yet another surprise from the animal world

Probably at least half the animal studies I read open with some variant of we thought only people did this stuff.

As a matter of fact, the entire history of research on animal behavior could be summed up as a protracted exercise in goalpost moving.

(I'm joking.)

btw, I now believe animals have language.

I can't prove it. I can't even argue the case competently.

But I believe it. I guess I believe it thanks to my Bayesian brain (and a glimmer of an insight that Jeff Hawkins' argument will lead to the conclusion that animals have language....) I've read SOOOO many articles that start out with "We scientists thought only humans do this" that if someone forced me to bet money on whether animals do or do not have language, I would have to bet yes. I just don't see enough, "We scientists always thought animals couldn't do X and, sure enough, animals can't do X" articles to make me bet "no."

In other words, I'm seeing a trend.

(or a pattern!)

Thinking that animals have language is heresy, in case you didn't know.^* Ed, as it turns out, did not. I dropped my animals-have-language bomb the other morning at breakfast and he said, "Didn't I read an article saying animals have language?"

answer: no

You did not "read an article" saying animals have language. You may have read a book coauthored by your wife saying that animals (might) have language, or something close to it.

It's funny how one person's heresy is another person's misconception.

Anthropologists have long recognised altruism as a vital element in allowing complex social groups to form. This raised the question of when it first evolved. True altruism has always been seen as a uniquely human trait in that only people were thought capable of deliberately helping others, knowing there would be a cost to themselves.

Warneken and his colleague Brian Hare carried out the study on 36 chimpanzees at the Ngamba Island Chimpanzee Sanctuary, in Uganda.

The animals were not allowed to interact with any humans they knew or had received food from.

In the first experiment, the chimpanzee saw a person unsuccessfully reach through the cage bars for a stick on the other side, too far away for the person but within reach of the ape.

The chimpanzees spontaneously helped the reaching person regardless of whether this yielded a reward or not. When the chimpanzees could see the person making no effort to reach the object, they did not help.

A second experiment was designed to make it much harder to offer help, with the chimps forced to climb 6ft to get the stick. There were no rewards but, again, the animals still helped.

A third piece of research looked at the apes’ willingness to help each other. One chimp was made to watch as a second animal tried to get into a closed room containing food.

The only way it could get in was if the watching animal removed a chain on the door. In each case they did so.

Elsewhere in the animal world there are many examples of apparent altruism. Dolphins, for example, will support sick or injured animals, swimming under them for hours at a time and pushing them to the surface so they can breathe.

source:
Chimps beat us to that human touch

yet another surprise from the animal world
are meerkats constructivists?

^* It may not be heresy in the UK. Not sure.