Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable • Hacker News Board

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#21

Post by TooBrokeToBeg » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 5:48 PM UTC

handsomechad wrote: post #18

deft wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic HN. Layman comments to tell us why a trained professional knows less than them.

This isn't fair, the OP broke down his arguments for why the author was wrong, and all you do is appeal to the author's authority as a "trained professional". After a certain amount of life experience you realize that "trained professionals" in some (many?) fields of study often have glaring gaps in their knowledge of are purposely ignorant of some set of facts/ideas that do not corroborate their philosophical leanin…

> This isn't fair,

Of course it's fair, in a discussion.

> the OP broke down his arguments for why the author was wrong,

No he didn't. There are no "arguments" presented. There's a vague premise (It can all be compared to how most social mammals operate. <--- not an argument in any sense) then some 1 line ramblings that seem thinly related.

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#22

Post by tkahnoski » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 5:50 PM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #13

kstenerud wrote: post #9

> Racism and global climate change are not explained by our shared history with chimpanzees, nor are gender diversity, the #MeToo movement, and the recent rise in nationalism. No. It can all be compared to how most social mammals operate. Racism & nationalism have their roots in tribalism, a very useful tool to keep a tribe cohesive and thus competitive against other tribes. Climate change: Have a look at any invasiv…

I would say that racism is rooted not specifically tribalism but more broadly in inductive reasoning (particular-to-general heuristics) which has been absolutely indispensable to survival and evolution. It is critical to classify a creature as friend or foe based on what class it belongs to, rather than granting the instance benefit of doubt. How previously observed members of a group have behaved in the past constit…

Trying to understand the thread of reasoning here so correct me if I didn't interpret this correctly.

An individual observing some members of a group with different physical characteristic with a certain behavior, an individual infers all members of that group behave that way.

Then with an individual being exposed to a sampling of that groups behavior due to say the news or social media algorithms the individual makes an inference but is unable to account for the bias these sources might have.

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#23

Post by chillwaves » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 5:52 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #20

chillwaves wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> even if honestly seeking scientific inquiry. OK, so show us an example. We don't have to "imagine" someone on the right comparing Barack and Michelle Obama to chimps, or apes, or gorillas in a non-scientific inquiry because it was a constant during his presidency.

And we’re saying that that was okay? I don’t think so. So why is it okay in this case? Or are we saying it’s dishonest for a leading expert to engage in this juvenile behavior pretending it’s scientific inquiry? Imagine a scientist on the right equivocating Hillary with a rat, or something to that effect. People on the right get compared to Neanderthals as well. My point is no one should honestly be making these comp…

As mentioned elsewhere, the context is from a comment one person (a celebrity scientist) made.

> the hypocracy on the left

This statement seems designed to drag discourse into the gutter. I do not believe you are here to speak in good faith. There are 1,000 ways I can legitimately criticize Trump without referring to him as a chimp, and frankly it's not something that comes up very often.

Imagine the criticism of Trump and tell me honestly you think him being compared to an animal is anywhere near 1/10th of 1%.

Re: Obamas, it seemed to be one of the go to. You are creating a false equivalency.

Ironically, the article we are discussing is refuting the comparison.

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#24

Post by stcredzero » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 5:55 PM UTC

deft wrote: post #14

kstenerud wrote: post #9

> Racism and global climate change are not explained by our shared history with chimpanzees, nor are gender diversity, the #MeToo movement, and the recent rise in nationalism. No. It can all be compared to how most social mammals operate. Racism & nationalism have their roots in tribalism, a very useful tool to keep a tribe cohesive and thus competitive against other tribes. Climate change: Have a look at any invasiv…

Classic HN. Layman comments to tell us why a trained professional knows less than them.

Classic HN. Layman comments to tell us why a trained professional knows less than them.

There has been tremendous politicization of science in media in recent years. Basically, if it contradicts a narrative the media is trying to push, actual science is shouted down and castigated. Both the left and the right do this. The right does it with climate science. The left does this with psychology and social sciences.

Basically, this article is nicely full of facts. However, it's presenting them in the classic leftist mode of obscurantism, all to push a politically driven agenda:

These contexts include the history and current reality of specific inequalities that stem from economic, racist, and sexist processes in our society.

As humans are social animals, there is some psychological insight to be gained from studying other social animals, just as there's some physiological insight to be gained by studying the biology of rats and monkeys. Right now, any biological and evolutionary components of human behavior contradict the Marxian, postmodern social constructionist, and far left foundational notion of the human being as blank slate. If any such components are acknowledged, many of their simplistic moralistic calls for reform would have to be questioned. The realistic scientific consensus is a moderate and nuanced one: both nature and nurture matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuQHSKLXu2c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKmyO3hbOz8

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#25

Post by smhost » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 5:59 PM UTC

kstenerud wrote: post #9

> Racism and global climate change are not explained by our shared history with chimpanzees, nor are gender diversity, the #MeToo movement, and the recent rise in nationalism. No. It can all be compared to how most social mammals operate. Racism & nationalism have their roots in tribalism, a very useful tool to keep a tribe cohesive and thus competitive against other tribes. Climate change: Have a look at any invasiv…

Higher reasoning isn't all that great. E.g., people have constructed consistent systems of reasoning that are entirely misanthropic or, if not actually misanthropic, they conclude that the extinction of the human species is good.

And you're missing the point that the stratification of phenomena into "higher reasoning" "base instinct" is a false hierarchy. Even when you're working within ethics, you eventually have to ground yourself in moral intuitions, which is fundamentally irrational (the underlying mechanism of moral intuition can't be examined through reason).

I think maybe what the author is ultimately saying is that it's not wrong to think about these uniquely human qualities as being just as natural and basic as anything else.

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#26

Post by stcredzero » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 6:00 PM UTC

chillwaves wrote: post #23

mc32 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And we’re saying that that was okay? I don’t think so. So why is it okay in this case? Or are we saying it’s dishonest for a leading expert to engage in this juvenile behavior pretending it’s scientific inquiry? Imagine a scientist on the right equivocating Hillary with a rat, or something to that effect. People on the right get compared to Neanderthals as well. My point is no one should honestly be making these comp…

As mentioned elsewhere, the context is from a comment one person (a celebrity scientist) made. > the hypocracy on the left This statement seems designed to drag discourse into the gutter. I do not believe you are here to speak in good faith. There are 1,000 ways I can legitimately criticize Trump without referring to him as a chimp, and frankly it's not something that comes up very often. Imagine the criticism of Tru…

I do not believe you are here to speak in good faith.

Most of the media, which is generally slanted left politically, has generally ceased to speak in good faith with regards to actual societal statistics, social science, biology, and psychology. The right tremendously distorts climate science.

There are 1,000 ways I can legitimately criticize Trump without referring to him as a chimp

Portrayal of George W. Bush as a chimp was tremendously popular in the early 2000's.

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#27

Post by msbarnett » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 6:02 PM UTC

handsomechad wrote: post #18

deft wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic HN. Layman comments to tell us why a trained professional knows less than them.

This isn't fair, the OP broke down his arguments for why the author was wrong, and all you do is appeal to the author's authority as a "trained professional". After a certain amount of life experience you realize that "trained professionals" in some (many?) fields of study often have glaring gaps in their knowledge of are purposely ignorant of some set of facts/ideas that do not corroborate their philosophical leanin…

> This isn't fair, the OP broke down his arguments for why the author was wrong

No they haven't. An argument is a persuasive set of evidence and reasoning presented to make a case for a conclusion -- OP merely made a bunch of handwavey, highly debatable statements as if they were fact

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#28

Post by SubiculumCode » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 6:09 PM UTC

Several years ago I attended a distinguished lecture by a researcher with a long history of working with non-human primates. For an entire hour we watched clip after clip of chimps failing at trivially easy human mental tasks mostly involving 2nd order cognition, even after extensive training and guidance by researchers in each task, and videos of research data in which the researcher had anthropomorphized the observed anaimal behavior when the data doesn't actually support it He was trying to undermine the notion that humans are just a better chimpanzee (i.e. quantitative) but are a different order of chimpanzee (i.e. qualitatively different). I was convinced.

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#29

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 6:34 PM UTC

tkahnoski wrote: post #22

kazinator wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say that racism is rooted not specifically tribalism but more broadly in inductive reasoning (particular-to-general heuristics) which has been absolutely indispensable to survival and evolution. It is critical to classify a creature as friend or foe based on what class it belongs to, rather than granting the instance benefit of doubt. How previously observed members of a group have behaved in the past constit…

Trying to understand the thread of reasoning here so correct me if I didn't interpret this correctly. An individual observing some members of a group with different physical characteristic with a certain behavior, an individual infers all members of that group behave that way. Then with an individual being exposed to a sampling of that groups behavior due to say the news or social media algorithms the individual make…

Even before social media - we're a social and talkative species. More often than not, we're not observing members of a group directly, but we're receiving an already made generalization from other people - which they as well may have received, not made. In the past, the main source of those received generalizations were people we met. Ever since the printing press, it's mass media instead.

Re: Most of what chimpanzees and humans do today is not directly comparable

#30

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 6:41 PM UTC

tkahnoski wrote: post #22

kazinator wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say that racism is rooted not specifically tribalism but more broadly in inductive reasoning (particular-to-general heuristics) which has been absolutely indispensable to survival and evolution. It is critical to classify a creature as friend or foe based on what class it belongs to, rather than granting the instance benefit of doubt. How previously observed members of a group have behaved in the past constit…

Trying to understand the thread of reasoning here so correct me if I didn't interpret this correctly. An individual observing some members of a group with different physical characteristic with a certain behavior, an individual infers all members of that group behave that way. Then with an individual being exposed to a sampling of that groups behavior due to say the news or social media algorithms the individual make…

[deleted]