Dogs As Intelligent As Average Two-Year-Old Children 472
Ponca City, We love you writes "The Telegraph reports that researchers using tests originally designed to demonstrate the development of language, pre-language and basic arithmetic in human children have found that dogs are capable of understanding up to 250 words and gestures, can count up to five and can perform simple mathematical calculations putting them on par with the average two-year-old child. While most dogs understand simple commands such as sit, fetch and stay, a border collie tested by Professor Coren showed a knowledge of 200 spoken words. 'Obviously we are not going to be able to sit down and have a conversation with a dog, but like a two-year-old, they show that they can understand words and gestures,' says Professor Stanley Coren, a leading expert on canine intelligence at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. Dogs can tell that one plus one should equal two and not one or three,' says Coren, adding that dogs 'can also deliberately deceive, which is something that young children only start developing later in their life.' Coren believes centuries of selective breeding and living alongside humans has helped to hone the intelligence of dogs. 'They may not be Einsteins, but are sure closer to humans than we thought.'"
Wolves (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Wolves (Score:5, Interesting)
That's an interesting idea.
And then - different breeds have different levels of potential too. Having been in contact with different breeds I have realized that there are those that are almost dumb as a brick while others are smart enough to figure out exactly when to sneak out and sneak back without being noticed and also realize when their master has confused right and left when they are given a command.
Re:Wolves (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of people think certain breeds are dumb because they misunderstand the instincts of the breed and/or confuse trainability and responsiveness with intelligence. Breeds commonly called dumb, like many of the hounds, were bred to work independently of humans. Whereas a retriever or herding dog needed to expect and act on cues from humans, a sight or scent hound would need to track based on his own instincts. A bloodhound who was constantly asking for direction would be a very poor scenthound and would not be used as breeding stock--just like an Australian Shepherd who ran without checking in would be a failure as a herding dog.
It's important for people to research and understand the instincts in their particular dog, including mixed breeds, before bringing a pet into their home.
Signed, Anonymous and Lazy--rather than cowardly.
Re:Wolves (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Wolves (Score:4, Funny)
Black labs I am convinced where bread to be the stupidest animal possible. Not because they are black, but because they where bread to jump in to freezing water, retrieve a duck, and like it. Any animal that will wag its tail after that and want to do it again is fairly dumb.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
One of my dogs is half Belgian Malinois Shepard (a popular K9 unit breed) and half Black Lab. She's quite literally half brilliant, half moron. She's fairly intelligent, understands lots of commands and is generally a well behaved dog... until you show her a tennis ball, frisbee, or a stick. Then the slobbering moron lab takes over and her world quite literally narrows to "must chase ball." It's pretty funny... but my next big dog is going to be ALL Belgian Shepard if I can help it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Wolves (Score:4, Funny)
I crinched when I read that. Oooh that must hurt.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
She's quite literally half brilliant, half moron. She's fairly intelligent, understands lots of commands and is generally a well behaved dog... until you show her a tennis ball, frisbee, or a stick.
Dude... see the most intelligent guy you know talking about quantum physics as it pertains to the transdimensional interpretation of possible parallel universes. Then see a hot chick in a very short skirt walk past him... it will look damn similar to your dog's reaction at this point.
We all bow to our base biological imperatives.
Re:Wolves (Score:5, Informative)
According to TFA, wolves score lower than domestic dogs on the intelligence tests used. I suspect this may be an artifact of the test, since wolves are pretty damned smart in their wild behaviors. But unsurprisingly, domestic dogs have a kind of intelligence that responds better to tests designed by the same species that's been breeding and training them for the last several thousand years.
Re:Wolves (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wolves (Score:5, Insightful)
Pro dog trainer here with 40 years experience.
In my observation, wolves and wolf-hybrids are fairly dumb -- about on a par with the dimmer breeds of dogs, such as the majority of purely pet breeds. Which is indeed about the level of a 2 year old human child. This stands to reason since there hasn't been any intensive selection for intelligence or reasoning power. (Coyotes seem to be somewhat smarter, but as a DNA profile study revealed, a lot of coyotes have domestic dog DNA, dating from about 2000 years ago.)
The bright breeds, those that have been bred for brains and thinking ability and that have to do a specific job that goes against wolf instincts (primarily gundogs and some herding breeds, but most especially Chesapeakes and fieldbred Labradors) are about on a par with a bright 5-6YO human child, and will think every bit as far, up to the point of playing simple practical jokes on unwitting humans.
Trust me, it's a damn good thing for us that Chessies (and some Labs) don't have opposable thumbs.... that, and inability to form words, are probably the real limiting factors, much as they are for Downs syndrome children. And some dogs learn to work around those limits. I have one Lab who can open any door that doesn't lock with a key!
Re:Dobermans (Score:5, Funny)
Re:evolutionist's are funny, and no I wont registe (Score:4, Funny)
Cow evolution has been driven by unnatural selection for a long time. We've sculpted the animal to be naturally docile. If the dumb tail waggin variety are more likely to reproduce curtesy of our intervention, then you get a race of big dumb cows.
Less interestingly but more practically - it's not like a cow ever came back from the slaughterhouse to warn the rest of them!
Re:evolutionist's are funny, and no I wont registe (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally, I just don't eat mammals anymore. I'm not sure where the "too smart eat" line is, but I've quit eating in my own class at least. Birds concern me to some degree, but crustaceans don't. Anyway, if it has a neocortex, I won't eat it.
Re:evolutionist's are funny, and no I wont registe (Score:5, Informative)
Crows or other corvids are very smart too (smarter than chimps in some ways). Anyway, given the sorts of stuff they eat, it's probably a good idea to not eat them ;).
Octopuses are also quite smart. At least one seem to have rather poor memory though - forgets after a few days and has to relearn stuff.
http://www.pitara.com/discover/earth/online.asp?story=111 [pitara.com]
Re:evolutionist's are funny, and no I wont registe (Score:5, Interesting)
People are not comfortable with eating intelligent animals and cows are intelligent enough, the fact that they trust the people who raise them to lead them off for slaughter isn't a sign of stupidity. Your average small child would be as trusting.
Funny thing is we tend to reward animals that escape the slaughter house with a reprieve. Is this just due to a natural support of the underdog or perhaps that the animal will know whats coming and will freak out and alert the other animals to whats going on.
Chickens tend not to show the same survival instinct but being raised in a cage unable to move or see daylight is it any wonder they tend to just sit there when accidentally released early from a cage. death might seem a welcome release from such a poor quality of life.
An interesting thing is the difference between an animal and meat, it seems for most people once an animal has had its head removed it transitions from being an animal and some emotional involvement, to becoming meat something to eat.
I'm not a vegetarian by any means and I enjoy meat and fish, you can't beat eating fish that you have caught and prepared yourself (assuming you master deboning).
Some people think its cruel to do your own slaughtering and butchery, it could be if you didn't ensure a rapid and as pain free as possible death for the animal. It's not a good thing that people are divorced from the reality of how meat is produced because it means low standards of care get applied to animals while they are alive in the name of cheap meat production and maximum profit.
Honestly if you choose to eat meat you should choose to be informed about its production.
It's funny but a lot of racism seems to flow in the same way, denigrating intelligence, emphasizing small differences in order to treat people as less than human. Perhaps if there was a better understanding of killing and cruelty there would be less of it in the world.
Re:evolutionist's are funny, and no I wont registe (Score:5, Informative)
Evolution isn't some "magic memory" passed on magically from one cow that dies to all other cows that are born after that. Evolution is the result of tiny mutations that for one reason or another have been continuously passed down from generation to generation. All of the cows that have "realized" that they were about to be slaughtered (not that they would be capable of that kind of realization in the first place) have also been... well, slaughtered.
Not that this study had much to do with evolution. It just has to do with dog's current levels of intelligence.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Wolves (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps we should get dolphins to design some intelligence tests to compare wolves and dogs and see who performs better on those.
That's easy. Mice would perform the best ;) Following them would be the dolphins and in a distant third would be homo sapiens.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No one is going to keep an animal that will challenge its owner for leadership.
Then why, pray tell, do we keep cats around?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Cats don't challenge us for leadership. They just assume leadership.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's why my girlfriend's cat looks at you like you're an idiot when you ask it to get off the table, and when you ask mine (politely) she jumps off. Even just pointing to the floor gets her to jump off without complaints.
Haven't tried having a wolf for a pet yet, on the TODO list.
Re:Wolves (Score:5, Interesting)
Occam's Razor (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Wolves (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
[pro dog trainer here, with 40 years at it]
Training and conditioning are diametric opposites. The goal of conditioning is to PREVENT independent thought and to get ONLY the desired response, whereas the goal of training is to ENHANCE thinking ability, channeled so that the desired actions are achieved in the best way possible.
As a general rule, the dumber the dog, the easier it is to condition it. Which make some people mistake ease of conditioning for intelligence, when it's more like filling the void.
A fa
Re:Wolves (Score:4, Interesting)
It doesn't help that we civilized folk been taught to never do the natural thing and just deck a dog that shows a dangerous level of dominance (exactly what another dog would do, for that matter).
We've had a few friends' dogs whose owners didn't control them well. When the dog tries to pull that nonsense on me, I find the best approach is to quickly flip it to the ground and get my hand on its throat. The dog instantly becomes a nice dog, at least to me, and usually to whomever came in the door with me (the kids, most importantly). It's like they have a nice-switch inside. No need to hurt the dog, just to explain, in dog terms, what the appropriate relationship here is. It helps to have a lifetime's experience with flipping good dogs, to get the leverage right. :)
With some disnified owners, it's best to do this when they're not looking. "Boy, Miffie really likes you, he's usually so crazy with strangers."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Haha, been there, done that :)
But if you run into one that lacks the "nice switch" (or more accurately the "Okay, you ARE the boss, now we're all in agreement" switch) -- and they do exist -- you have to be willing to take it as far as necessary. The message with the down-on-your-back trick is "I am willing to KILL you if you don't behave" and the dog has to believe it. Most believe instantly, no violence required, and they are much the happier for it, since dogs need to KNOW their place in life to feel sec
What good does this do us? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:What good does this do us? (Score:5, Funny)
Well 200 words is plenty to say "Hello IT, have you tried turning it off and on again?" and "Are you sure its plugged in?"
Re:What good does this do us? (Score:4, Funny)
I see you've called Dell's customer support then? Oh, wait... you said "good support"... sorry my mistake.
Thinking Brain dogs for the terminally stupid. (Score:5, Funny)
does this additional knowledge mean that we will end up with dogs in other support roles?
How about a "Thinking Brain" dog for some of the terminally stupid people I have to deal with? The blind and deaf already use dogs, why not stupid people? Are you a stupid person who can't make a decision in the fast food restaurant? Dog orders you a cheeseburger. Are you so stupid that you can't decide if you should turn left or right at the stoplight? Dog tells you to turn left. Are you a dumb pedestrian who stops in the middle of the intersection to answer their cell phone? Dog drags you to the curb.
This would be GREAT!
Re:Thinking Brain dogs for the terminally stupid. (Score:5, Funny)
"How about a "Thinking Brain" dog for some of the terminally stupid people I have to deal with? "
Enough dogs are afflicted with stupid humans as it is.
Enabling the stupid just makes empowered window-lickers.
Re: (Score:2)
Enough dogs are afflicted with stupid humans as it is.
Yeah, but with or without dogs there are still going to be stupid people. At least with the dogs doing the thinking for them the rest of us wouldn't have to suffer as much.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Proper training of such an animal should include noticing the telltale signs of sexual attraction. The release of certain pheromones would be a trigger for this beast to viciously attack the owner's groin (or that of the nearest male in the case of a female owner).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Rational thinking: It's gone to the dogs.
No. No other roles for dogs. (Score:5, Funny)
But there is some breakthrough work being done on training 2-year-olds to sniff for bombs and drugs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What good does this do us? (Score:4, Funny)
So you can pay a dog to do your homework?
No, only to eat it.
2 years old. (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually... (Score:5, Funny)
...my dog is a lot like Einstein, in that her hair goes everywhere and she refuses to accept quantum mechanics.
Schrödinger dog? (Score:4, Funny)
...my dog is a lot like Einstein, in that her hair goes everywhere and she refuses to accept quantum mechanics.
There's no reason we can't have a Schrödinger's dog too. Try it. Whether the dog survives or not, it'll have a far greater appreciation of quantum mechanics. Note: Do not put Schrödinger dog with Schrödinger cat. Experimental results may be random.
Re:Schrödinger dog? (Score:5, Funny)
Note: Do not put Schrödinger dog with Schrödinger cat. Experimental results may be random.
Actually, if you put a SchrÃdinger dog with a SchrÃdinger cat together, they will form an *Entangled* state.
Re: (Score:2)
I've suspected this for a while (Score:5, Insightful)
I've suspected this for a while, which is why I get especially worked up over people who get their jollies tormenting and abusing animals.
It's basically like abusing a child, and is just as sick.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's basically like abusing a child, and is just as sick.
"Just as sick" is subjective. Also, it's not like abusing a child, because an animal is not anything like a child, not legally, physiologically, or in any other significant way. This is an emotion-driven argument. In many countries, people eat dogs and cats and some places consider them a delicacy. I have yet to hear of a country that fries up children and serves them. Pets are glorified livestock.
That said... torturing of animals positively correlates with psychopathy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a difference between killing an animal to eat it, and enjoying torturing it.
Working at an abattoir doesn't make you a psychopath. Working at an abattoir so you can take animals to "the back room" and torture them before work does.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Working at an abattoir doesn't make you a psychopath. Working at an abattoir so you can take animals to "the back room" and torture them before work does.
As the US Government has recently demonstrated to the world, the term 'torture' is subjective. It's like porn -- you know it when you see it, right? You have vegetarians that claim killing animals in and of itself is 'torture'. On the other extreme, you have corporate farms that pack animals in so tightly they die in double-digit percentages. It's not that they actively seek to harm the animal, they just want to maximize profits. Somewhere between these two extremes is a balancing point that we unquestionab
Re:I've suspected this for a while (Score:5, Interesting)
Working at an abattoir doesn't make you a psychopath.
I'm not so sure. Considering the gruesome methods used to kill livestock in slaughterhouses I can't imagine working in one is all that good for one's long term psychological health.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
dog lover science. (Score:5, Interesting)
'They may not be Einsteins, but are sure closer to humans than we thought.'
I don't think so. You're comparing a fully-mature animal to one in its infancy. We've long known that animals can learn behaviors that mimick that of humans -- in some cases, their physiological parts are superior to humans (the eyes of a hawk, for example). But to say they're "closer to humans than we thought" -- that's a quotable designed to be eaten up by the popular press because a lot of people are dog lovers and will jump at the chance to say "Aw, see, old charlie here is almost human smart!"
I'm sorry to say that, no, Charlie is still a dog. A creature that has spent several thousand years being domesticated by humans -- I'd damn well expect it to be able to emulate certain kinds of human behavior and show types of intelligence other animals do not, that's exactly what domestication is supposed to do. But a dog does not have near-human intelligence. It doesn't even have remotely human intelligence -- it has simply learned behaviors that we can understand and manipulate to a far greater degree than other animals.
Re:dog lover science. (Score:5, Insightful)
A creature that has spent several thousand years being domesticated by humans -- I'd damn well expect it to be able to emulate certain kinds of human behavior and show types of intelligence other animals do not, that's exactly what domestication is supposed to do.
I don't know if that's a valid argument. Even after several thousand years, domesticated cats are no more useful now then they have ever been. They're hunters of domestic pests, no more. Dogs, on the other hand, have been bred for hunting, where they point, retrieve, and flush out game. They've been bred for herding, rounding up cattle and sheep on command. They've been bred for guard duty. They have learned a lot more than other animals given the same opportunity.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Cats are obviously much smarter than Dogs, not only where they able to show very little use, so they will not loose their time working for us, but they show a capacity to domesticate us cf: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8147566.stm [bbc.co.uk]
So apparently they have learned the most :-)
Re:dog lover science. (Score:4, Insightful)
I've had a cat learn how to open a door via the knob without being taught. But it doesn't have hands so after it awhile it realised it doesn't have a hope in hell and doesn't try again. She knew how to open the small refrigerator too but again didn't have the strength and gave up.
I think dogs are the same. They don't care about the same things as us and for the most part they have what they need so where is the incentive to learn? People are like that too. The good life makes most living beings lazy and stupid.
Of course cats or dogs will never be as smart as an adult human but I think people are giving 2 year olds too much credit. They're not that smart either. The only difference is they want to be like all the other humans and therefore have more incentive to improve and they have the added benefit of being surrounded by other humans that have a load of knowledge already and want the child to improve.
The cat can't care what you think (Score:3, Interesting)
The cat doesn't
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think people are giving 2 year olds too much credit. They're not that smart either.
Having one of each type at the moment, it's easy to compare. Language aside, the human boy is far more clever than the dog pup, but the pup is much more skillful. If I put their favorite treat on a high shelf, the dog would try every possible approach to get it, and do some great leaping, but probably fail. If the boy tried this, his jumping would be consistent and pitiful, but then he would look at the problem, gather r
Re:dog lover science. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well, cats can learn to use the toilet.. I've yet to see a dog do that.
Many dogs use the toilet. Just for a different purpose than we do.
Re:dog lover science. (Score:4, Interesting)
Having three cats and a two year old nephew, I'd say that cats are about as smart as an eighteen month old child. They understand simple concepts, a few words, and enough problem solving to be interesting, but not as much as a dog.
I think the role of cats as pets is one that they're uniquely suited for though, and there is a lot of material available to breed very convivial animals.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
She also eats dogs?!?!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Having grown up around dogs, and now having two cats, I think a lot of people underestimate a cats intelligence because the cat is only interested in pleasing itself. I personally have cats who have figured out how simple mechanical devices like doors and drawers operate, and they have also figured out that I dislike them opening certain doors and drawers and they will get squirted by a spray bottle if they try (so they wait until I am asleep or away to misbehave).
Now, I'm not saying they're super smart cre
Re:dog lover science. (Score:5, Informative)
You're comparing a fully-mature animal to one in its infancy.
Profoundly retarded humans, such as adults who operate on a two-year-old level, still have what we recognize as human-type intelligence. They don't have as much of it as most people do, obviously, but they still think like humans as opposed to cattle, or hawks, or trout. So if dogs think similarly enough to us to score at all on human-type intelligence tests, then it's silly to say that their intelligence is "not even remotely human."
Re:dog lover science. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But a dog does not have near-human intelligence. It doesn't even have remotely human intelligence -- it has simply learned behaviors that we can understand and manipulate to a far greater degree than other animals.
The thing is, you could say the same thing about a lot of people as well -- but that doesn't mean they aren't human.
Human intelligence varies greatly from one individual to the next, and so does canine intelligence, and the two ranges overlap somewhat. I won't try to speculate as to what the mora
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It doesn't even have remotely human intelligence -- it has simply learned behaviors that we can understand and manipulate to a far greater degree than other animals.
What's the difference? Ability to learn == intelligence.
This is a crock (Score:5, Interesting)
One test was that the subject was offered a treat inside a cage -- a banana pellet for the ape, a Gummy Bear candy for the human child -- an a kind of toothed rake to retreive the treat.
In each case, the rake was handed to the subject tooth-side down, and the teeth were to widely spaced to make and headway retrieving the treat. In each case the subject, a chimp and a 2-year-old human, raked away to no effect.
Then the experimenter turned the rake over and demonstrated how the treat could easily be retrieved using the flat end of the rake. Then the rake was returned to the subject with the tooth-side-down position of the rake.
The ape went back to raking away to no effect. With respect to the human 2-year-old, however, not only did the 2-year-old achieve 1-trial learning that the flat side of the rake was the effective way to get the Gummy Bear candy, when the 2-year-old was shown this technique, the 2-year-old laughed out loud, as if to say, "Oh, that's cheating, but if cheating is allowed, I am certainly going to do it."
What I figure was the role of the laughter and the sense that the rake experiment was a joke is this: humor is connected with this type of reasoning and this type of learning. A lot of learning is a matter of figuring out the exception to the rule, what has to be un-learned in order to effect an outcome. So not only did the 2-year-old learn in one trial, the 2-year-old developed a mental model of how the rake was supposed to operate and then made a conceptual correction to that model, and thought the whole thing to be funny.
I don't know the equivalent experiment with a dog as dogs lack the hand dexterity of humans and apes, but the minute I see a dog respond with 1-trial learning to a related situation, only then will I believe any claim as to a dog have the intelligence of a 2-year-old human.
Re:This is a crock (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is a crock (Score:4, Funny)
No kidding, I've been going at this gummy bear for like three hours now. Fucking gummy bear.
Re:This is a crock (Score:5, Insightful)
You really think they only did these tests with 1 kid and 1 chimp?
The candy is rewarding to both chimp and child so they presumably both had motivation to do this.
This is hardly a claim that the human brain is magical. You've been really reaching with this one. I know critical thinking is good and all but scientists aren't always dumber than slashdot armchair scientists.
Guide Dogs for the Blind . . . ? (Score:2)
They have always seemed pretty smart to me. Or is the stuff that they do not deemed "intelligent?"
'As Stupid As Two Year Old Kids' (Score:2, Informative)
If you are child-less, and thus have little patience for the little monsters, you'd say that dogs *can* be as stupid and annoying as those screaming spoiled rotten two year old brats at McDonalds. Please, parents, stick them in that soundproof screaming chamber area with the playground equipment!
Dogs and kids tell a lot about their parents . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
I have seen some nasty, aggressive dogs. They tend to have nasty, aggressive owners. I have seen some nasty, aggressive children. They tend to have nasty, aggressive parents.
I have also seen well-behaved children and dogs. Guess what their parents are like?
Re:Dogs and kids tell a lot about their parents . (Score:2)
TFTFY (Score:2)
If you are child-less, and thus have little patience for the little monsters, you'd say that dogs *can* be as stupid and annoying as those screaming spoiled rotten two year old brats at McDonalds.
Small children, screaming and running around restaurants and other public establishments are akin to dogs let loose.
Also, such behavior indicates that their parents consider their offspring to be what dogs are to most people - pets.
Academic elitists insulting our children (Score:5, Funny)
No one needs academic elitists from Canada telling them their own sons and daughters are no smarter than an average dog. My husband Todd showed me this article while we were playing with Trig, and I sat down and I thought to myself, boy, what's the world coming to, that if you could equate a puppy's intelligence with that of an unborn child, you could give the puppy a post-birth abortion?
And I'm telling you, when you put forth Americans in front of these scientists on Obama's health care panel, and they put your baby and an Ivy League-educate golden retriever on the scale, who do you trust they'll declare the victor? This is dystopian, this is an outrage, this is what we must fight, America!
--Sarah Palin
Original Article (Score:5, Informative)
As a beagle owner (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As a bulldog owner, I felt the urge to defend my breed too. ;) But stating that one breed is generally more intelligent than others doesn't mean your dogs, individually, are stupid. The breed ranking was based on surveys of obedience trainers, who probably have a pretty good feel for how different breeds act in general. Specifically, if they're rating intelligence by how well dogs respond to commands -- well, that's one particular type of intelligence, and it's worth evaluating, but there's a lot more to
Re:As a beagle owner (Score:4, Insightful)
Beagles are not Border Collies. I'm glad you enjoy your pets (and I'm not dumping on them).
There is a reason Border Collies, English Shepards, etc, are the norm on farms and ranches. They are quite clever and I think you would have to keep one to appreciate the difference.
I also have a Rhodesian Ridgeback just to keep the proselytizing missionaries away. Sweet but intimidating. I think he would quit breathing if it weren't for autonomous body functions, yet I have met owners who think theirs is borderline canine Einstein. No way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny idea of average (Score:3, Insightful)
The average two year old understands 250 words? My two year old and all her same age friends know far far more than that. I also don't think that you get cleverer as you get older. You just learn more.
high bar (Score:2)
To be fair, not many humans are Einsteins either.
The value of life (Score:3, Insightful)
This makes me wonder how aborting a human life far less developed than a toddler can still draw so much debate, while relatively little concern is shown for the thousands of lost lives of unwanted pets euthanized every year in animal shelters.
Obligatory joke... (Score:5, Funny)
The telegraph operator says, "We normally charge by the word, but if you like, I'll give you the tenth 'woof' for free."
To this, the dog responded, "But that, my good chap, would make no sense at all!"
Summary is Wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
The statement "as intelligent as a 2 year old child" implies the ability to perform on par with a 2 year old with average mental abilities, or another child of different age with greater or lesser abilities, on an appropriate test of "intelligence" such the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (Revised).
Since those expected responses which are not verbal are written, obviously they'll score 0.
Since cognitive science seems to get further from a definition of intelligence the harder it tries to pin it down, even using the word is a problem. I quit believing in the concept when I saw a retarded child perform successfully (though slower, and with more effort)in a class of gifted children mostly because of the attention offered in the situation.
"Can perform successfully tests of some functions and display some cognitive abilities which when given to humans can be accomplished by more than half of 2 year old children" might be acceptable.
Besides, I've seen some dogs that were too stupid to live. And I've run and howled with some that I've trusted alone with my baby children. Who cares how smart a person they'd make? What matters is how smart a dog they are, and the smartest rarely need things like arithmetic.
For that matter, how smart is a 2 year old human on a dog scale of "intelligence"? After all, that's 21 in dog years. It's not 7 to 1, it's 10.5 to 1 for the first two, then 4 to 1 after.
It's not breeding. (Score:3, Interesting)
Coren believes centuries of selective breeding and living alongside humans has helped to hone the intelligence of dogs.
Yet it is also well established that both cats and dogs have smaller brains relative to body size than their wild counterparts. This being a result of selective breeding which may select for more juvenille traits. I'm quite sure a wild big cat or wolf raised carefully in captivity would do just as well as their domesticated cousins, and there is reason to believe they may do better.
I'm not so sure... (Score:5, Interesting)
Canine standards are not intelligence tests (Score:3, Interesting)
I was with them until they ranked breeds by intelligence.
What they're not telling you (and most of the +3 posts on this thread would indicate that the posters know little of professional dog breeding) is the pedigree of the subjects under test.
I was especially disappointed when they chose to rank the Afghan Hound as one of the "dumber" breeds; which is sorting is such a human trait.
Those who know the history of the Afghan in Europe are aware the breed descends from a very shallow gene pool. Find the history of the breed written in the 19th century by "those who would be king" (Google books maybe?) to read the description of just how intelligent those imperialists found the long-haired variety.
Re:right to vote (Score:4, Funny)
That would probably be a mistake; I'd expect most dogs to vote Democratic.
Cats, on the other hand, would be overwhelmingly Republican.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT4mFkYp1Yw [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
If you've ever owned a cat, you know that they are most decidedly authoritarian; namely, they are the self-appointed dictator-for-life of your home.
That's what he said, "...cats are clearly democrats."
Re:right to vote (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:right to vote (Score:5, Funny)
"Cats, on the other hand, would be overwhelmingly Republican."
But of course - who do you think funds the Cato Institute?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)