• Suddenly unable to log into your ZooVille account? This might be the reason why: CLICK HERE!

Are humans *really* smarter than animals?

BlueBeard said:
First, define smart. If you define smart in terms of logic-based abilities like math or language, or by technological achievements, um, maybe. What dog has built a computer or designed an internet, right? But that sort of stacks the deck.

Is intelligence truly reducible to IQ, SAT and ACT scores? That's an awfully restrictive definition -- and even for humans, the metrics of "standardized" tests are constantly under attack as unreliable, grossly biased or even just plain meaningless. I know someone who boasts an IQ of 174 but trips over her ever-untied shoelaces. Learning how to tie her shoe was too petty for a girl of her intellectual capabilities, she told me. And some people bought her spiel. Not me. And since she's basically worthless in a work environment, she's unemployed. Is she more intelligent than you? Than even your parakeet or ... goldfish?

Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences (1983) won widespread accolades from educators who, like him, saw IQ, ACTs and SATs as frustratingly poor indicators of intelligence -- which they had trouble defining. He believed there were actually many *kinds* of intelligence, most of them far more accurate in predicting an individual's successful navigation of their world than their quantified IQ.

Although the multiple intelligences theory has its share of detractors, consider this: Donald Trump is one of the most successful people living today. What's his IQ, you think? (If you measure it by linguistic acuity, holy shit... he'd be institutionalized. Take away "very" (as in "very bad person, very, very, very bad, very bad person), and you'd render him speechless, right?

Guess what else the theory of multiple intelligences does? It harkens back to the historically interrupted investigation into *animal* intelligence.

It may be likely that any stray dog on the street is more "intelligent" than you or me, a girl who can't tie her shoe -- or at least a standing U.S. president (though I don't take sides).

Here are some highlights from one 2013 report (there are others more specific, more recent or perhaps more interesting than this, but it was handy):
  • The belief that humans have superior intelligence harks back to the Agricultural Revolution some 10,000 years ago when people began producing cereals and domesticating animals. This gained momentum with the development of organised religion, which viewed human beings as the top species in creation.
  • The belief of human cognitive superiority became entrenched in human philosophy and sciences.
  • Progress during the Industrial Revolution in the 19th century distracted society for increasing awareness of other animals, just as human interest in animal rights had begun to increase (and is today returning)
  • Animals possess different abilities that are misunderstood by humans. The 'intelligences' of animals and humans are not necessarily at different levels, but are just different kinds.
  • Compare to when a foreigner tries to communicate with us using an imperfect, broken, version of our language, our impression is that they are not very intelligent. The reality is quite different.
  • Just so, animal intelligences are generally under-rated by humans who are fixated on language and technology include social and kinaesthetic intelligence. A few examples:
    • Gibbons produce a large number of varied sounds – over 20 different sounds with clearly different meanings allowing them to communicate across tropical forest canopy. That they do not build houses is irrelevant to them.
    • Many quadrupeds leave complex olfactory marks in their environment. Humans, with their limited sense of smell, are unable to gauge the complexity of messages contained in olfactory markings, which may be as rich in information as the visual world.
    • Mammals, even birds learn how to communicate to us their demands and make us do things they want.
Fun topic to read more about. Browse for something using search term phrases something like "human vs animal intellect"
Click to expand...

The definition is the important part.

Animals like horses can be thaught to count, but they certainly don't solve differential equations anytime soon.

What differentiates human intellect from the way animals view the world it the ability to think abstractly. Or so we currently think.

There was a time when people were certain that only humans were able to think about the future and plan ahead. This has been proven wrong, as it has been observed that animals can prepare for the future as well. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/smarter-you-think/202003/do-animals-plan-the-future
How cognitive their processes are isn't really known now, but it is known that they have cognitive processes going on and are certainly self-aware. http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf
So the times of René Descartes, who believed animals were just unconscious automatons, biological machines programmed to simulate responses to external stimuly, while not processing them actively, a mindset that certainly led to much cruelty and exploitation towards animals, are truely over.

We might discover in the future, that animals might be able to think abstractly on their own, currently we just lack a proof from the wild and any method of testing it.

Personally I think that the distinction between human intellect and animal intelligence might be similar to the distinction between being book smart and being street smart. I always hold the belief, that animals are intelligent enough for survival in their preferred habitat or environment. They know what plants to eat and what plants to avoid, they know how to solve some problems and get over obstacles. Humans might be book smart, but animals are certainly street smart.

Just watch the squirrels tackle this obstacle course build for them: Or watch those octopi solve other obstacle courses and puzzles build for them:

They without a doubt are intelligent, but I doubt it is really fair to compare the intellect between different species, because of the quite different anatomy they possess. Most animals must make do with smaller, less complex brains than we have and I find the things they do still remarkable, nevertheless.
 
Sadly, due to work I do not have the time to read all the responses on this topic, however I would still like to put in my thoughts.

While I often questions the intelligence of certain individuals, such as those that jump out of a perfectly good plane, or off a perfectly good bridge, or dance with snakes because they think it is God's will rather they get bit or not, I personally believe the human race as a whole are smarter than animals.

Why you ask?
There is currently no other species on earth that is able to purposely alter the environment around them on a large scale to have a specif outcome to fit their desired end result.
Now that said, the desired result may have undesired side effects. One such side effect is global warming for those that believe in it, but none the less, there was an intended effect that happened before the side effect. And not only do we alter our environment to be what we perceive as beneficial (or at least most of us want to change it to be beneficial) but we do so most often with the intent that it be beneficial not just to us and an individual, but instead beneficial for our entire species and often times other species as well.

Yes, I do think humans as a whole are smarter than any other species. No other species currently on this planet (as far aw we know) is capable of technological advancements the way humans are.
That does not mean that I do not thing one of my horses is super smart for his or her species. That does not mean I love my horses any less than I love humans (the opposite actually), however I do none the less conclude that humans in my opinion, are smarter than animals (as a whole).
 
Human species is incredibly intelligent yes however i think they are just as intelligent.
It is just displayed in different ways.
If you are someone who has ever spent lots time in the wilderness that is clearly evident. in are environment sure we seem far superior to all however once you step into thiers its complete opposite.
 
Roxxi said:
I just had to bathe one of my dogs....cause he apparently thought it intelligent to roll in another animals shit.... :gsd_ohmy:
Click to expand...
That's just the thing, animals sometimes do incredibly unpleasant things we, as humans, would condemn. But that is an entirely human-centric point of view. Animals don't share those specific viewpoints and therefore sometimes do things we find incredibly stupid or disgusting, nevertheless an animal might have a reason for behaving in a certain way. One important aspect of human intelligence when interacting with (and studying) animals is, to ignore a human-centric worldview for a while and to explore, why an animal behaves in certain ways. The rolling in poop thing happens with many animals and usually is supposed to mask their own scent, so it's something that usually predators tend to do, mostly. It might not be pleasant but for animals (especially in the wild) it serves a purpose. It's unclear however how much an animal knows about the purpose of the thing they do, when they do it. We, as humans, learned to question our own behaviour and to analyze it. Animals would do that rately, I guess. They never had a need to do that, therefore they probably wouldn't think about it, if the learned (or instinctual) behaviour would lead to success or just to a large inconvenience.

Long story short: Yeah, one of your dogs did something "stupid" (from a human perspective), but that doesn't mean, that he (or she) is stupid. ;)
 
Last edited:
In answer to OP's headline question, the two can't be compared.
Here's why: The intelligence levels are RELATIVE. Animals in the wild are smarter than humans in a RELATIVE sense.
Animals in the wild who are not smart, die. Humans who are not smart are walking around and surviving just fine.
Does that say anything about animal intelligence relative to human intelligence? I think it does.
 
The fact that you even have to ask I'm going to say no, in regards to you personally.

The rest of us, Yes, by far.
 
Kristy said:
No self-loathing here, I assure you, but I understand what you mean.
Click to expand...
I wasn't necessarily talking about you, but a bit more general about all the people I have met so far, who were totally hating on their own kind. It's something that always baffles me.
 
BlueBeard said:
Absolutely. IQ tests and tests of academic ability are not the same. But that's a topic for a different thread. If I need to reword something I will. I did not intend it as a distraction from the primary topic at hand. Apologies if it was.
Click to expand...
This is a bit unrelated to the discussion at hand, and I do agree that this would be better for another thread... but with that being said....

IQ tests are very unreliable. Many external variables can cause flawed results. One of the more interesting studies done was conditioning the test takers before the test even started. The instructor quoted something in the lines of "On average, women tend to score higher on these tests than men do." When everything was said and done, the men scored generally lower than the men observed in the control group, while the women sorced generally higher than the women observed in the control group. <This information might not be 100% accurate because the genders might have been flipped.> Also... mood, hunger, wakefulness, and several other factors will effect the outcome of the IQ score.

I could be happy, confident, awake/well rested, and feeling like I'm going to do well and score ~114 on it one day. Then several months later I take another IQ test, but this time around I'm very tired, sad, feeling a bit depressed, and dreading taking the test in the first place, and only score ~94. That doesn't mean that in those few months I lost intelligence. It simply demonstrates the overall unreliability of these tests in general. It good for a rough estimate and not much else.

No one asked but in the 11th grade I took an IQ test and at the time my overall score was 102, cheers to being average. My lowest scoring catagory was mathematics, while my highest scoring catagory being logic/reasoning. But a lot has changed in my life since high school. xP
 
FloofyNewfie said:
This is a bit unrelated to the discussion at hand, and I do agree that this would be better for another thread... but with that being said....

IQ tests are very unreliable. Many external variables can cause flawed results. One of the more interesting studies done was conditioning the test takers before the test even started. The instructor quoted something in the lines of "On average, women tend to score higher on these tests than men do." When everything was said and done, the men scored generally lower than the men observed in the control group, while the women sorced generally higher than the women observed in the control group. <This information might not be 100% accurate because the genders might have been flipped.> Also... mood, hunger, wakefulness, and several other factors will effect the outcome of the IQ score.

I could be happy, confident, awake/well rested, and feeling like I'm going to do well and score ~114 on it one day. Then several months later I take another IQ test, but this time around I'm very tired, sad, feeling a bit depressed, and dreading taking the test in the first place, and only score ~94. That doesn't mean that in those few months I lost intelligence. It simply demonstrates the overall unreliability of these tests in general. It good for a rough estimate and not much else.

No one asked but in the 11th grade I took an IQ test and at the time my overall score was 102, cheers to being average. My lowest scoring catagory was mathematics, while my highest scoring catagory being logic/reasoning. But a lot has changed in my life since high school. xP
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's usually more of a glorified skill test. It says something about how well you can perform certain tasks (in a limited time frame), but little about overall cleverness.

EDIT: added the "(in a limited time frame)" to the sentence, as this is a crucial part of most tests.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, I think animals are smarter than humans in some ways. They're able to sense so many things humans can't its crazy
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20220131_000705~2.jpg
    IMG_20220131_000705~2.jpg
    29.9 KB · Views: 2
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top