IEET > Rights > HealthLongevity > CognitiveLiberty > Personhood > GlobalDemocracySecurity > Vision > Bioculture > Fellows > David Brin > Futurism > Technoprogressivism > Innovation > Implants > Biosecurity > Disability > Enablement
Are Animals Intelligent… Enough?  Do They Want to be… Smarter?
David Brin   Aug 30, 2012   Contrary Brin  

Decoding Animal Languages, by Con Slobodchikoff, is an inspiring new study that demonstrates how new technologies can open new avenues of empathy, helping humans understand the other species who co-inhabit this planet with us.

As Temple Grandin has pointed out, in her campaigns to reform the meat industry, we do not have to entirely abandon the omnivorous cravings of our caveman ancestry. But we are obliged to offer our fellow creatures the best deal that’s compatible with our legitimate needs. Doing that entails finding paths of greater care and understanding. Prof. Grandin explores the language of animals through her gifts as the world’s most impressive and high-functioning fully autistic person. Dr. Slobodchikoff is doing it with acoustical science.

I have some history in this area, having visited many researchers to learn about animal communications, in preparation for my “uplift” series of novels. These portray a future in which humanity meddles with the intellectual capacities of higher animals.  Prior authors explored this territory—HG Wells, Pierre Boule, Cordwainer Smith - so I avoided their standard scenario that, in arrogating the promethean powers of God, humans would reflexively opt to be cruel or to enslave the new minds.  Instead, my readers explore what problems neo-dolphins or neo-chimps might have, even were the endeavor done with skill, kindness and best intentions.

The end result - 200 years down the road, might be a pan-Terran civilization filled with broader styles and more diversity of wisdom - a fine dream. But are we willing to pay the price? Which would be pain.  Lots of it, unavoidable, for those intermediate generations of cetaceans and simians, and for ourselves, as some of the steps and missteps along the way prove awkward, mistaken, or even or tragic.

I have no doubt that powerful forces from both left and right would unite (as I portray in my new novel) against any such effort, one side decrying any hubristic attempt to revise God’s plan and the other proclaiming that natural species are already smart enough, with great linguistic abilities and their own nobility of spirit, equal in value to our own.  I do not wholly disagree with the second of these objections!  But it is, in the end, wrongheaded.

Consider the recent work of Dr. Slobodchikoff and others, demonstrating the basic linguistic ability of prairie dogs, adding them to a long list of species who can signal complex arrays of factual-practical information.  And the smaller but significant number of even-smarter species who seem capable of genuine sentence structure, questions, answers and basic logical-semantic interpretation. Those who can do all this, with vocabularies in hundreds of words, include dolphins, apes, parrots, corvids (crows), pinnipeds (sea lions) and dozens more (with dolphins and chimps slightly ahead).  Is this evidence, as Dr. Slobodchikoff implies and as many on the left insist, that all these threshold races have what’s sufficient, noble, and in no need of human “help”?

Or does it suggest the very opposite? All seem to crowd against an obdurate and perhaps natural limit, bumping against the same glass ceiling. Evolution brought each, separately, to the point where individuals can interact tribally, solve basic riddles, organize a few, primitive-coordinated activities, and perhaps (in a few cases) contemplate some kinds of irony, esthetics or even whimsey. But Darwin is stingy. He allows urgent species (sometimes) to achieve their minimal needs. But it is another matter to get what you want.  And speaking purely anecdotally, I can tell you that the dolphins who interact with sincere human researchers appear to want - desperately - to be smarter than they are. It is a subjective impression I have heard from the scientists themselves, a number of times.

There is growing evidence that something very special happened to a few thousand African hominids, half a million or so years ago… and in accelerating stages ever since, up to today. That special thing - a runaway selection process that made a race capable of contemplating what YOU are contemplating, right now - was certainly unique on Earth and may be unprecedented across vast stretches of the Galaxy. It enabled us to rise so high that our abilities and numbers may threaten the whole planet.  Or else - if we choose - empower us to save the Earth, and heal it and tend and manage it.

Either way, that’s power, man.

Those who attempt to downplay this leap, by saying animals have “language” too, miss the point.  It s not in simple, qualitative, on-off switches like “tool use” or use of basic semantics that we are so profoundly different.  It is the additive, multiplicative, exponentiated effects that have come from combining a myriad skills in a stunning momentum of mind.

While some of our savants ponder how to analyze, emulate and even amplify these powers in silica, it may be time, as well, to contemplate the cousin consciousnesses that we already have, all around us.  Natural beings who may not have to bump against the hard ceiling of their pre-sapient limits forever, but whose destinies may be broad and vast indeed… providing we grow wise and good and skilled enough to show the way.

David Brin Ph.D. is a scientist and best-selling author whose future-oriented novels include Earth, The Postman, and Hugo Award winners Startide Rising and The Uplift War. David's newest novel - Existence - is now available, published by Tor Books."


The interesting thing is that with the help of some intermediate technologies, it might be possible to get some form of consent from members of a particular species to be ‘upliifted’. I’m not sure we have the knowledge to effectively increase the intelligence of our animal friends, but being able to establish that they might wish it would be a good first step.

“Those who attempt to downplay this leap, by saying animals have “language” too, miss the point.  It s not in simple, qualitative, on-off switches like “tool use” or use of basic semantics that we are so profoundly different.  It is the additive, multiplicative, exponentiated effects that have come from combining a myriad skills in a stunning momentum of mind.”

-YES! There is still a large gap. This “animals are so smart” confusion that we are witnessing right now is very frustrating.

Tool use doesn’t distinguish us from the rest of the animal kingdom. Here’s a particularly jaw dropping instance:

I think the ethical dilemma is greatly reduced if we take safeguards to minimize or eliminate nociception in the organisms we uplift, at least in the intermediate stages where things get particularly murky/messy. This is, of course, assuming the rejection of the anti-natalist position that sentient existence is inherently adversive and it is unethical to create it. Otherwise, the choice is pretty similar to that of having kids the way we do now.

The biggest obstacle would be for these hybrid beings to be accepted by the wider society, so it would be a good idea for us to undergo quite significant first. It won’t bode very well for interspecies prejudice and hatred if we can’t even get the intraspecies varieties right.

Also, the notion that current non-human animals yearn to be more intelligent is a laughable instance of projection.

YOUR COMMENT Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Will Artificial Intelligence Turn Evil & Against Humans?

Previous entry: Sixteen Wives, Twenty Children: The Role of Machismo in Overpopulation