@CountDorio said in #20:
> @ShaanS1
>
> I think that's a very eloquent point in #18 if we're talking about joining the High School football team or uplifting people in a struggling community etc.
>
> @DuMussDieUhrDruecken isn't being symbolic here about 'chimps' or anything else. He's talking about REAL chimps and REAL animals. They don't 'speak' math!
>
> I'm sorry I guess if that upsets you but this is just how the world was created at least thus far.
Your interpretation of the quote seems to have missed its central idea.
The quote's meaning is direct and relevant to your argument, which appears to focus on a limited measure of ability, overlooking other forms of capability.
@ShaanS1
I don't think the meaning of that quote is to say that a 'literal' fish can do math.
I'm not sure why this is hard for you to understand but you are a superior being than the fish! You are sentient in a way the fish is not! It's strange to me that this is somehow disagreeable to you. For example, you're debating me as opposed to me debating the fish...the reason seems obvious.
@CountDorio said in #22:
> @ShaanS1
>
> I don't think the meaning of that quote is to say that a 'literal' fish can do math.
>
> I'm not sure why this is hard for you to understand but you are a superior being than the fish! You are sentient in a way the fish is not! It's strange to me that this is somehow disagreeable to you. For example, you're debating me as opposed to me debating the fish...the reason seems obvious.
I never said a literal fish can do math. I'm using the quote exactly as intended: to challenge the idea that your 'calculus test' is the only valid measure of intelligence.
I am debating you, not a fish, because humans possess a specific type of intelligence that allows abstract communication. That doesn't make it the only type that exists.
You continue to operate from a single, narrow definition of 'superiority,' which is exactly the bias that quote highlights.
@CountDorio said in #19:
> @DuMussDieUhrDruecken
>
> Chimps CANNOT learn our language as 'our' language isn't really German or English....our universal language is 'math!'
>
> I don't know why you downvote math.
I could be wrong, but in my opinion music is our universal language. You could show someone from an entirely different part of the world some music, and they would understand the emotion and depth underlying the notes. Music is what makes us human, the ability to feel and think and cry and laugh. Animals such as birds and crickets also make music, but do not truly understand it; however we should not look down on them for this. Surely, there exist people who are more intellectually gifted than you, yet do they (or should they) look down on you? Also, just because they are not as advanced as humans does not mean they are not intelligent. There was once a study conducted with crows, if my memory serves me correct, where they learned to use tools in order to collect food.
@ShaanS1 said in #23:
> I am debating you, not a fish, because humans possess a specific type of intelligence that allows abstract communication.
It seems we both agree on this point.
Now, I certainly agree with Nagel in his masterpiece, "What is it Like to be a Bat?" I don't know what it's like to be a bat or a fish, so I guess there may be a whole world of 'wonder' that I don't know about.
I maintain "mathematics" is the real universal language for intelligent life. All this talk of math and fish has made me hungry for some Salmon, so I'm going to go eat some fish!! ....and I don't mean that metaphorically.
@CountDorio said in #25:
> > I am debating you, not a fish, because humans possess a specific type of intelligence that allows abstract communication.
>
> It seems we both agree on this point.
>
> Now, I certainly agree with Nagel in his masterpiece, "What is it Like to be a Bat?" I don't know what it's like to be a bat or a fish, so I guess there may be a whole world of 'wonder' that I don't know about.
>
> I maintain "mathematics" is the real universal language for intelligent life. All this talk of math and fish has made me hungry for some Salmon, so I'm going to go eat some fish!! ....and I don't mean that metaphorically.
I don't know who Nagel is, but I know a goalpost shift when I see one. You've avoided the core premise of my quote in three separate messages.
You continue to define 'intelligent life' solely by human metrics like mathematics. That is the exact bias I am calling out.
You can deflect all you want, but my point stands for everyone reading this: defining intelligence only by our human 'tree-climbing test' is narrow-minded.
again:
maths rest on *d e l i b e r a t e* axioms of logic
[ logic being even more basic than maths, is btw implied in that ]
if anything, then the *laws of nature* ( as far as we know them ) can be seen \ taken \ put to discussion as "first unalterable principles" ( of everything, the universe ), but not even *that* is granted as for example in big bang theory, laws of nature only start to exist with the universe "unfolding", but also any basic values we might postulethwaite might not "match" and be as relevant as we ( by nature of being living things: biased humans ) think.
so, ...face it!
Humans are animals, but we’ve spent so much time pretending we’re not that we’ve become a whole new type of life form
@ShaanS1
I'm not avoiding your central point and I'm not saying that animals don't have their own unique perspective that is unknowable to us, ie the philosopher, Nagel. The so called 'bias' that you think is a bias ISN'T! It's simply comprehending technological advancement. It would be racist if it were judging the Xavante tribe, for example, as inferior to let's say the German as the German drives Mercedes while the Xavante eats monkey brains. The Xavante have every capable ability as the Germans to create and add to technology....they are both human. Animals, at least thus far discovered animals, simply ARE inferior as they DO NOT have the kind of sentience we have which is, at least for this universe, by definition superior.
@DuMussDieUhrDruecken
I don't know why you're obsessed with axioms and so forth. The phrase 'Mathematical Concepts' takes into account what we're both talking about and the way I'm using it is very much standard. Humans have math...maybe someday we'll discover another lifeform that makes technological advancements....that will be interesting as we'll find something 'equal' to us in the sense that both of us speak 'mathematical concepts.'
#24
"music is our universal language"
* Makes sense. Birds, Whales, dolphins... practice it.