Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart • Hacker News Board

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#21

Post by exo-pla-net » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:33 PM UTC

bigpumpkin wrote: post #14

exo-pla-net wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an assumption. Self awareness has been scientifically tested in many species, most prominently by using the mirror test: testing if an animal can recognize itself in a mirror by observing if its behavior changes after surreptitiously placing onto its body a mark, which the animal can only see through the mirror. One can argue about the merits of the mirror test, but it's inaccurate to say that scientists are…

I think it's likely that social animals are almost all self aware. How can an individual animal manage social relations within its pack without a knowledge of self and of other selves?

I disagree. Ants are highly social, but few would ascribe them self awareness. They pursue social objectives using instinct.

But pack animals? Maybe. We don't have an answer to how our own self awareness works, so we're largely working in the dark.

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#22

Post by clickok » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:38 PM UTC

rtx wrote: post #20

I always feel a bit disappointed when science catches up to traditional or observational knowledge. It feels like so much opportunity being lost.

In the words of John von Neumann, there's a lot more that's known than is proved.

It's often frustratingly difficult to go from the known to the proven; still, just because something's not proved doesn't mean that scientists are ignoring it.

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#23

Post by rtx » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:40 PM UTC

clickok wrote: post #22

rtx wrote: post #20

I always feel a bit disappointed when science catches up to traditional or observational knowledge. It feels like so much opportunity being lost.

In the words of John von Neumann, there's a lot more that's known than is proved. It's often frustratingly difficult to go from the known to the proven; still, just because something's not proved doesn't mean that scientists are ignoring it.

Thanks for sharing this.

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#24

Post by root_axis » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:43 PM UTC

exo-pla-net wrote: post #10

deeblering4 wrote: post #2

I find our assumption that other living beings are not self aware fascinating. Simply because we cannot speak a common language we assume creatures are drones with no intelligence or emotion, until we can somehow prove otherwise. It almost speaks more to the human psyche than anything else.

It's not an assumption. Self awareness has been scientifically tested in many species, most prominently by using the mirror test: testing if an animal can recognize itself in a mirror by observing if its behavior changes after surreptitiously placing onto its body a mark, which the animal can only see through the mirror. One can argue about the merits of the mirror test, but it's inaccurate to say that scientists are…

The mirror-test is not even close to exhaustive with respect to conclusions about self-awareness. It is certainly conceivable that a self-aware creature could simply be incapable of understanding a mirror or that they might be otherwise indifferent to what they see in it. For example, dogs fail the mirror test, but they are obviously self-aware creatures.

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#25

Post by read_if_gay_ » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:50 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #24

exo-pla-net wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an assumption. Self awareness has been scientifically tested in many species, most prominently by using the mirror test: testing if an animal can recognize itself in a mirror by observing if its behavior changes after surreptitiously placing onto its body a mark, which the animal can only see through the mirror. One can argue about the merits of the mirror test, but it's inaccurate to say that scientists are…

The mirror-test is not even close to exhaustive with respect to conclusions about self-awareness. It is certainly conceivable that a self-aware creature could simply be incapable of understanding a mirror or that they might be otherwise indifferent to what they see in it. For example, dogs fail the mirror test, but they are obviously self-aware creatures.

> but they are obviously self-aware creatures.

Is it that obvious? Mine gets scared by her own farts sometimes.

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#26

Post by root_axis » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:51 PM UTC

exo-pla-net wrote: post #21

bigpumpkin wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's likely that social animals are almost all self aware. How can an individual animal manage social relations within its pack without a knowledge of self and of other selves?

I disagree. Ants are highly social, but few would ascribe them self awareness. They pursue social objectives using instinct. But pack animals? Maybe. We don't have an answer to how our own self awareness works, so we're largely working in the dark.

We're definitely working in the dark, but i don't see any compelling reason to suggest that ants aren't self-aware; why wouldn't they be? What about their behavior makes you feel like they aren't?

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#27

Post by eternalban » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:55 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #26

exo-pla-net wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Ants are highly social, but few would ascribe them self awareness. They pursue social objectives using instinct. But pack animals? Maybe. We don't have an answer to how our own self awareness works, so we're largely working in the dark.

We're definitely working in the dark, but i don't see any compelling reason to suggest that ants aren't self-aware; why wouldn't they be? What about their behavior makes you feel like they aren't?

Extreme self-abnegation.

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#28

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:56 PM UTC

riffraff wrote: post #12

bhk wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found that people tend to attribute human emotions and self-awareness to their pets, far beyond what science (or skilled pet trainers) would hold. And then there are other people that attribute these qualities and even the presence of a "soul" to plants, rocks, etc.. As far as the human "psyche" is concerned, I think it's inclined to animism.

Many years ago someone gave a talk on the ever expanding sphere of "things we recognize rights too". One of the interesting point was how we tend to humanize "evil" objects which clearly have no intent: being angry at a mouse that does not work, some software that crashes, or feeling the printer hates us. We do seems to have animism as a built-in mental device.

[deleted]

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#29

Post by dfischer » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 7:59 PM UTC

the8472 wrote: post #16

dfischer wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re doing it within their frame of definitions which is largely evidence of constrained models leaving options unknown outside the realm of reason thereby excluding outliers of surprising potential.

This sounds like critiquing science for not having all answers. Do you have a better approach?

My critique of is shaded by an irritation of within the both the "non-scientific" community that has been indoctrinated to take what "scientists" say as expert factual irrefutable statements and the "scientific" community that has become not what I'd call scientific and more close to dogma, orthodox, ideological, and or protectionist to break novel grounds. The scientific community is explicitly sanctioned by a centralized order of groups that endorse individuals within a process enforced upon anyone born. You either accept the game and fight to get into "science" or you're not a "scientist."

I know plenty of individuals who are more-expert, more scientific than any scientist publishing papers funded by poorly designed incentive structures between education, research, monetary incentive, and survival.

There's a lot of "clique politics" within the academia of science and it deeply troubles me. It's largely based on the university system being in control of it and the processes that contribute to that structure.

Luckily it does seem to be getting more attention so that is good. Additionally the trend towards self-organization with the internet and wherever that leads us will most likely lead to new structures that allow more freedom of information within science to propagate without as much dependence on centralized entities being corrupted and tainting the scientific process.

Outside of that, my critique here is largely based on various modes within Functionalism (theory of mind)

> In an analogous manner, the role of mental states, such as belief and desire, is determined by the functional or causal role that is designated for them within our best scientific psychological theory. If some mental state which is postulated by folk psychology (e.g. hysteria) is determined not to have any fundamental role in cognitive psychological explanation, then that particular state may be considered not to exist . On the other hand, if it turns out that there are states which theoretical cognitive psychology posits as necessary for explanation of human behavior but which are not foreseen by ordinary folk psychological language, then these entities or states exist.

I think the solve I'm looking for is required on both ends to communicate truth and "fuzziness" of truth. I'm not sure if English and current languages will ever trend towards this because every statement has a value of assigned truth based on existence/to-be. So short-term would be communicating the meme of this through the zeitgeist/noosphere and embed it within the culture - then potentially evolve towards a language that is fuzzy based.

Re: Newfound brain structure explains why some birds are so smart

#30

Post by dfischer » Sat, Sep 26, 2020, 8:03 PM UTC

stouset wrote: post #17

dfischer wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re doing it within their frame of definitions which is largely evidence of constrained models leaving options unknown outside the realm of reason thereby excluding outliers of surprising potential.

If you have any better ideas, the scientific community would legitimately love to hear them. It’s not like nobody realizes that we don’t have flawless definitions for “self-aware”, “intelligent”, or even “life” . Or that the experiments we devise to test for these things come from our own experiences and bias, and might exclude creatures with novel presentations of these traits. But they’re the best we have for now.…

If it keeps hurting, it should keep being mentioned. When things that hurt are turned into silence, then things don't change that can stop hurt.

I understand your point though, and I'm sorry if it came off as an attack. It's a criticism rooted in a few things. I typed up more here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24601665