Fish do/don't anticipate things? (was: "ARAs" against Game chickens)

Goo ****wit David Lying ****bag Harrison lied:

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 01:06:41 -0400, Logic316 wrote:


wrote:

I never saw a wild thing sorry for itself.
A small bird will drop frozen dead from
a bough without ever having felt sorry for itself.
--
I never saw a wild thing sorry for itself.
A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough
without ever having felt sorry for itself.

This poem is fundamentally flawed. Most animals, including avian
species, lack the necessary mental capacity to have a sense of "self" in
the first place.

- Logic316


There are examples that suggest otherwise. For example: We all
know that a dog is aware of his balls, so what would make us believe
he is not aware of himself?

They fail the mirror test, for one, ****wit, you
****ing ****bag.

A dog is not aware that its tail is "its" tail. It's
aware of THE tail, and if you step on tail it yelps.
It does not know that the tail is "its" tail, or that
its paw is "its" paw. If you approach a dog that will
let you approach it at all, and calmly extend a pair of
garden shears as if you're going to cut off the dog's
front paw, it will not react. It doesn't have the
sense of self required to think, "This stranger might
intend to hurt me."

Dogs, cats, cattle, almost all animals "lower" than the
great apes have no sense of self.

dh@. wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 05:25:50 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote:


NanK wrote:

Yes, they do! When they see you outside the tank, don't they wiggle
with anticipation of being fed???

No. That's stimulus response, *not* anticipation.


That stimulus response *is* anticipation Goo.

I would have to agree. "Anticipation" simply means sensing that an event
is going to occur. If somebody punches you a couple of times in the
face, you're naturally going to remember the pain and try to avoid his
hand next time you see it coming towards you - that's anticipation, and
it's done without using any abstract thought. But somewhere in that
fish's tiny brain there is a piece of data being stored which tells it
that there's going to be food when it sees the image of a person in
front of it's tank. This information was not genetically inherited from
it's parents, not will it pass it on through it's DNA to it's offspring,
so it can't be called instinct. It is, in fact, a memory - learned
information. It's a very primitive sort of learning, just barely above
the level of instinct, but learning nevertheless. But it does not imply
or require that the fish is consciously thinking or reflecting about
what it's doing.

- Logic316




"A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring
one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their
own pursuits of industry and improvement."
-- Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural address - 1801

mid-post

dh@. wrote:
Goo insists that no animals can anticipate, but that humans are
somehow projecting their emotions into the animals causing them
to behave in a way which gives the obvious appearance that they
are experiencing them themselves...most likely through voodoo or
something...it's bizarre, whatever it is.

Perhaps he's referring to "anthropomorphism". Yes, people are often
guilty of attributing human qualities and motives to things that aren't
human. Just look at the Disney channel :-P


The only question I have, could such a fish (one having learned to
associate the presence of humans with food) learn to distinguish between
humans and other large creatures who show up in front of it's tank who
don't feed it (like dogs or cats)?

- Logic316


Most likely they can learn to avoid things as well as anticipate
getting food from them. Amusingly, Goo can understand that animals
feel fear and anger, but can't understand that they also feel pride,
anticipation and disappointment. It's amusing, but in an almost pitiable
way.

'Fear' and 'anger' are among the most primal of emotions, present even
in most lower lifeforms. These help ensure survival by allowing the
organism to either flee danger, or fight off threats to its food and
territory. 'Anticipation' is not an emotion; it's the condition of
merely having knowledge of an upcoming event, and acting on it. As for
'pride', that's a far more complex emotion which involves feeling
pleasure from knowing that you acquired, accomplished or succeeded at
something - which you definitely won't find in a fish. The closest
instinct you can find to that in a fish is simply territoriality and
aggression. As for 'disappointment', that's also a complex mammalian
emotion involving a feeling of dissatisfaction that results when one's
expectations are not realized. Again, I doubt a fish can feel that; if
it sees and tries to obtain food or a mate and it fails to do so, they
don't have the capacity to think about their loss - they just keep
trying and keep going about the business of survival.

- Logic316



"Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to
realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first."
-- Ronald Reagan

A GOOGLE search may direct you to the latest research where scientists
have actually taught flies to follow a particular flight pattern in
controlled experiments! And did you know that bees remove the legs on a
fellow worker bee that habitually returns "drunk" on fermented nector.

If you watch Animal Planet and Discovery, you have learned about the
complexity of elephants, dolphins, wolves, and many other animals and
insects. Recently, I saw a clip where an unhappy, aquarium-housed
octopus was given a Duplo (jumbo toy blocks) structure with
window-shaped holes, and the animal immediately perked up and
investigated the structure and its openings.

Wild birds have demonstrated uncanny abilities to figure out puzzles in
order to obtain a tasty morsel. Parrots can watch you unlock a cage,
and repeat your action. No training, no conditioning -- just brain power.

Many bored, lonely, anxious pets (birds, rats, cats, dogs, horses) and
zoo animals, i.e., pandas, marsupials, monkeys, develop behavior
problems when confined in inappropriate conditions. Experts constantly
seek to improve zoos and rescue facilities for this very reason. Rescue
groups anxiously rehabilitate and rehome orphaned animals according to
the needs of the species. (Did you catch the otters on "GROWING UP OTTER"?)

We assume a whole lot more than we should about the animals with whom we
share this planet. Perhaps our fish ARE capable of learning,
recognition, and feelings.

Who among us knows for sure?


n

NanK wrote:
A GOOGLE search may direct you to the latest research where scientists
have actually taught flies to follow a particular flight pattern in
controlled experiments! And did you know that bees remove the legs on a
fellow worker bee that habitually returns "drunk" on fermented nector.

Perhaps we should follow a similar approach with drunk drivers. On the
first offense, take away their cars. On the second offense, remove their
legs so they can't operate the pedals.


If you watch Animal Planet and Discovery, you have learned about the
complexity of elephants, dolphins, wolves, and many other animals and
insects. Recently, I saw a clip where an unhappy, aquarium-housed
octopus was given a Duplo (jumbo toy blocks) structure with
window-shaped holes, and the animal immediately perked up and
investigated the structure and its openings.

Most animals are naturally curious. It benefits their survival to
explore their environment as thoroughly as possible.


Wild birds have demonstrated uncanny abilities to figure out puzzles in
order to obtain a tasty morsel. Parrots can watch you unlock a cage,
and repeat your action. No training, no conditioning -- just brain power.

That's called 'learning through imitating', something parrots are
particularly good at. I've seen pretty clever horses do it too. But if
they could figure out on their own how to unlock a cage, that would be
an entirely different story.


Many bored, lonely, anxious pets (birds, rats, cats, dogs, horses) and
zoo animals, i.e., pandas, marsupials, monkeys, develop behavior
problems when confined in inappropriate conditions.

Yes. It's been proven that higher animals can actually experience
boredom and stress when their brains are not sufficiently stimulated.


We assume a whole lot more than we should about the animals with whom we
share this planet.

Wait a minute there hippie, this isn't just a "planet". It's an entire
WORLD, and one of a kind at that. And we don't share it. Humans OWN it.
We didn't rise to the top of the food chain by putting the interests of
competing species on the same level as ours. A black bear isn't going to
respect *your* rights if it's hungry or if you happen to be in it's
territory near its cubs.


Perhaps our fish ARE capable of learning,
recognition, and feelings.

Fish are capable of learning, certainly. Recognition, maybe or maybe
not. I'd need to see some experiments done on that. I know that
amphibians and reptiles can often differentiate the appearance of their
owner from other people, but fish in the store seem to do that "fishy
dance" no matter who shows up in front of their tank.

- Logic316



"A liberal is a conservative who's been arrested. A conservative is a
liberal who's been mugged."
-- Wendy Kaminer

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 06:30:20 GMT, wrote:

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 23:55:35 -0500, Cyli
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 03:06:26 GMT, wrote:


I never saw a wild thing sorry for itself.
A small bird will drop frozen dead from
a bough without ever having felt sorry for itself.


And how is it that you know exactly what a dead bird felt before it
died? Or how any wild thing is feeling about itself?


Perhaps by the same reasoning that allows you to speak to squirrels
and causes your paranoia with regards to trout.


_Anyone_ can speak to squirrels. They only pay attention if you
frighten them or feed them, though. Speaking for them or their
feelings is another matter.

I'll admit to the trout paranoia accusation. Probably has something
to do with being a lousy fisherman.

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

"Logic316" wrote in message
...
NanK wrote:
A GOOGLE search may direct you to the latest research where
scientists have actually taught flies to follow a particular
flight pattern in controlled experiments! And did you know
that bees remove the legs on a fellow worker bee that
habitually returns "drunk" on fermented nector.

Perhaps we should follow a similar approach with drunk drivers.
On the first offense, take away their cars. On the second
offense, remove their legs so they can't operate the pedals.
============
Nah, then you'd have to "accomodate" them under the ADA, and they
wouldn't have lost any privledges.





If you watch Animal Planet and Discovery, you have learned
about the complexity of elephants, dolphins, wolves, and many
other animals and insects. Recently, I saw a clip where an
unhappy, aquarium-housed octopus was given a Duplo (jumbo toy
blocks) structure with window-shaped holes, and the animal
immediately perked up and investigated the structure and its
openings.

Most animals are naturally curious. It benefits their survival
to explore their environment as thoroughly as possible.


Wild birds have demonstrated uncanny abilities to figure out
puzzles in order to obtain a tasty morsel. Parrots can watch
you unlock a cage, and repeat your action. No training, no
conditioning -- just brain power.

That's called 'learning through imitating', something parrots
are particularly good at. I've seen pretty clever horses do it
too. But if they could figure out on their own how to unlock a
cage, that would be an entirely different story.


Many bored, lonely, anxious pets (birds, rats, cats, dogs,
horses) and zoo animals, i.e., pandas, marsupials, monkeys,
develop behavior problems when confined in inappropriate
conditions.

Yes. It's been proven that higher animals can actually
experience boredom and stress when their brains are not
sufficiently stimulated.


We assume a whole lot more than we should about the animals
with whom we share this planet.

Wait a minute there hippie, this isn't just a "planet". It's an
entire WORLD, and one of a kind at that. And we don't share it.
Humans OWN it. We didn't rise to the top of the food chain by
putting the interests of competing species on the same level as
ours. A black bear isn't going to respect *your* rights if it's
hungry or if you happen to be in it's territory near its cubs.


Perhaps our fish ARE capable of learning, recognition, and
feelings.

Fish are capable of learning, certainly. Recognition, maybe or
maybe not. I'd need to see some experiments done on that. I
know that amphibians and reptiles can often differentiate the
appearance of their owner from other people, but fish in the
store seem to do that "fishy dance" no matter who shows up in
front of their tank.

- Logic316



"A liberal is a conservative who's been arrested. A
conservative is a liberal who's been mugged."
-- Wendy Kaminer

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 Goo wrote:

dh wrote:

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 01:06:41 -0400, Logic316 wrote:


wrote:

I never saw a wild thing sorry for itself.
A small bird will drop frozen dead from
a bough without ever having felt sorry for itself.
--
I never saw a wild thing sorry for itself.
A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough
without ever having felt sorry for itself.

This poem is fundamentally flawed. Most animals, including avian
species, lack the necessary mental capacity to have a sense of "self" in
the first place.

- Logic316


There are examples that suggest otherwise. For example: We all
know that a dog is aware of his balls, so what would make us believe
he is not aware of himself?

They fail the mirror test, for one, ****wit, you
****ing ****bag.

A dog is not aware that its tail is "its" tail. It's
aware of THE tail, and if you step on tail it yelps.
It does not know that the tail is "its" tail,

There is no reason to believe anything so stupid as that Goo,
but there is reason not to. For example: dogs mark their territory,
and know that it's their territory. You are amazingly ignorant. It's
no wonder they call you Goobernicus.

or that
its paw is "its" paw. If you approach a dog that will
let you approach it at all, and calmly extend a pair of
garden shears as if you're going to cut off the dog's
front paw, it will not react. It doesn't have the
sense of self required to think, "This stranger might
intend to hurt me."

That's not it Goober. They don't understand that garden shears
could hurt them, and that's all there is to that little fantasy.

Dogs, cats, cattle, almost all animals "lower" than the
great apes have no sense of self.

You are the last person who would know if they do Goo, that's
for sure. They indicate by their behavior that they do, and there is
absolutely no reason at all to believe they don't.

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 Goo wrote:

dh wrote:

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 05:25:50 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote:


NanK wrote:

Yes, they do! When they see you outside the tank, don't they wiggle
with anticipation of being fed???

No. That's stimulus response, *not* anticipation.


That stimulus response *is* anticipation Goobernicus.

No, ****wit, you idiot, it isn't anticipation.
Anticipation is THINKING about something BEFORE the
stimulus is present.

Not always Goo. Sometimes the stimulus stimulates it. Maybe
that's why it's called stimulus, you Goober.

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 13:16:04 -0400, Logic316 wrote:

mid-post

dh@. wrote:
Goo insists that no animals can anticipate, but that humans are
somehow projecting their emotions into the animals causing them
to behave in a way which gives the obvious appearance that they
are experiencing them themselves...most likely through voodoo or
something...it's bizarre, whatever it is.

Perhaps he's referring to "anthropomorphism". Yes, people are often
guilty of attributing human qualities and motives to things that aren't
human. Just look at the Disney channel :-P

It can go either way...people can attribute too much to animals, but they
also can be ignorant of what animals are capable of. The latter is the case
with Goo. But. Goo does insist that a fantasy about a talking pig--an extreme
case of anthropomorphism written by one of his fellow "ARAs"--somehow
refutes the fact that some farm animals benefit from farming.

The only question I have, could such a fish (one having learned to
associate the presence of humans with food) learn to distinguish between
humans and other large creatures who show up in front of it's tank who
don't feed it (like dogs or cats)?

- Logic316


Most likely they can learn to avoid things as well as anticipate
getting food from them. Amusingly, Goo can understand that animals
feel fear and anger, but can't understand that they also feel pride,
anticipation and disappointment. It's amusing, but in an almost pitiable
way.

'Fear' and 'anger' are among the most primal of emotions, present even
in most lower lifeforms. These help ensure survival by allowing the
organism to either flee danger, or fight off threats to its food and
territory. 'Anticipation' is not an emotion; it's the condition of
merely having knowledge of an upcoming event, and acting on it. As for
'pride', that's a far more complex emotion which involves feeling
pleasure from knowing that you acquired, accomplished or succeeded at
something - which you definitely won't find in a fish. The closest
instinct you can find to that in a fish is simply territoriality and
aggression. As for 'disappointment', that's also a complex mammalian
emotion involving a feeling of dissatisfaction that results when one's
expectations are not realized. Again, I doubt a fish can feel that; if
it sees and tries to obtain food or a mate and it fails to do so, they
don't have the capacity to think about their loss - they just keep
trying and keep going about the business of survival.

- Logic316

That's probably the case with fish, but some animals do experience
disappointment even if fish don't. This is another area of Goo's extreme
ignorance. Here are a couple of his classic quotes:
__________________________________________________ _______
From: Rudy Canoza
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 15:48:32 GMT

Animals do not experience pride or disappointment. Period.
[...]
No animals anticipate.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
His ignorance is so pure, that he doesn't even consider the possibility
that some animals are capable of experiencing things that other
animals are not capable of. That is very shallow "thinking", and in
many ways very primitive and animal like imo.