pavlovscat on 17/9/2006 at 15:29
Quote Posted by Shevers
Can I be in with the cool kru then and call myself GlasgowTaffer? :erm:
Only if you promise to take a short trip west to Islay & send me some of that wonderful single malt y'all make over there. :)
Shug on 17/9/2006 at 15:50
Shug is to my real name as Bob is to Robert
EXCITING
ilweran on 17/9/2006 at 20:08
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
In theory, conditional training should work for any involuntary response evoked in animals. Since cats don't typically drool (except for our cat Herman who is now 20 yrs old - I figure if he's lived this long he can pretty much do what he wants, right? ;) ), there isn't an obvious universal response; every cat seems to be different. However, cats do associate some sounds with food, eg: can opener, rustling food bags, shaking a treat container. They don't drool, but they do react predictably with various meows and body postures. Of our 9 cats, some are more interested in food noises than others. Some cats don't seem interested in anything except a sunny sleeping spot. :cool:
I believe that, since most cats are solitary and not pack animals, evolutionarily (is that a word?) they have had to develop their own hunting techniques while dogs relied more on the shared behaviors learned from their pack members. This makes cats more independent thinkers and their actions less predictable.
I think the whole ringing a bell thing doesn't work with cats, but they can recognise the sound of a tin being opened from a fair distance. My first cat could pick out an unopened tin of cat food from a random mixture of cat food and tinned fruit, so some cats can recognise the look of their normal brand. She was smart though, and ruled the house for 18yrs- I knew my place :rolleyes:
I watched a programme about animal intelligence that involved animals playing a simple video game where they had to move a dot into a coloured area. Pigs were great at it, dogs needed constant encouragement and cats weren't interested.
LesserFollies on 17/9/2006 at 20:13
My nick is Thief-derived and admittedly quite stupid. I'd change it but I fear I'm stuck with it now. :\
NamelessPlayer on 17/9/2006 at 20:54
I came up with mine simply because I find myself bad at coming up with names.
Then the idea struck: "If you can't come up with a good name, why not go nameless?"
Since then, my Internet handle is usually what you see here, perhaps with a different second word if it's taken already.
Jonesy on 17/9/2006 at 21:27
Quote Posted by NamelessPlayer
Since then, my Internet handle is usually what you see here, perhaps with a different second word if it's taken already.
I always get you mixed up with Namelessvoice.
I DEMAND THAT YOU BOTH FIGHT WITH PISTOLS AT DAWN TO RECTIFY THIS SIMILARITY
pavlovscat on 17/9/2006 at 23:34
Quote Posted by ilweran
cats weren't interested.
That solves it! Cats are definitely smarter. Thanks! LOL
Sneaky Acolyte on 18/9/2006 at 02:41
Quote Posted by LesserFollies
My nick is Thief-derived and admittedly quite stupid. I'd change it but I fear I'm stuck with it now. :\
It's not stupid, Lessar! And don't you even think about changing it!! :mad: :D
Mine came from a line spoken by the ghost in one of the Thief missions. God, it's been so long I can hardly remember. The line was something to the effect of "Hast thou gotten the rosary beads yet, sneaky acolyte?"
At the time, I was foolin' around with DromEd and had to post a question about it. I was trying to come up with a username that was relevant to Thief, and was listening to some of the audio in the game. I randomly clicked on that line and heard the phrase "sneaky acolyte." I knew from then on I'd be known as sneaky acolyte on these (and some other) forums.
Also, I never released any fan missions. :erg:
Agent Monkeysee on 18/9/2006 at 16:10
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
I believe that, since most cats are solitary and not pack animals, evolutionarily (is that a word?) they have had to develop their own hunting techniques while dogs relied more on the shared behaviors learned from their pack members. This makes cats more independent thinkers and their actions less predictable. Whether or not they are smarter, I don't know. I like to think so.
Actually it's almost certainly the opposite. Intelligence studies, especially across species, are frought with uncertainty, loaded terms, and a lack of clear criteria but there is ample evidence to suggest that the more social an animal is the more, I dunno about
intelligent per se, but the more akin to
human intelligence the animal will exhibit.
This is because social interaction requires a complex internal notion of "self" and "other" and, depending on the complexity of the social environment "other" may include hierarchical power structures, gender roles, cooperative and competitional interactions, deception, altruism, and labor division. An animal that must navigate this sort of environment needs to have a fairly clear notion of identity as well as a theory of external individuals as unique personalities in order to accurately evaluate and anticipate the behavior of its animal peers.
Solitary animals really don't need this level of mental sophistication. A lone hunter can get by with a fairly simple categorization of "internal" and "external" stimuli and the occasional brush with its own species can be fairly easily mediated by basic sensory signals such as scent. A tiger doesn't really need a mental model of tiger behavior, identity, or personality in order to maintain its territory and boink the occasional female. A wolf, however, does if it doesn't want to get on the bad side of the pack Alpha.
Obviously this doesn't imply cats are automatons and dogs are unique snowflakes, but the lack of socialization in most cats suggests that whatever their intelligence it most likely isn't directed to the sorts of things that
we as social animals would consider high cognition, whereas dogs brains probably are wired "like people" to a degree; at least to a greater degree than cats.
Are cats smarter than dogs? To some degree that's a poorly defined question. Cats brains are built for a different set of behaviors than dogs. They have to think differently, they have to be efficient at different things. Is a cactus a better plant than an oak? They're built for different needs, the question doesn't really make any sense. But given that we typically use
ourselves as the measuring stick for what intelligence actually is then by that definition it's likely that dogs are smarter than cats.
Does it matter? Not really. A cat is a cat and a dog is a dog. One is never going to act like the other and I've never really understood the dick-measuring between "cat people" and "dog people". Though I do find it amusing and somewhat puzzling that cat people typically attribute aloofness, indifference, and self-sufficiency to "higher intelligence". A person that acted like a cat would not be seen as particularly intelligent, though they would probably be seen as a sociopath. For the record I like cats better than dogs.
pavlovscat on 18/9/2006 at 22:38
Quote Posted by Agent Monkeysee
Does it matter? Not really. A cat is a cat and a dog is a dog. One is never going to act like the other and I've never really understood the dick-measuring between "cat people" and "dog people". Though I do find it amusing and somewhat puzzling that cat people typically attribute aloofness, indifference, and self-sufficiency to "higher intelligence". A person that acted like a cat would not be seen as particularly intelligent, though they would probably be seen as a sociopath. For the record I like cats better than dogs
True, the question is an apples/oranges debate. I grew up with lots of both animals and have a healthy respect for the benefits of associating with either species. I think that people are frequently drawn to things either like themselves or possessing qualities they admire.
I like dogs a lot, but I am a cat person. I do think that self-sufficiency is admirable. I prefer to think of cats' aloofness as more akin to selectivity or just being more reserved with strangers than others, as opposed to a dog's unflagging displays of selfless devotion. I have never been accused of being a sociopath, but I do like my "ME" time. I have also seen cats be just as affectionate as a dog with familiar people and cats. Intelligent? More than some, less than others. So I think that I do tend to see animals the most like me as the most intelligent. I wonder if this is true of other people.
