Raven About Intelligence

[vgnwtch]

Clever raven proves that it's no birdbrain

Logic and puzzle-solving come naturally to highly intelligent scavenger, claim biologists

by Robin McKie, science editor
Sunday April 29, 2007
The Observer

Scientists have revealed an

Comments

[willfishguy]

I find this all rather stupid and useless considering the raven has been venerated for thousands of years for it's profound intelligence by practically every single mystic faith system (except those derived from middle eastern origins) the world has ever had. Plus it's use to describe intelligence in hundreds of age old fables, children stories, poems and hunters lore. In short, the raven has always been associated with the human mind. So I don't know why these scientists are surprised in their findings.

I'm willing to bet the money spent on this research could have been better spent feeding starving children. Seriously, if these idiots really wanted to know how intelligent the raven is, all they had to do was read Aesop and for a cost of about $10.

The magpies in this city bark like dogs while harassing cats. I remember watching a crow pick up large potato chip bag and shaking it upside down to empty out the crumbs. I consider that bird more intelligent then the moron that threw the chip bag on the ground after they were finished with it.

[vgnwtch]

I find it exceptionally useful.

On the one hand, it is true that priorities are deeply skewed away from the practical and compassionate - there are so many examples of how our systems of thinking and being in the world are screwed up that we could spend forever listing them.

On the other hand, studies like this are dismantling that system of thought from the inside. Publishing these studies, and making them available to the public allows people like us to say, "Yep. This is what mainstream science says." Opponents may argue with mythology and tradition, with folklore, with the evidence of their very own eyes and ears - but when people who feel that they are rational and "modern" in their attitudes are faced with peer reviewed studies by respected mainstream scientists published in respected journals, and when those studies mount and mount and mount, they face either making fools of themselves by claiming to know better, or they are forced to admit that the world is not divided into Us and Them, Smart Humans and Dumb Animals, the Valuable and the Disposable.

I am also a fan of empirical evidence, though not keen to fetishise it. I adore mythology and folklore, and keep it close to my heart; I do know, though, that there are layers and kinds of truth, and that empirical evidence is a very useful thing.

I'm entirely with you on the littering - it's a habit I utterly despise, and is indicative, I believe, of a general lack of pride in the self and connection with the wider community and environment.

[willfishguy]

Call me dull, but I only understand the last sentence.

[savagefreedom]

You're a minority bud, the problem being that most people are so conditioned by human elitism to "see not" and "hear not" in terms of century or even millennia-old observable intelligent behavior in other animals. I agree that the study did not reveal anything that isn't already observable, but a lot of people do not see it until it's pointed out to them. Note that, as you use the words "mystic" and "fable," to point out the age-old existence of this knowledge, you are also adding to a general pool of undue ignorance, because many people do not believe in mysticism or fables, especially any mysticism or fables outside of their own faith system if they have one. After all, as children we're read Aesop's fables under the condition that we understand what a fable is and how it differs from "real life." Even if it's true-to-life, we are most often prone to disbelief when the appearance of fable-like qualities or the term itself is used.

[willfishguy]

Aesop's wisdom is for children of all ages.