Chimps Have a Theory of Mind?

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Cognitive Science Forum » Chimps Have a Theory of Mind?

Page 1 of 1

Author

Message

John Hasenkam

Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 4:42 am

Guest

So now we find that chimps have a "theory of mind", this concept typically
invoked when describing symptoms of autism(ie. autistics lack it). Does that
mean there are autistic chimps? King Kong?

Perhaps this is one for Joseph Campbell, he might have something to say
about theory of mind. After all, he was the whiz kid in mythology.

Who's Bad? Chimps Figure It Out By Observation

Who's Bad? Chimps Figure It Out By Observation

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080326095411.htm

ScienceDaily (Mar. 31, 2008) - Chimpanzees make judgments about the actions
and dispositions of strangers by observing others' behavior and interactions
in different situations. Specifically, chimpanzees show an ability to
recognize certain behavioral traits and make assumptions about the presence
or absence of these traits in strangers in similar situations thereafter.
These findings are by Dr. Francys Subiaul - from the George Washington
University in Washington DC - and his team.

Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:14 am

Guest

On Apr 1, 5:42 am, "John Hasenkam" <jo...@goawayplease.com> wrote:

Quote:

hmm. this is one of those things where i don't know whether to say, in
a know it all sarcastic fashion, 'gee, you mean that evolution might
find it advantageous to be able to predict the behavior of others in a
general way?' or 'gee, you mean that the creatures most closely
related to us have similar abilities for things which are strongly
advantageous evolutionarily?'

Glen M. Sizemore

Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:31 pm

Guest

"z" <gzuckier@snail-mail.net> wrote in message
news:d37cbd28-fbe3-4195-813f-c0a57b4acb62@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 1, 5:42 am, "John Hasenkam" <jo...@goawayplease.com> wrote:

Quote:

So now we find that chimps have a "theory of mind", this concept typically
invoked when describing symptoms of autism(ie. autistics lack it). Does
that
mean there are autistic chimps? King Kong?

Perhaps this is one for Joseph Campbell, he might have something to say
about theory of mind. After all, he was the whiz kid in mythology.

Who's Bad? Chimps Figure It Out By Observation

Who's Bad? Chimps Figure It Out By Observation

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080326095411.htm

ScienceDaily (Mar. 31, 2008) - Chimpanzees make judgments about the
actions
and dispositions of strangers by observing others' behavior and
interactions
in different situations. Specifically, chimpanzees show an ability to
recognize certain behavioral traits and make assumptions about the
presence
or absence of these traits in strangers in similar situations thereafter.
These findings are by Dr. Francys Subiaul - from the George Washington
University in Washington DC - and his team.

GZ: hmm. this is one of those things where i don't know whether to say, in
a know it all sarcastic fashion, 'gee, you mean that evolution might
find it advantageous to be able to predict the behavior of others in a
general way?' or 'gee, you mean that the creatures most closely
related to us have similar abilities for things which are strongly
advantageous evolutionarily?'

GS: Or perhaps you should say "What sort of dimwit is so careless with
language that they claim that chimps have a theory of anything? " The answer
is, unfortunately, all of cognitive "science." Iknow a bunch of rats that
press levers - do they have a theory? What is gained by such insipid
nonsense? Oh, BTW, what makes it necessarily the domain strictly of
evolution? Are there any ontogenic histories necessary? Or if one witnesses
any kind of behavior does one just automatically point to evolution? An
alternative notion is that evolution produced more-or-less general learning
mechanisms. So, while true that evolution is ALWAYS involved in behavior, it
is probably not true that there is a "module" for every kind of behavior
that can be distinguished as evolutionary psychology seems to indicate.

Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 5:44 am

Guest

On Apr 4, 4:31 pm, "Glen M. Sizemore" <gmsizemo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Quote:

"z" <gzuck...@snail-mail.net> wrote in message

news:d37cbd28-fbe3-4195-813f-c0a57b4acb62@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 1, 5:42 am, "John Hasenkam" <jo...@goawayplease.com> wrote:

So now we find that chimps have a "theory of mind", this concept typically
invoked when describing symptoms of autism(ie. autistics lack it). Does
that
mean there are autistic chimps? King Kong?

Perhaps this is one for Joseph Campbell, he might have something to say
about theory of mind. After all, he was the whiz kid in mythology.

Who's Bad? Chimps Figure It Out By Observation

Who's Bad? Chimps Figure It Out By Observation

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080326095411.htm

ScienceDaily (Mar. 31, 2008) - Chimpanzees make judgments about the
actions
and dispositions of strangers by observing others' behavior and
interactions
in different situations. Specifically, chimpanzees show an ability to
recognize certain behavioral traits and make assumptions about the
presence
or absence of these traits in strangers in similar situations thereafter..
These findings are by Dr. Francys Subiaul - from the George Washington
University in Washington DC - and his team.

GZ: hmm. this is one of those things where i don't know whether to say, in
a know it all sarcastic fashion, 'gee, you mean that evolution might
find it advantageous to be able to predict the behavior of others in a
general way?' or 'gee, you mean that the creatures most closely
related to us have similar abilities for things which are strongly
advantageous evolutionarily?'

GS: Or perhaps you should say "What sort of dimwit is so careless with
language that they claim that chimps have a theory of anything? " The answer
is, unfortunately, all of cognitive "science." Iknow a bunch of rats that
press levers - do they have a theory? What is gained by such insipid
nonsense? Oh, BTW, what makes it necessarily the domain strictly of
evolution? Are there any ontogenic histories necessary? Or if one witnesses
any kind of behavior does one just automatically point to evolution? An
alternative notion is that evolution produced more-or-less general learning
mechanisms. So, while true that evolution is ALWAYS involved in behavior, it
is probably not true that there is a "module" for every kind of behavior
that can be distinguished as evolutionary psychology seems to indicate.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

well, that's where Skinner was coming from, of course. what is the
point of hypothetical constructs inside the black box of an organism
when all that can be seen/measured is stimulus and response? what
advantage is there of saying "lack of food generates a hunger drive
that initiates a feeding response which is manifested as feeding
behavior" over saying "lack of food causes feeding behavior"?

Glen M. Sizemore

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 8:56 am

Guest

"z" <gzuckier@snail-mail.net> wrote in message
news:43a876e0-758c-475b-be11-b686641297cd@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 4, 4:31 pm, "Glen M. Sizemore" <gmsizemo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Quote:

"z" <gzuck...@snail-mail.net> wrote in message

news:d37cbd28-fbe3-4195-813f-c0a57b4acb62@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 1, 5:42 am, "John Hasenkam" <jo...@goawayplease.com> wrote:

So now we find that chimps have a "theory of mind", this concept
typically
invoked when describing symptoms of autism(ie. autistics lack it). Does
that
mean there are autistic chimps? King Kong?

Perhaps this is one for Joseph Campbell, he might have something to say
about theory of mind. After all, he was the whiz kid in mythology.

Who's Bad? Chimps Figure It Out By Observation

Who's Bad? Chimps Figure It Out By Observation

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080326095411.htm

ScienceDaily (Mar. 31, 2008) - Chimpanzees make judgments about the
actions
and dispositions of strangers by observing others' behavior and
interactions
in different situations. Specifically, chimpanzees show an ability to
recognize certain behavioral traits and make assumptions about the
presence
or absence of these traits in strangers in similar situations
thereafter.
These findings are by Dr. Francys Subiaul - from the George Washington
University in Washington DC - and his team.

GZ: hmm. this is one of those things where i don't know whether to say, in
a know it all sarcastic fashion, 'gee, you mean that evolution might
find it advantageous to be able to predict the behavior of others in a
general way?' or 'gee, you mean that the creatures most closely
related to us have similar abilities for things which are strongly
advantageous evolutionarily?'

GS: Or perhaps you should say "What sort of dimwit is so careless with
language that they claim that chimps have a theory of anything? " The
answer
is, unfortunately, all of cognitive "science." Iknow a bunch of rats that
press levers - do they have a theory? What is gained by such insipid
nonsense? Oh, BTW, what makes it necessarily the domain strictly of
evolution? Are there any ontogenic histories necessary? Or if one
witnesses
any kind of behavior does one just automatically point to evolution? An
alternative notion is that evolution produced more-or-less general
learning
mechanisms. So, while true that evolution is ALWAYS involved in behavior,
it
is probably not true that there is a "module" for every kind of behavior
that can be distinguished as evolutionary psychology seems to indicate.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Z: well, that's where Skinner was coming from, of course. what is the
point of hypothetical constructs inside the black box of an organism
when all that can be seen/measured is stimulus and response?

GS: No, I'm afraid you are incorrect. Skinner's and others' point was more
that hypothetical constructs should be avoided where the ONLY evidence for
the alleged existence of a a thing is the very behavior that it is said to
explain. One way to look at this is that the name of the hypothetical
construct bears, to the observations it is said to explain, the exact same
relationship that, say, the word "chair" bears to chairs. We do not say,
generally, that the word chair is evidence of "chairness." No, chair is
simply a name for a thing, exactly as mental terms are names for behavioral
observations. Secondly, your "...all that can be seen/measured is stimulus
and response" is as sophomoric a description as one can find.

Z: what
advantage is there of saying "lack of food generates a hunger drive
that initiates a feeding response which is manifested as feeding
behavior" over saying "lack of food causes feeding behavior"?

GS: Indeed. The latter is better because it focuses only on the known cause.
The former does to, but it is an easy step to eliminate the reference to the
observable, manipulable cause - the food deprivation - and become fixated
upon the explanatory fiction. Further, a focus on the latter does not
preclude an analysis of the physiology that underlies the behavioral effect.
When the physiology is all but unobserved, talk about some physiological
drive says nothing more than that the behavioral observation (i.e.,
food-deprivation leads to eating) is mediated physiologically. In the case
of nonsense like "theories of mind," the same thing prevails. There are the
observations of the chimp's behavior, and there is the name given it.

Page 1 of 1 All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Fri May 16, 2008 12:32 pm Science Forum Index