Are animals self-aware?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I call shenanigan. Of all the retrievers I know, they have been highly intelligent based on any criteria. I don't think that just because they follow commands and are easier to train, they suddenly aren't intelligent. Isn't the ability to learn a trait on intelligence?

It's really a very subjective thing, isn't it? (Since when was Wikipedia ever regarded as a highly reliable source for well researched information?). Of all the GR's I have known, they have all exhibitted responses to stimulae which I would classify as less than highly intelligent. GR's are unwitting sycophant's who generally think of NOTHING but what you want them to.

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

If Golden retrievers were not intelligent, then they would not make very good guide dogs; a position where they must evaluate the circumstances or risk walking their owner into traffic.

This may be construed as true, based on your assessment of situational responses as one which requires great cognition. Is this necessarily the case for dogs (and other animals)? In the case of "evaluating circumstances", perhaps seeing eye dogs are not depended upon so much for their decision making and problem solving abilities, as they are for their uncanny instinctive mechanisms which can detect unforseen dangers. There are dogs who can detect seizures and tumours, often without ANY training (I have had personal experience with such a case); are they to be classified as higher in intelligence as a result?
In the end, I must admit that my opinion stems in part from a bias against Golden Retrievers. I am a dog owner and enthusiast; I am married to a professional dog trainer; I have had experience with dog handling, training, and some performance, and I have found very few endearing qualities among the several GRs that I have known and worked with. I will never own one.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I call shenanigan. Of all the retrievers I know, they have been highly intelligent based on any criteria. I don't think that just because they follow commands and are easier to train, they suddenly aren't intelligent. Isn't the ability to learn a trait on intelligence?

If Golden retrievers were not intelligent, then they would not make very good guide dogs; a position where they must evaluate the circumstances or risk walking their owner into traffic.

Note that I didn't say retrievers weren't intelligent, simply that trainability doesn't necessarily equate with intelligence, and thus the list that you posted needs to be taken in context. Trainability is a kind of intelligence, but using it as the complete be-all-and-end-all of canine intelligence is completely erroneous.

Everyone likes to believe that their breed is intelligent. I'm no different--yesterday I phoned my wife at work to tell her how our puppy, who can only carry a tennis ball for a moment because it's a little too big for his mouth, intentionally dropped the tennis ball in a shoe and proceeded to carry around the shoe. He knows he's not supposed to chew on the shoe, so he was being disobedient. At the same time, he was displaying impressive (at least to me) problem solving for figuring out a way of carrying the tennis ball without having to open his mouth wide.

I've heard 'intelligent' used to describe extremely docile, well-behaved dogs, and I've heard it used to describe fiercely independent dogs, too. Personally, I think it's pointless to debate one breed against another; you can weigh traits, but differentiating between obedience and comprehension is extremely difficult. I know hound-dog owners who have said that their dog understands commands, but chooses not to obey. It's like trying to evaluate the intelligence of a person who refuses to participate in any sort of testing. Maybe they're a moron. Maybe they're a genius. How can you tell?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by octothorp

...It's like trying to evaluate the intelligence of a person who refuses to participate in any sort of testing. Maybe they're a moron. Maybe they're a genius. How can you tell?

Beautiful!

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

In the case of "evaluating circumstances", perhaps seeing eye dogs are not depended upon so much for their decision making and problem solving abilities, as they are for their uncanny instinctive mechanisms which can detect unforseen dangers. There are dogs who can detect seizures and tumours, often without ANY training (I have had personal experience with such a case); are they to be classified as higher in intelligence as a result?

Guide dogs go through long training. I doubt the CNIB would trust to "uncanny instinctive mechanisms" when it comes to crossing the road, or any of ther other myriad number of tasks asked of a guide dog.

The seizure detection is an intriguing trait, but the breeds you view as 'intelligent', can they be trained for that purpose? I'm guessing not. I guess I would view animal intelligence as the ability to learn, and then apply that learning. Sure, a retriever may appear single-minded when given a command, but will he override that command if it violates some other tenant of his learning? If he has been taught not to go on the road, but you throw his ball over the road, what will he do? Or if he has been taught to heel, and yet you are about to walk in front of a passing car, what will he do? These circumstances require an intelligence to handle, and I believe Golden's are better suited to evaluate these than many other breeds.

I'm actually surprised CowPerson hasn't waded into the discussion of Goldens.

[octothorp]

Just as a further note on the list: breed #72 out of 79, the Beagle, is quoted (on Wikipedia) as being intelligent, but stubborn and hard to train. #75, the Borzoi: intelligent. #78, the Basenji: highly intelligent and learn quickly.

The thing that all of these dogs (and most of the others at the bottom of the list) share is a strong independent streak. The writer who compiled the list obviously as a certain view of canine intelligence that is predisposed toward eager, loyal dogs and against independent ones.

[JiriHrdina]

Can someone explain to me precisely what constitutes Self Awareness (it maybe in this thread already and I missed it). I'm not sure I understand what we are exactly talking about.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Can someone explain to me precisely what constitutes Self Awareness (it maybe in this thread already and I missed it). I'm not sure I understand what we are exactly talking about.

I don't think anybody is really 'sure'. Philosophers and a few hundred more years of debate should pretty much get the discussion under way.

[Reaper]

The real question we should be asking is whether or not Skynet is self aware?

[TheyCallMeBruce]

I think our pets will one day become self aware, form a government and kill us. My chinchilla seems to be up to no good these days.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Can someone explain to me precisely what constitutes Self Awareness (it maybe in this thread already and I missed it). I'm not sure I understand what we are exactly talking about.

That's a very good question. There are really hundreds of definitions, and most of them are valid on some level. The original question of whether animals are self aware really depends on how you define self-awareness. Does it have any relation to either emotion or intelligence? I'm not sure that it does.
Personally, I think the the question of self-awareness is more a question of empathy; establishing that those around us have essentially the same interior perspective that we do, and thus that we, from an external perspective, are more or less the same as them.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Can someone explain to me precisely what constitutes Self Awareness (it maybe in this thread already and I missed it). I'm not sure I understand what we are exactly talking about.

Great question. And lots of good comments on here on what it means to them.

The answer is,

Cogito, ergo sum.

You can spend a lifetime contemplating it if you'd like. You'll never get it right. Descartes probably didn't either. Such is the human condition.

More reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogito_ergo_sum

[HelloHockeyFans]

Originally Posted by Reaper

The real question we should be asking is whether or not Skynet is self aware?

LOL That made me laugh out loud!!

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by HelloHockeyFans

LOL That made me laugh out loud!!

Finally, someone got the joke. I was starting to think I was the only person the boards who had seen The Terminator.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Finally, someone got the joke. I was starting to think I was the only person the boards who had seen The Terminator.

I got it, I just couldn't figure out how to work a Predator reference in.

Just think - if Jesse Ventura has hung around, he and Arnold could have reminisced about Predator at the State governor meetings. Somehow picturing that seems to sum up American politics for me.