🚀 go-pugleaf

On 2012-09-19 9:34 PM, larry_tapper wrote:
>
> PB> I'll bet you my 2nd car no experiment will demonstrate 
> propositional thinking in the squirrel in the next decade.
>
> PB,
>
> It certainly won't happen if nobody is willing to define 
> "propositional thinking". In my previous post, I asked you what you 
> meant by that, and you didn't really answer that question.
>

You asked for (& got) examples of evidence that confirms propositional 
thought in a animal that doesn't have language.

The ordinary meaning of propositional thought is logical thought, 
roughly what Piaget called formal operational thought. Prob'ly for 
animals you'd want to add in the previous stage, concrete operational 
thought, ability to do arithmetic & concrete logic.

So for an animal, minimally, propositional thought should demonstrate 
logical operations; propositional knowledge should demonstrate the 
animal manipulating pics or whatever logically, as in the sea-lion and 
macaque numerosity experiments.

PB

-----

>
> LT
>
> --- In analytic@yahoogroups.com <mailto:analytic%40yahoogroups.com>, 
> Peter Brawley <peter.brawley@...> wrote:
> >
> > On 2012-09-19 8:21 PM, walto wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In analytic@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:analytic%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:analytic%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > Peter Brawley <peter.brawley@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 2012-09-19 3:34 PM, walto wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In analytic@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:analytic%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:analytic%40yahoogroups.com> 
> <mailto:analytic%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > > > Peter Brawley <peter.brawley@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 2012-09-19 2:00 PM, larry_tapper wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PB> Seems likely the cat is using images. Propositionally? No
> > > > > evidence
> > > > > > > cats can do that.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PB,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You still haven't really spelled out what *you* mean by an 
> animal
> > > > > > > "using images propositionally". And it can hardly be 
> something
> > > you've
> > > > > > > thought about for years, because as of a couple of days ago
> > > you were
> > > > > > > insisting that propositional thinking is impossible without
> > > language.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That was a sloppy mistake.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So was my remark that some animals have nonpropositional 
> language; I
> > > > > > meant to say nonpropositional thought.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Instead of just saying they don't have language, I should've
> > > said (i)
> > > > > > cats don't have language, (ii) unlike some primates there's no
> > > evidence
> > > > > > cats can acquire any language skills, and (iii) unlike those
> > > primates
> > > > > > and perhaps some other animals, cats show no other evidence of
> > > > > > propositional capacity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your inference about "a couple of days ago" is incorrect, 
> primate
> > > > > > nonlinguistic propositional intelligence has been known for 
> many
> > > years,
> > > > > > I've been trying to get up-to-date on this quickly growing 
> field
> > > for a
> > > > > > couple of years.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So far, your explanation has been along the lines of: you
> > > know, like
> > > > > > > the sea lion's icons or the macaque's numerosity. OK, now 
> we're
> > > > > > > getting somewhere, but ... like the sea lion and the macaque
> > > in what
> > > > > > > way, exactly?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What interests you about that?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This branch of the thread began with an instance of
> > > non-propositional
> > > > > > knowledge of a physical fact. Do you claim that's physically
> > > > > impossible,
> > > > > > or just that evolution is such that it absolutely never occurs
> > > anywhere
> > > > > > in the animal kingdom, and if so what's the evidence for that?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I think there's a problem with the notion of "non-propositional
> > > > > knowledge of a physical fact." I could see how someone might 
> maintain
> > > > > that something could have non-propositional knowledge of things
> > > (i.e.,
> > > > > some sort of acquaintance with them), but it seems to me that
> > > > > "knowledge of a fact" requires some sort of ordering of 
> constituents.
> > > > > E.g., knowing/believing/deciding that a squirrel is in a tree is a
> > > > > different from knowing/believing/deciding that a tree is in a
> > > squirrel.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's a distinction that's meaningful only in a mind with language.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't see that. You say this cat knows there's a squirrel in that
> > > tree. Surely you don't think that the cat knows there's a tree in the
> > > squirrel. Thus, there's a distinction that meaningful with respect to
> > > this cat, whether it knows language or not.
> > >
> > > > > If some cat really knows that a squirrel is in that tree (and I
> > > > > personally have my doubts about that ascription), it seems to 
> me that
> > > > > it would have to have propositional knowledge.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > So when the squirrel remembers where he stored the nuts, you'd 
> say he's
> > > > thinking propositionally?
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's a good question: I don't know.
> > >
> >
> > I'll bet you my 2nd car no experiment will demonstrate propositional
> > thinking in the squirrel in the next decade.
> >
> > PB
> >
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > W
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> 




------------------------------------

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/analytic/
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/analytic/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/analytic/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    analytic-digest@yahoogroups.com 
    analytic-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    analytic-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/