Are Dolphins Superior To Humans?

[Liberty 53K]

Several times now, when arguing the significance of man due to his ability to reason which is a provision of his conceptual consciousness, I have encountered the pro-dolophin chant of those who claim that dolphins are superior to humans. I have pointed out during these arguments the achievements of man by which those of dolphins pale. I am countered by claims about their healing and sonar abilities, sensitivity, etc. I have some knowledge about dolphins though I am a marine biologist by no stretch of the imagination. Can anyone better inform me about dolphins? Which type of consciousness do dolphins actually have (perceptual I would imagine)? What are their capabilities? Which approach should I take when arguing for the rational man?

PS-As well, I have heard some advocate ants as superior. Comments?

Edited December 15, 2005 by Felipe

[y_feldblum]

Dolphins apparently have unique healing and sonar abilities etc. Humans started without such things and invented them.

Contrariwise, humans start with a mind which produces things like healing and sonar to the nth degree and cars and computers, and dolphins are still stuck with whatever healing and sonar they started with, whatever transportation they started with, and haven't the power to calculate pi to four decimal points if all of them gathered around in a big circle for a year on end.

That thing that dolphins lack is reason. It is a thing unique to mankind. Concepts - many species have that, including humans. But no species other than Wise man has mind/reason, an order of consciousness above concepts.

[AshRyan]

PS-As well, I have heard some advocate ants as superior.  Comments?

Sorry, your postscript was just too funny not to comment on. Ants have a specific nature which dictates certain requirements for their survival, and so do humans--and those natures are fundamentally different. My guess would be that those who say ants are "superior" mean that they would like to rewrite reality such that human nature was modeled after ant nature--i.e., they wish that we were mindless automatons whose own survival was best served by serving the collective. I think whoever suggested to you that ants are superior are probably communists, though I'm sure it would be pretty funny to hear their specific reasons for saying so.

[AshRyan]

That thing that dolphins lack is reason.  It is a thing unique to mankind.  Concepts - many species have that, including humans.  But no species other than Wise man has mind/reason, an order of consciousness above concepts.

Could you please clarify what you mean when you claim that other species may have concepts but lack reason? What do you take to be evidence that they have concepts? To think conceptually, as I understand it, is to reason.

[y_feldblum]

"Tiger" is a concept. Deer recognize it.

[AshRyan]

That's a pretty weak example. A deer doesn't know the word for tiger. Its reaction to tigers is probably determined entirely biologically and perceptually. I don't see how that's an example of an animal using concepts, just because they can perceive similarities among certain objects and act on them.

A stronger example would have been something like: My dog knows the concept "ball." It understands the word ball, and can apply it to many different particular objects that fall within that concept. But even this example, I think, is questionable along the same lines. There are more plausible explanations of those behaviors that don't attribute concepts to animals, and I think doing so is therefore an anthropomorphism.

[y_feldblum]

I think there it is unreasonable to reject the notion that an animal can recognize similar things across contexts - eg, dogs know what dogs are and what balls are, as in your example.

Animals clearly have no faculty for reason - that is the faculty which makes us human. But an abstraction of percepts into an archetype - the highest orders of animals certainly have precursor minds, ie things from which human minds capable of reason most recently evolved from.

Otherwise, what other plausible explanations are there? And can you point me to some, free, on the Internet?

[AshRyan]

I think there it is unreasonable to reject the notion that an animal can recognize similar things across contexts - eg, dogs know what dogs are and what balls are, as in your example.

I don't think it's quite accurate to say that dogs "know" what balls are, in the same way that we do. I shouldn't have used the word "understands" in my example--"recognizes" would have been better. But "recognizing" simliar things across contexts does not constitute conceptualization.

A crucial part of the process of concept formation is assigning a word to stand for a certain concept. Because of the principle of the crow epistemology (the idea that we can only hold so many units in conscious awareness at once), it is impossible for a consciousness thus limited to retain a concept, which is an abstraction, without the use of some concrete symbol to stand for it (since abstractions don't exist in reality, only concretes do). Obviously, animals do not use language in the way that we do. A dog may seem to "understand" the word "ball," since he can apply it to many different particular balls--but this is better explained as a stimulus/response behavior, similar to Pavlov's dog salivating at the sound of a bell.

Animals clearly have no faculty for reason - that is the faculty which makes us human.  But an abstraction of percepts into an archetype - the highest orders of animals certainly have precursor minds, ie things from which human minds capable of reason most recently evolved from.

But it is precisely abstraction from percepts that animals don't seem to be capable of performing. Certainly the higher animals are closer in some ways to us--e.g., they can probably "focus" on similarities among perceptual entities--but to say that they can actually abstract away the differences and form a complete, functioning concept is, I think, false. They may be able to act on their perceptions of similarities among objects, but that isn't evidence that they can do anything cognitively with such perceptions.

Concept formation is precisely the cognitive breakthrough that allows us to reason. If animals could form concepts (which relate entities in a certain way), why wouldn't they be able at that point to further relate their concepts to one another, form propositions, and be rational? The major dividing line between the consciousnesses of humans and lower animals has to be drawn between the conceptual and perceptual levels, not between reason and concepts.

[Old Geezer]

Here is what we know about Dolphins.

1. Their brains are more convuluted then ours (that is their are more neural pathways) When brains are more "wrinkled" or convuluted, the agent is able to complete more cognitive tasks, more complex cognitive tasks, and more abstract cognitive tasks.

2. Their brains are larger than ours.

3. Our brain to body weight ratio is larger than theirs

4. They dont have opposable thumbs and can definitely survive without tools

5. Because of their biological vulnerablity, like humans, they are highly social and have highly developed language skills

6. They have been able to learn our language, we have not been able to learn theirs.

[DavidV]

1. Their brains are more convuluted then ours (that is their are more neural pathways) When brains are more "wrinkled" or convuluted, the agent is able to complete more cognitive tasks, more complex cognitive tasks, and more abstract cognitive tasks.

Wrong. Man has no more or less neocortex than other primates, yet the intelligence levels are wastly different. Within a given range, there is no relationship between neocortex and intelligence.

2. Their brains are larger than ours.

Absolute brain size is irrelevant – dolphins are two to three times larger than man.

3. Our brain to body weight ratio is larger than theirs

So is the brain to body weight ration of most birds, and rats. Are rats also smarter than man? A much better indicator of brain/IQ ratio is the encephalization quotient (EQ), which measures the marginal increase of brain size to body mass. Man has an EQ of 7.44 while dolphins have an EQ of 5.31.

4. They dont have opposable thumbs and can definitely survive without tools

So can spiders. Your point?

5. Because of their biological vulnerablity, like humans, they are highly social and have highly developed language skills

Like all animals, dolphins don’t have “words” – just shrieks a variety of sounds varying according to any particular group. Like a dog’s bark, these sounds represent different emotions, not words – they cannot be combined into any semblance of a compound expression. This is below the level shown by some apes.

6. They have been able to learn our language, we have not been able to learn theirs.

There is no evidence that dolphins understand anything beyond the tricks you can teach to your dog.

The ridiculous claims you’re making reek of ignorance, dishonesty, or both. Given your past record of misrepresenting obvious facts and intellectual dishonesty, I suggest you attempt to maintain some semblance of rational discussion if you don’t want to be banned from this forum.

[Old Geezer]

Wrong. Man has no more or less neocortex than other primates, yet the intelligence levels are wastly different. Within a given range, there is no relationship between neocortex and intelligence.

certainly a large leap from Brain to Neocortex. Given the infancy of Neuroscience, its a thin claim to imply that the neocortex is the important part of the brain for "reason".

Absolute brain size is irrelevant – dolphins are two to three times larger than man.

I never spoke to its relevancy... The original poster wanted to know a little more about dolphins in the context of a discussion on reason. This is sure to be a point that will be raised

So is the brain to body weight ration of most birds, and rats. Are rats also smarter than man?

of course not... I never said that... I was just trying to give the poster an idea of what is most likely to be brought up in conversation

QUOTE 

4. They dont have opposable thumbs and can definitely survive without tools

So can spiders. Your point?

My point was that there is no reason to suspect that their brains are as developed as ours since ours are presumably so developed because we need tools to survive.

"Like all animals, dolphins don’t have “words” – just shrieks a variety of sounds varying according to any particular group. Like a dog’s bark, these sounds represent different emotions, not words – they cannot be combined into any semblance of a compound expression. This is below the level shown by some apes"

I would love to know the methodology of an experiment that proved that.