Chimp's stone throwing at zoo visitors was 'premeditated'
March 9, 2009
Researchers have found what they say is some of the first unambiguous evidence that an animal other than humans can make spontaneous plans for future events. The report in the March 9th issue of Current Biology, a Cell Press publication, highlights a decade of observations in a zoo of a male chimpanzee calmly collecting stones and fashioning concrete discs that he would later use to hurl at zoo visitors.
"These observations convincingly show that our fellow apes do consider the future in a very complex way," said Mathias Osvath of Lund University. "It implies that they have a highly developed consciousness, including life-like mental simulations of potential events. They most probably have an 'inner world' like we have when reviewing past episodes of our lives or thinking of days to come. When wild chimps collect stones or go out to war, they probably plan this in advance. I would guess that they plan much of their everyday behavior."
While researchers have observed many ape behaviors that could involve planning both in the wild and in captivity, it generally hasn't been possible to judge whether they were really meeting a current or future need, he added. For instance, when a chimp breaks a twig for termite fishing or collects a stone for nut cracking, it can always be argued that they are motivated by immediate rather than future circumstances.
And that's what makes the newly described case so special, Osvath said. It is clear that the chimp's planning behavior is not based on a "current drive state." In contrast to the chimp's extreme agitation when throwing the stones, he was always calm when collecting or manufacturing his ammunition.
Osvath said he thinks wild chimps in general, as well as other animals, probably have the planning ability demonstrated by the individual described in the study. Indeed, experiments conducted recently with other captive chimpanzees have shown they are capable of making such plans. (Some have argued, however, that those findings could be the result of experimental artifacts.)
"I think that wild chimpanzees might be even better at planning as they probably rely on it for their daily survival," Osvath said. "The environment in a zoo is far less complex than in a forest. Zoo chimps never have to encounter the dangers in the forest or live through periods of scarce food. Planning would prove its value in 'real life' much more than in a zoo."
Source: Cell Press
Jun 18, 2008 |
not rated yet |
0
Right, like monkeys have a soul. Psshh.
You have a dancing Jesus in your backyard? Cool. Upload a video to YouTube.
Seriously though, the research is not implying or trying to imply anything about any religious aspect. It is about the way we internally represent the world and ourselves in the world. We do not represent the world in a 1-for-1 manner (ala Nyquist), but instead use a reduced, highly efficient representation (see qualia for related discussion). One of the most puzzling aspects of the internal representation is how we represent ourselves and this research is a step in the right direction.
Bonkers, are you still sore over the homeopath thing? Maybe you need to drink some remembery water. http://www.physor...047.html
I'm sorry you think I'm a cretin. Ironic, really, since the etymology of the word suggests it likely comes from "Christian". Maybe you're the cretin?
Of course you have massive evidence that humans have this so far undetected and completely hypothetical soul. Have just been keeping it a secret?
Why did you even use the word soul? Its not even implied in the article.
Ethelred
Do humans have a soul? does the "soul" exist?
Subtle had nothing to do with it.
http://www.godandscience.org/
http://www.av1611...kjv.html
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/
http://www.godhatesfags.com/
http://www.landov...ist.org/
http://objectivem.../zounds/]http://objectivem.../zounds/[/url]
http://objectivem.../zounds/]http://objectivem.../zounds/[/url]
At least one of the above is a fake religious site. Attempts to parody fanaticism is doomed to failure at least when you only have used one paragraph.
Next time you might keep that in mind. Write a LOT more or passover it.
Ethelred