypocritical that the same people who have no problem eating pork are outraged over people eating dogs in Asia.

The issue with dogs is that there are no dog farms. All of the dogs eaten are stolen or taken from the street.

in korea where dogs are eaten often, the dogs come from dog farms.

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#132

Post by bduerst »

FreeFull wrote: post #115
tzs wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately for us, they have two biological strikes against developing that kind of culture. 1. They have short lifespans, limiting how much knowledge and wisdom an individual can acquire over its lifetime. 2. Reproduction is fatal. Males dies a few months after mating. Females spend all their time after the eggs are laid guarding them, and neglect to eat. They die of starvation around the time the eggs hatch. The o…

I also suspect it's a lot harder to advance technologically when you live underwater. One of the big boosts to human evolution was the mastery of fire and development of cooking.

Depends on whether or not cooking would expand an octopode diet the way it did with humans. They're also technically "cold" blooded.

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#133

Post by junto »

jnbiche wrote: post #37
ch4s3 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well pigs are smarter than dogs, and many people eat them.

Yeah, but a dog's got personality. Personality goes a long way.

So by that rationale, if a pig had a better personality, he would cease to be a filthy animal? Is that true?

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#134

Post by Falling3 »

virmundi wrote: post #108
burkaman wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All ethics are entirely manmade, so this is not particularly helpful. Are you ok with torturing criminals, as long as they seem like they'd be willing to torture you?

No, because we've found empirically that torture doesn't work. If it did, why not? I know many will not like that conclusion, but again, presuming an amoral universe, and I have little evidence outside of a religious world view that I'm wrong to presume such, there is no right or wrong. You admitted in your first sentence. Comment is helpful in that many people, from all backgrounds, assume that ethics are absolute.…

Torture is used for reasons other than obtaining information. It's also used as a form of punishment/vengeance. Does that context change your answer?

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#135

Post by danans »

virmundi wrote: post #88
danans wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like reductio ad absurdum. You could argue amorality in the specific case of you vs. the octopus, in the wild, but that's now how most of us get the octopus or other animals we eat. The instinctual human ability to mentalize about another creature's state of being is likely where our capacity to, for example, domesticate animals and keep them as a food source came from in the first place. That same ability…

Actually, I argue amorality in all things from an agnostic view. There is no such thing as a universal ethic. There is only force and its decay. For the general concept of animal herd vs people collective (effectually herd vs herd), this doesn't much matter. The best argument one can muster its that we, being rational, should preserve a reasonable food chain. The idea goes like this: A stable, sustainable food chain…

> Actually, I argue amorality in all things from an agnostic view. There is no such thing as a universal ethic. There is only force and its decay.

There are personal (and group) ethics which the OP appeared to be reflecting on when they pondered whether or not to eat the octopus. These arise from a mix of rational, irrational, habitual, and even hypocritical thought processes, and that's all part of the human condition.

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#136

Post by burkaman »

virmundi wrote: post #108
burkaman wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All ethics are entirely manmade, so this is not particularly helpful. Are you ok with torturing criminals, as long as they seem like they'd be willing to torture you?

No, because we've found empirically that torture doesn't work. If it did, why not? I know many will not like that conclusion, but again, presuming an amoral universe, and I have little evidence outside of a religious world view that I'm wrong to presume such, there is no right or wrong. You admitted in your first sentence. Comment is helpful in that many people, from all backgrounds, assume that ethics are absolute.…

I doubt most people around here are moral absolutists. I didn't downvote your comment, but it did feel a little irrelevant, in that "ethics are manmade" applies to every situation if you believe it, and no situation if you don't.

I'm not sure what you mean by your atheist comment. It is not contradictory to hold strong morals while accepting moral relativism. As long as you accept that there is no objective moral truth, but have some coherent basis for your beliefs, there is no contradiction. Having no morals whatsoever would be inhuman.

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#137

Post by up_and_up »

Pigo wrote: post #92
komali2 wrote: post #64

Total anecdote here, but when I volunteered at our aquarium in Charleston, SC (amazing aquarium, go check it out), we had a problem where our flounder were vanishing from their tank. We suspected theft and so put a camera up in the back room. The next time flounder disappeared we checked the feed - one of our octopi was escaping from his tank that we thought we had already anti-octopus'd, climbing over the walls, bre…

I would love to see that footage. I've seen videos of them solving simple problems, but I've never seen them go all MacGyver. The way their described makes me think of our local raccoons, shifty, conniving and sort of belligerent. You have to respect their audacity and resolve.

> I would love to see that footage.

Different footage but a similar crazy feat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPJaPZCwZo4

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#138

Post by Falling3 »

virmundi wrote: post #88
danans wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like reductio ad absurdum. You could argue amorality in the specific case of you vs. the octopus, in the wild, but that's now how most of us get the octopus or other animals we eat. The instinctual human ability to mentalize about another creature's state of being is likely where our capacity to, for example, domesticate animals and keep them as a food source came from in the first place. That same ability…

Actually, I argue amorality in all things from an agnostic view. There is no such thing as a universal ethic. There is only force and its decay. For the general concept of animal herd vs people collective (effectually herd vs herd), this doesn't much matter. The best argument one can muster its that we, being rational, should preserve a reasonable food chain. The idea goes like this: A stable, sustainable food chain…

>If such a measure were carried out without hypocrisy, one would not eat any animals.

A very reasonable, consistent position.

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#139

Post by WalterSear »

cicero wrote: post #76
virmundi wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've made it a side-effect. As a conscious being I know that there is a circle of life. I know that animals eat each other. I know that without getting into franen-foods, the human body evolved to eat other animals too. You picked an ethic. Probably because it felt good. I too picked an ethic. Mine is Christian with a good deal of Epicurean infusion. Religiously I believe we can eat animals, but need to care for th…

Christianity (at least Catholicism) has an animal ethic that is not man-made, but comes from divine revelation. Genesis says that man is given the responsibility to care for creation, and while since the time of the flood we have permission to eat animals, the general (at least Catholic) interpretation is that doesn't mean we can be cruel to animals. In other words, if we have a reasonable need to kill an animal for…

Except we no longer need to kill animals for food. Animal products are, on the whole, deleterious to our health.

So, why is it still acceptable to most Catholics?

Re: Just how smart is an octopus?

#140

Post by Falling3 »

overcast wrote: post #63
maxxxxx wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having dealt with both I would rate pigs higher in personality than dogs. They are very smart, learn stuff quickly and definitely have individual personalities. I always find it very hypocritical that the same people who have no problem eating pork are outraged over people eating dogs in Asia.

I think the key difference here is that dogs were bred for thousands of years, to be our companions, while pigs were bred as food. That's where it comes from.

In what way is that a meaningful distinction?
Post reply on HN