[ SECRET POST #2694 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2694 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[General Hospital]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Homestuck, The Other Woman, Pacific Rim, Naruto, X-Men]


__________________________________________________



04.
[The Ear, the Eye and the Arm]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Warehouse 13]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Alton Brown and Anthony Bourdain]


__________________________________________________



07.
[YU-NO: A Girl Who Chants Love at the Bound of This World]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Star Trek: The Next Generation]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Magic: the Gathering]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Smallville]













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 046 secrets from Secret Submission Post #385.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think any scientist would agree with you that being compliant is a measure of intelligence. In fact, I'm not sure how you got to that point. Even with a treat as a reward doesn't mean any animal, whether dog or cat or whatever, is going to feel like performing. You're ignoring a cat's natural biology. When cats hunt, they don't pursue prey like dogs. They aren't physically high stamina. They stalk and surprise, or ambush, prey. If the prey runs, they might chase a little, but won't dedicate much energy to it. They'd sooner conserve energy and wait for something else - this is true for most cats of all sizes. They are solitary, after all, with the exception of lions. Cats are the same way with treat rewards. If they have to exert too much energy to get the treat, and aren't having fun with the "game", they simply won't perform.

Cats also don't view humans as a superior, like dogs, therefore aren't compelled to obey like dogs are. They certainly like human attention, for the most part, and treats, and playing "games", but since it is on their terms entirely, if they lose motivation they won't cooperate.

This has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence.

I made a mistake up there, I accidentally wrote neurotransmitter when I meant neuron. Anyway, cats have twice as many neurons as dogs in their cerebral cortexes. This is actually what accounts for ability to process information, which means cats essentially do that better than dogs. Dogs do have bigger brains (which may, or may not, actually mean anything) and dogs have also "evolved" through breeding to become "smarter" while cats haven't (scare quotes there on purpose), but dogs still have half the neurons that cats do.

Dogs also, in general, have been bred to become so reliant on their owners that they couldn't take care of themselves independently, unlike cats. Which can also be considered one factor of the very, very complex concept of intelligence. Dogs can problem solve on human terms, but can't problem solve in the wild.

Here is an excellent essay on cat (with comparison to dog) intelligence: http://messybeast.com/intelligence.htm

The point is, cats and dogs are wired differently. Dogs are social animals, like humans, and it's easy to recognize their intelligence with bias while failing to recognize cat intelligence, or why equal tests between cats and dogs don't work. Furthermore, cats have less motivation than dogs to please humans and receive treats.

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

[ill_omened]

You've misunderstood me.

I specifically mentioned that compliance isn't a measure of intelligence per se. That's why I used the example of the octopus, they are as 'unsocial' and 'uncompliant' as cats - indeed significantly more so, but they pass most measures of intelligence very well because we take that into account. But you're projecting heavily here, which ironically is what you're criticising me for. Cats don't have any opinion on inferiority or superiority simply because they're not wired to even understand such a concept, the truth is much simpler. Cats can't understand the casual link between instructions and rewards in the same way a dog can.

They are incapable of complex problem solving. Which is understandable, they're not designed for it - but it is very much what we define as intelligence.

You seem to be confusing that here, ability and intelligence are not directly linked. There are for example any number of tasks that a computer or robot can carry out far better than I, but that does not mean that I'm not more intelligent then it is. Which is common, most solitary predators are very stupid in comparison to pack animals, with a couple of effective behaviours for a number of complex evolutionary factors.

Re: Controversial opinions: Animal edition

[(Anonymous)]

I think you are grossly misunderstanding the scope of intelligence tests, as well as approaching this with a clear bias. (for the record, I don't have cats or dogs, I am a small rodent person)

I am not projecting by referring to social dynamics of dogs vs social dynamics of cats. In fact, I'm curious as to why you are ignoring the biological imperative dogs have to please owners (and therefore, generally be compliant with testing). Instead, you're equating that to intelligence, which is pretty ridiculous. Cats do not have pack dynamics in their brains, and certainly no recognition of an "alpha" as dogs do. They are solitary.

Yet these tests - and animal intelligence experts generally concur - are often biased to manipulating behaviors that come more natural to dogs than to cats. This does NOT mean cats are incapable of solving complex problems. If you check the link I posted, you'll see referred to various complex problems, including learning how to work together with a fellow cat while in a cage to get a treat that would be otherwise impossible. The fact that you think cats are incapable of "complex problem solving" (at least how it is defined in terms of all animal testing, including dogs) makes me think you simply don't have any idea what kinds of tests have been performed with cats.

I've refuted your (wrong) point that cooperation correlates with intelligence. It does not. Cats have lower motivation for food rewards and for pleasing humans than dogs. This directly relates to their style of hunting in the wild, for both animals.

And I've already explained that cats have a higher ability for information processing (a factor of intelligence) than dogs do.

I am not saying cats are smarter than dogs. I am saying that they cannot be compared, and both are "smart" in ways appropriate to their species. It's one thing to say dogs are better at a certain type of test. But dogs are not "smarter" than cats.