TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

A Cephalopod Has Passed a Cognitive Test Designed for Human Children

209 点作者 daegloe大约 4 年前

12 条评论

40four大约 4 年前
I agree with the main thesis of the article, stated in the first paragraph. That idea of <i>”how important it is for us humans to not underestimate animal intelligence”</i>.<p>I think folks in modern times are less &amp; less prone to thinking animals are ‘dumb’. But 1 or 2 generations ago this was not the case. I think humans for a long time have regarded animal intelligence in an inferior light.<p>Cephalopods have proven to to be incredibly intelligent, and emotional. I think you could easily argue many of them are smarter than human children, maybe even a lot of adults :)<p>I highly recommend an episode of ‘Nature’ I saw recently on PBS about octopi. It’s called “Octopus: Making Contact”. It’s the story of a professor who decided to install a tank and keep an octopus in his home, and the relationship he &amp; his daughter developed with it. Absolutely stunning!<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pbs.org&#x2F;wnet&#x2F;nature&#x2F;octopus-making-contact-preview-a98u9n&#x2F;19851&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pbs.org&#x2F;wnet&#x2F;nature&#x2F;octopus-making-contact-previ...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pbs.org&#x2F;wnet&#x2F;nature&#x2F;baby-cephalopods-first-moments-tzuuij&#x2F;19380&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.pbs.org&#x2F;wnet&#x2F;nature&#x2F;baby-cephalopods-first-momen...</a>
评论 #26332406 未加载
评论 #26330827 未加载
评论 #26330482 未加载
评论 #26331143 未加载
评论 #26330519 未加载
评论 #26331883 未加载
motohagiography大约 4 年前
As someone who trained my dog to sit and wait for me outside a shop while I got coffee, which was a similar delayed gratification and I didn&#x27;t even use treats, I think science might be underestimating just how stupid human children are.
评论 #26329322 未加载
评论 #26329446 未加载
评论 #26329041 未加载
评论 #26329455 未加载
评论 #26328924 未加载
评论 #26331059 未加载
评论 #26333304 未加载
评论 #26329007 未加载
评论 #26331100 未加载
评论 #26339561 未加载
Jeff_Brown大约 4 年前
&gt; That seems like cuttlefish can exert self control, all right, but what&#x27;s not clear is why. In species such as parrots, primates, and corvids, delayed gratification has been linked to factors such as tool use (because it requires planning ahead), food caching (for obvious reasons) and social competence (because prosocial behaviour - such as making sure everyone has food - benefits social species). &gt; &gt; Cuttlefish, as far as we know, don&#x27;t use tools or cache food, nor are they especially social ...<p>This feels like an evolutionary attribution error, if that&#x27;s a thing. Self control is different from a thumb; there aren&#x27;t necessarily any genes that code for it.<p>My first guess would be that, in order for a creature to be as smart as a cuttlefish, it needs to have a mental model of spacetime and of itself. Self-control is just one of the many results of such intelligence.
hermitcrab大约 4 年前
If anyone is interested in cephalopod intelligence I heartily recommend the book: &quot;Other Minds: The Octopus and the Evolution of Intelligent Life&quot; by Peter Godfrey-Smith.
评论 #26330102 未加载
评论 #26329235 未加载
评论 #26331030 未加载
评论 #26331335 未加载
8fGTBjZxBcHq大约 4 年前
The article doesn&#x27;t mention this but that test is not very well regarded currently. It&#x27;s basically a test of food security and trust in adults rather than any particular behavioral benchmark.
评论 #26329456 未加载
评论 #26331755 未加载
评论 #26331105 未加载
bryanrasmussen大约 4 年前
I mean the signature characteristic of the most famous Cephalopod in fiction is that it waits dreaming in its house in R&#x27;lyeh. Evidently not coming out until the food on offer is better, either.
评论 #26329044 未加载
markhahn大约 4 年前
It is a test, and it is used on humans. It isn&#x27;t a qualification for human-ness, any more than &quot;breathing&quot; is.<p>Theory of Mind is much more a test of human-ness - a stage person-ness really. And yes, quite a few animals qualify.
JoeAltmaier大约 4 年前
Says more about how hard it is to design tests, than it does about this particular test. Lots of reasons for delayed gratification. Not all of them mean &quot;as smart as humans&quot;.
评论 #26329224 未加载
carapace大约 4 年前
There are implications of certain recent discoveries. Not to be mysterious, I&#x27;m talking about Levin&#x27;s lab.[1] All cells &quot;think&quot; using the same bio-molecular machinery as neurons. Neurons are just denser and faster.<p>-&gt; Intelligence is ambient.<p>All cells think, and all collections of cells (from biofilms and stomatolites on up) think. In computer terms all cells use compatible protocols and processors and the living world is a kind of biological internet (&quot;Wood-Wide Web&quot;).<p>-&gt; All life shares one mind.<p>Whatever mind is, if you believe it &quot;runs on&quot; the physical substrate of cellular internet, then our minds are not separate from the minds of other living things. This would explain a lot.<p>When I bring this up people often object that this is anthropomorphism, but don&#x27;t see it that way. Since all living tissue is intelligent, I see humans as the anthropomorphism of that ambient intelligence of the biosphere.<p>-&gt; The biosphere is the result of &quot;intelligent design&quot;: it&#x27;s own.<p>From early on, the evolution of life would have become (more deeply) self-referential through mental feedback, meaning that the advent of intelligence itself becomes a factor in the further evolution of life. Things like the great switch-over from anaerobic to aerobic metabolism and the concomitant massive increase in atmospheric oxygen may well have been deliberate choice on the part of the global mind. In any event, the reductive mechanistic view of &quot;dumb&quot; life is faulty. Earth is Solaris.<p>Now this changes nothing about evolution. It&#x27;s still a chemical tautology with no purpose, and adaptive pressure doesn&#x27;t stop just because cells can think. (&quot;Science does not remove the terror of the gods.&quot;) The Earth as a single being still has to navigate the &quot;slings and arrows of outrageous fortune&quot;. Gaia is mortal. Part of the reason living systems seem so wildly inefficient (an illusion) is that they are so inconceivably resilient. (Efficiency vs. inefficiency is meaningless in evolution: there is no purpose so there can be no measurement of efficiency.)<p>[1] &quot;What Bodies Think About: Bioelectric Computation Outside the Nervous System&quot; (youtube.com) <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=18736698" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=18736698</a>
hour_glass大约 4 年前
Uh oh the humans are on to us
评论 #26328668 未加载
glsdfgkjsklfj大约 4 年前
*a biased cognitive test
HenryBemis大约 4 年前
&gt; &quot;They break camouflage when they forage, so they are exposed to every predator in the ocean that wants to eat them. We speculate that delayed gratification may have evolved as a byproduct of this, so the cuttlefish can optimise foraging by waiting to choose better quality food.&quot;<p>It&#x27;s a bit of natural selection. I don&#x27;t know if cephalopods have a &#x27;patience&#x27; gene. If yes, then --&gt; natural selection. The ones who didn&#x27;t have this gene got eaten many generations ago. The ones who do (and their genetically blessed offsprings), are alive to &#x27;tell the tale&#x27;.<p>This is a bit biased if you ask me. They examined only the ones thay they found. The ones they found are the ones that are alive. The ones that are alive are the ones that are patient.<p>To disqualify my above &#x27;theory&#x27; the scientists must capture eggs of 100 (?) eggs, raise them, treat them all the same, and then release them in a controlled &#x27;wild&#x27; environment and see how fast they get eaten&#x2F;how many survive for how long.<p>Then they compare results with their observations in the wild.<p>I am not a marine biologists, so I probably wasted 30secs of your life (apologies).