This guy has got some pretty good points. I think it is a very interesting read. Any other intellectuals agree? I read science papers once a week and it has honestly helped me really understand what is happening in this world for real. Check him out. Basically, it confirms what I know about animals and how humans are different. Smart guy. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1955772/#B21
Fuck me sideways, did he reference himself? Nine fucking times? You do realize he has next to no actual evidence here beyond conjecture right OP?
He has proof for every point, sir. Did you even read it? And referencing yourself is completly valid, you toolbox. It's peer reviewed, so what is the problem? Stop being such a fag and try to learn something.
>>7707317
Go to sleep Premack, no one cares.
But he has a good point. And is a university professor who passed away this year. He even established Premack's Principle. He also pretty much discusses how animals just can't think like we can. It's all automatic responses. Very interesting stuff.
>>7707317
Let's make this very clear, OP. When people ignore this thread, it's not because we're fags that can't learn nuffin. It's because for the most part we know that there's nothing in that article but interchangeable terminology, undefined conjecture and apparently self-referencing. As is basically anything about "intelligence"
>>7707325
Sorry. I didnt know how 2 reference you directly with the comments. I haven't been on here too often except when reading some papers.
>>7707332
You're dead Premack. Stop the spooky zombie shitposting
>>7707330
I'm just trying to open up conversation that relates to how smart animals are. I do not think they come close to people and Premack has some very interesting points that agree. Basically, people need to realize that it is okay to eat animals and stop being to hippy about it when they can't even decide or plan ahead. They aren't worth the praise they get and I will totally talk about it with anyone that wants to.
>>7707331
>>7707336
Let's just have a reasonable discussion here, fellas how does teaching exist in animals? it doesnt, except in the most basic ways Animals just can't pass on knowledge that way or at all. Cats only hunt for food and teach that to their kids and cant teach anything else like how to clean or move and basicallyt cant do much else in the way of teaching
>>7707330
I put forward to you a conjecture:
Conditioning is learning, at the most basic level. Operant and Classical are both forms of learning, dogs and even mice can achieve.
Now, let us supposed to have a large group of bacteria, and they have environmental conditions such that following a period of nutrient rich conditions, there are drought conditions that follow at regular intervals. Or alternatively one chemical food source is replaced with a second and they switch back and forth.
Now, what if as a group some bacteria evolve to prepare for the second food source or drought period by the end of the first period and vice versa?
Is this a form of genetic conditioning? Is it learning? It isn't learning as we would normally think of, children in a school, but it is a form of conditioned response to the environment. Therefore I propose all life can learn through adaptation and evolution, and any caveats you try to place on that are human exceptionalism, and meaningless.
>>7707330
Define think, then prove they can't think, then further argue that thinking is a basis for how humans should treat them,
Fundamentally there is no difference in the mechanisms or mechanics between humans and other complex animals, only complexity.
>>7707351
Let me reference the paper, which is what I wanted to discuss in the first place. The conjucture is fair enough, but the definition of "Human Learning" which can be thought of as different that animal "learning" involves his three points. Observation, judgement, and correction by an adult human to a "sub" or "Beta" human. Smart people teach the rest of humans. We are inclined to. Building up a tollerance to a chemical as a bacteria isn't learning, but similar to getting a callus after rubbing your hands lots. Just getting a tougher skin doesnt mean learning at all.
>>7707307
>Any other intellectuals agree
This would imply that you are an intellectual.
Fuck the fuck off
>>7707368
Stop being a neckbeard
>>7707357
"Human Learning" which can be thought of as different that animal "learning" involves his three points.
Human's are not special creatures selected by God to be his snowflakes. Yes, humans have the greatest capacity to learn that has ever existed on the planet. That does not make "Human Learning" special.
>Observation, judgement
Most animals can observe and learn. A dog can figure out how to open a door handle with it's paw through observation. The is the basis of conditioning and is well studied.
>and correction by an adult human to a "sub" or "Beta" human.
All animals that raise their young do this. Nothing special here.
> Building up a tollerance to a chemical as a bacteria isn't learning,
You misunderstood. The bacteria isn't building up a tolerance to a chemical. The bacteria's DNA learns that "After Food Source A is around for a period of time, Food Source B shows up." The bacteria then prepares for Food Source B in response to Food Source A showing up to better take advantage of it. Pavlovian response at a genetic and species level.
DNA is learning, in parallel through each member of a species, how to best survive in an environment that is constant changing. It responds to outside stimuli. It makes adjustments to development and behavior in future iterations. DNA is a chemical program that can adjust itself. You are the sum total of 4 billion years of iteration of the same machine learning chemical program.
>>7707764
Stop denying God. I see your point with the dog though. Conditioning is considered an automatic response, unfortunately. Not like the first person learning with humans. Just a response similar to a sneeze. Automatic. No thought behind it. He probably learned to open the door because there was food behind it, again, just like Premack said.
Have y'all read his points on theory of mind (TOM)? The biggest advantege we have with our brains is the way we learn to perform socially complex tasks, like language, which distinguishes thought to only humans.
Altruism ( is the principle or practice of concern for the welfare of others.) Humans are the only ones to show true altruism, as he says, because animals only care for siblings or mates they can have children with. I can care for a complete stranger, who might be hurting, or donate to ahomeless shelter. When do animals take care of the homeless or bunnies other bunnies without homes? Never. Because only humans can have empathy
>>7707337
>what iz limbic brain
>what iz neocortex
>only difference between mammals and reptiles are hair and babys lol
>>7707986
>animals only care for siblings or mates they can have children with
That is simply not true. There are tons of examples of animals caring for or adopting other animals.
>>7707307
Premack is a legend. His early ape research was revolutionary. And he's right - human intelligence is discontinuous with animal intelligence because our domain-general learning ability (and, I would argue advanced relational learning) allows for much more complex problem-solving.
>>7707314
He has to cite the person who generated the research and ideas upon which his arguments rest. Those are himself because he's been advancing the state of research for 50 years! Moron.
>>7707331
>interchangeable terminology,
Just because you don't understand the distinction between two terms does not mean it doesn't exist. Learn the nomenclature before you dismiss.
>>7707343
>Animals just can't pass on knowledge that way or at all.
Right, there is good observational learning but little or no evidence of prosody, active teaching.
>>7707351
>genetic conditioning? Is it learning?
This is adaptation not learning. Individuals learn.
OP I think this is a good topic for discussion. Our ability to develop new concepts and relate them to each other and to other humans is key to human civilization. I don't think it should give you a reason to eat more meat, but that's just me.
>>7708875
Fair enough. Removing my own opinion of animals, or religious background (mostly a joke), he was a revolutionary guy. He changed psychology as we understand it, however from a biological point of view people will tend to argue because of differences in opinion over the extent animals can teach. Learning in animals is widely seen, but direct, quantifiable teaching is nearly impossible to find primary literature on.
>>7708875
Do you have any evidence, as I cannot find any, to show differences in short-term memory of animals (chimpanzees) and humans? It would be interesting to compare.
>>7707307
I have a dog and sometimes his behaviour makes me remember of myself when I was a kid. I wonder how much of our minds are partirculary "apeish-human" and how much else would be common with any creature with the same level of inteligence.
>>7709366
Pretty much any delayed matching to sample task directly tests working memory.
>>7707307
Goat intelligence > all
