The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
New Study Vindicates Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences (In a Fish)
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From preprint server BioRxiv:

No evidence for general intelligence in a fish
Melisande Aellen, Judith M. Burkart, Redouan Bshary

This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review

Abstract
Differences in human general intelligence or reasoning ability can be quantified with the psychometric factor g, because individual performance across cognitive tasks is positively correlated. g also emerges in mammals and birds, is correlated with brain size and may similarly reflect general reasoning ability and behavioural flexibility in these species. To exclude the alternative that these positive cross-correlations may merely reflect the general biological quality of an organism or an inevitable by-product of having brains it is paramount to provide solid evidence for the absence of g in at least some species. Here, we show that wild-caught cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus, a fish species otherwise known for its highly sophisticated social behaviour, completely lacks g when tested on ecologically non-relevant tasks. Moreover, performance in these experiments was not or negatively correlated with an ecologically relevant task, and in none of the tasks did fish caught from a high population density site outperform fish from a low-density site. g is thus unlikely a default result of how brains are designed, and not an automatic consequence of variation in social complexity. Rather, the results may reflect that g requires a minimal brain size, and thus explain the conundrum why the average mammal or bird has a roughly 10 times larger brain relative to body size than ectotherms. Ectotherm brains and cognition may therefore be organized in fundamentally different ways compared to endotherms.

 
Hide 45 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. H***y S**t
    Its habbening

    Bomb goes off in Capitol Building restroom after a 30 minute warning to evacuate. Tables overturned, windows smashed in nearby barber shop. Dogs searching for more bombs.

    Link to ABC live stream

    Q: What will happen to all the dumass larpers now?

    [MORE]

    A: Get interviewed by Donahue.
    “…how high the call, or how passionate and honorable the conscience…”

    A: Future presidents read your books

  2. Sex scandal.

    • Replies: @Not Raul
    , @MEH 0910
  3. This study sounds rather fishy to me.

    • LOL: Rosie
  4. Well, that’s the FIN-de-siècle of the assertion that species- and/or race-based intelligence is merely a social construct, right? Now there’ll be a wave of societal support for fish charter schools. And fewer folks falling hook, line, and sinker for unsupportable diversity bridges collapsing over troubled waters.

    • Replies: @Lockean Proviso
    , @tyrone
  5. The fish couldn’t perform–too anxious about stereotypes of stupid fish.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
  6. Anon[140] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m sure many readers will be surprised that research on general intelligence in animals exists, so here’s a passage from Russell Warne’s In the Know that discusses it:

    The Origin of Species’ g.​

    Another unresolved question for intelligence researchers is how g evolved. For a trait to evolve, it has to make an organism be more successful at passing on its genes….

    As I stated in Chapter 4, a general cognitive factor has been found in every mammal species investigated (B. Anderson, 1993; Arden & Adams, 2016; Fernandes et al., 2014; Galsworthy et al., 2002; Herndon et al., 1997; Hopkins et al., 2014; Matzel & Sauce, 2017; Navas González et al., 2019). This is evidence that g was already present in mammalian evolution. Evidence from non-mammals is less clear. For example, brain size in birds seems to increase the chance of survival (Møller & Erritzøe, 2016), which may indicate that smarter birds live longer, but birds that know more songs do not perform better on cognitive tasks, which might indicate that song learning is an independent skill or ability (MacKinlay & Shaw, 2019). If this latter finding is typical among all songbirds, then it may indicate that g is not present in songbird species because g cannot emerge unless all cognitive abilities are correlated with one another. On the other hand, pheasants seem to have a g-like general ability to distinguish colors from one another (van Horick, Langley, Whiteside, & Madden, 2019), though it is unclear whether this ability correlates with performance on other tasks. More research is needed to determine whether (a) g exists in bird species, (b) this g resembles human or mammalian g, and (c) bird g evolved independently of mammalian g or if g evolved once in a common reptilian ancestor of birds and mammals.

    Arden (2019) explained some of the difficulties with conducting intelligence research on animals. Most basically, it is impossible to give a written intelligence test to a large sample of animals at once. Instead, animals have to be examined individually, which means that sample sizes tend to be small and data collection is time consuming. Furthermore, many cognitive tasks do not transfer well across species. Species vary in the behaviors that they are capable of, and their evolutionary history constrains animal responses to behavioral prompts (Breland & Breland, 1961). As an obvious example, teaching gorillas sign language is possible because their hands are similar to human hands; but pigs cannot express human sign language because their hooves prevent the formation of the necessary signs. When investigating the intelligence of a species, it is necessary to study the species’ natural behavior first and then devise cognitive tasks that are customized for that species and require responses that the species can generate (Arden, 2019). But this makes comparisons across species difficult, and the g of one species may not be the same as the g in another.

  7. BREAKING: Parler CEO Responds to Amazon Hosting Ban — Says It’s a ‘Coordinated Attack By Tech Giants to Kill Competition’
    By Cassandra Fairbanks
    Published January 9, 2021 at 9:09pm
    71 Comments

    The ban goes into effect on Sunday, effectively shutting down the platform that conservatives have flocked to since the big tech giants began banning conservatives.

    In a post on Parler, Matze wrote that “Sunday (tomorrow) at midnight Amazon will be shutting off all of our servers in an attempt to completely remove free speech off the internet. There is the possibility Parler will be unavailable on the internet for up to a week as we rebuild from scratch. We prepared for events like this by never relying on amazons proprietary infrastructure and building bare metal products.”

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/breaking-parler-ceo-responds-amazon-hosting-ban-says-coordinated-attack-tech-giants-kill-competition/

    Gab still appears to be working and POTUS appears there.

    • Replies: @SOL
    , @Not Raul
  8. Trelane says:

    If you look into the eye of a fish nothing looks back at you.

  9. Anon7 says:

    OT: Well now that we can no longer use social media to hear from our leaders and leading thinkers, I think it’s about time you guys learn about how this situation was handled in the former Soviet Union.

    It was called Samizdat (Russian: самизда́т, lit. “self- publishing) in which individuals reproduced censored and underground makeshift publications, often by hand, and passed the documents from reader to reader.

    “My dad and his friends distributed samizdat that they probably got when it came from abroad,” remembers Ekaterina Poleschuk. “That’s how we read Bukovsky, Solonevich, and Voinovich’s Ivan Chonkin… Dad did the bookbinding. I often remember the smell of glue boiling on our stove. He would clamp the photocopied or printed pages, place glue on them and then after some time place them into the cover, which he also made. That’s how the samizdat book was produced.”

    I guess we’ll just have to make hand written copies of tweets, and iSteve posts, and pass them around to each other.

    • Replies: @bomag
  10. Kronos says:

    I vaguely recall an article (somewhere on the internet) detailing a meeting between Arther Jensen and Howard Gardner. Somewhere Gardner let it slip that the multiple intelligence thing never manifested itself unless the person had an IQ of 120 or above. I’ve been trying to rediscover the article to no avail. Does anyone here have any leads?

    • Replies: @njguy73
    , @prime noticer
  11. SOL says:
    @Joe Stalin

    An opportunity for GAB, if they can get the funding.

  12. newrouter says:

    iSteve on Parler. You be going down soon. lol.

  13. Not Raul says:
    @Joe Stalin

    Gab still appears to be working and POTUS appears there.

    Isn’t that just the Trump feed, which takes Trump’s tweets and reposts them on Gab?

    I didn’t see anything there that was posted since Twitter suspended Trump.

  14. @Bard of Bumperstickers

    From their perch it’s an intriguing idea, but will it scale?

  15. Bert says:

    The study’s authors appear unaware that some lizards and turtles have been shown to be far more than automatons. Casting the existence of g in terms of endotherm versus ectotherm is clearly too broad. G, and higher g, is most likely to exist in species whose behavioral niches are complex. That includes most mammals and birds, but also some reptiles.

    See these popular articles about intelligence in Anoles and tortoises.

    https://www.anoleannals.org/2011/07/13/is-an-anole-smarter-than-a-fifth-grader/

    http://blogs.thatpetplace.com/thatreptileblog/2013/05/31/green-anole-intelligence-researchers-shocked-by-lizard-brainpower/#.X_q7VzmSmUk

    https://www.studyfinds.org/turtle-power-study-finds-giant-tortoises-have-strong-memories-high-intelligence/

    If G is a function of behavioral/ecological niche, differences in it could exist among human populations if their niches differ in complexity and in intensity of natural selection.

  16. Show me a fish that is even up to Tic-Tac-Toe, and I’ll be impressed.

    How about a nice game of chess?

  17. Anonymous[184] • Disclaimer says:

    Now, if someone could replicate that study using Economist magazine writers and editors as the subjects, then I would *really* be impressed …….

  18. Anonymous[184] • Disclaimer says:
    @Trelane

    Just look at the perp faces from Chicago’s, Baltimore’s, St. Louis’s, New Orleans, Cleveland’s etc etc police department mug shots.

  19. Redouan Bshary

    It’s generous of Prof Bshary to bshare with us the bsheer vastness of his knowledge gleaned from bship and bshore. That he can do this from the University of Neubchâtel in landlocked Bschweiz makes it all the more bshimmering.

    Redouan Bshary = Used horny Arab.

  20. @AnotherDad

    According to my buddies who fish, the problem is they didn’t use muskies; they’re smarter than tropical fish.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  21. danand says:

    “…Labroides dimidiatus, a fish species otherwise known for its highly sophisticated social behaviour, completely lacks g when tested on ecologically non-relevant tasks.”

    Cleaner Wrasse (Labroides dimidiatus) in the mouth of a potato grouper (Epinephelus tukula)

    From the looks of it, the poor Labroides may lack g even for the ecologically relevant tasks.

    (Labroides dimidiatus in the mouth of a potato grouper.)

  22. tyrone says:
    @Bard of Bumperstickers

    Our schools are floundering already man and we don’t want our kids hanging out with mudpuppies .

  23. Bert says:

    The Labroides diamidiatus diet is made up of parasites that it removes from the buccal cavity and external surfaces of larger fish, which is why species with such diets are termed “cleaner fish.” The Labroides in your photo is performing its most ecologically relevant task.

    Pro Tip: Being cute needs to be based in reality, not 180 degrees counter to it.

  24. As E.O Wilson said for Communism: “Great Idea. Wrong Species.” because communism works fine for colonies of social ants.

    • Replies: @Wyatt
  25. njguy73 says:
    @Kronos

    gardner multiintel speech doubleplusungood refs thoughtcrime rewrite wokewise

  26. Anonymous[376] • Disclaimer says:

    In defence of our piscine cousins, a recent David Attenborough, ( the greatest living Englishman), documentary series featured a marine species of fish, the male of which is able to construct the most geometrically beautiful scalloped nests by the sculpting of sea bed sand.

    Surely the Japanese – the ultimate fish people – have a very rich seam of ichthyological myths, folklore, and actual fact, about the cognitive abilities of these aqueous creatures.

  27. Mike Tre says:

    Well, Finding Nemo certainly quantified the intelligence gap in different types of fish, all the way from neurotic jew to ditzy white chick.

  28. zx says:

    My goldfish is not very generally intelligent because I can beat it at chess three games out of five.

  29. No Evidence for General Intelligence in a Fish.

    Then at least when it comes to this one other species we might hope to succeed in Closing the Gap.

  30. @Trelane

    sharks are older than trees.

    it would be interesting to see if there’s a total lack of evidence for g in sharks. i’m not sure though, for ‘modern’ sharks. after interacting with marine biologists, some sharks seem to be able to learn which diver is which, like crows can.

    i was thinking of using lobsters as a baseline for water creatures, kind of like using mice. they have less than 1 million neurons. how many neurons do you need for any emergence of g at all? how many neurons do octopus have? they clearly have g.

    sharks have a much lower ‘FPS’ than humans, or mammals. that is to say, in experiments, sharks seem to operate at something like 15 frames per second – they can’t detect motion or react to movement that happens faster than that. their nervous system operates a lot slower.

    all animals operate at different FPS. humans aren’t the fastest, but they’re fast, relatively. dogs are a little faster than humans and can move and react faster. no HBD work for FPS of different human groups, but obviously, certain athletes are much faster than average. it’s not exactly the same thing as reaction time, which there is HBD work for, but it’s related.

  31. @Kronos

    Gardner was a bad faith actor and should be ignored. like thousands of jewish ‘researchers’ he was just attacking mainstream science in order to derail and destroy it for political purposes. i’m not saying all jewish scientists are doing this, but lots of them are. as Steve pointed out several times, the last 200 years of science is largely a battle of jewish intellectuals attacking WASP scientists and concepts.

    no serious intelligence researcher is saying that humans don’t have many abilities and capabilities or that intelligence tests measure everything a human can do. they explicitly say they don’t. they’re only saying that this one specific ability under investigation is something real and that it varies between humans. and they have attached the word ‘intelligence’ to this ability. in scholarly research and academic investigation, ‘intelligence’ means this one specific thing. it doesn’t mean ‘every adaptive behavior a human could do’. it doesn’t mean the day to day connotation of the layman’s word intelligence.

    Gardner knew that. he just wanted to fly in Leroy Jenkins style and derail the conversation, diverting real intelligence research and confusing the public, turning everything into a stupid tangent. “Certain musicians have great musical aptitude, certain athletes have great on field game IQ, so there, academic intelligence tests are stupid and don’t measure anything important.” these guys are good at that. that’s he’s a jewish psychology professor at Harvard should immediately set the alarm bells ringing. jewish academics at Harvard are the biggest source of scientific disinformation – they’ve completely taken over parts of the Ivy League specifically SO they can do this, ostensibly from a position of authority.

    • Thanks: bomag
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  32. Wyatt says:
    @Hyperdupont

    There is a reason the Chinese are often compared to insects.

  33. bomag says:
    @Anon7

    We shouldn’t have to give up the convenience of the internet; there should be enough hosting servers.

    Maybe start posting via encryption.

  34. anonymous[103] • Disclaimer says:

    There’s a lot of experts on IQ here so a request. Has anyone tried to calculate the effect of the growing share of non-whites on the average IQ of the United States?

    What was the IQ of the US in 1980? 80% white
    What is it in 2021? 59% white
    What will it be in one generation — 2040? 50% white

  35. @Redneck farmer

    According to my buddies who fish, the problem is they didn’t use muskies; they’re smarter than tropical fish.

  36. jamie b. says:
    @Trelane

    Hardly fair to expect them to make and keep eye contact, since their eyes are mostly fixed in place. AAR, there is reason to think that rays at least are somewhat intelligent…

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-an-example-of-intelligent-thought-in-a-species-of-fish/answer/Jamie-Bechtel-%E0%A4%9C%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%BF-%E0%A4%AC%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%95%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%B2%E0%A5%8D

  37. Nico says:
    @Not Raul

    Corporate-shill “conservatives” are creepy as a rule.

  38. Anonymous[290] • Disclaimer says:
    @prime noticer

    Gardner knew that. He just wanted to fly in Leroy Jenkins style and derail the conversation, diverting real intelligence research and confusing the public, turning everything into a stupid tangent. “Certain musicians have great musical aptitude, certain athletes have great on field game IQ, so there, academic intelligence tests are stupid and don’t measure anything important”. these guys are good at that. that’s he’s a Jewish psychology professor at Harvard should immediately set the alarm bells ringing. Jewish academics at Harvard are the biggest source of scientific disinformation – they’ve completely taken over parts of the Ivy League specifically SO they can do this, ostensibly from a position of authority.

    Here is a brief primer on pilpul. It is important, and will also save you hours of wasted effort. For an example of its importance, note that “judicial activism” is pilpul, no more:

    In this context, the Law is not primary; it is the status of the jurist. Justice is extra-legal, thus denying social equality under the rubric of a horizontal system. Law is in the hands of the privileged rather than the mass.

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-is-pilpul-and-why-on_b_507522
    Famous example: reinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment by redefinition of the word “militia” using the Lav Dequa method., which is:

    [MORE]

    As if this was not enough, the Tosafists instituted one more pilpul principle into Talmudic discourse. This was called the Lav Davqa method. In English we might call it the “Not Quite” way of reading a text. When a text appeared to be saying one thing, the Tosafot — in order to conform to the already-existing custom — would re-interpret it by saying that what it seemed to mean is not what it really meant!

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-is-pilpul-and-why-on_b_507522
    also see:

    Derailing the discussion is standard pilpul, a non-rational method of ending discourse, originally developed by Ashkenazim rabbis to deflect criticism of esoteric reading (reinterpretation) of the Talmud, and dominant in Ashkenazim theological disputes up until the present. My use of “Ashkenazim” does not include “Sephardic”.

    This is not my assertion alone, by any means. Here is part of the discussion of pilpul.

    Here is a common definition of pilpul: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pilpul

    Here is a good article on what pilpul is and its consequences, from the Huffington Post where they are up to their chins in pilpul and the skills described are vital for survival: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-is-pilpul-and-why-on_b_507522
    Concluding paragraphs:

    Pilpul is the rhetorical means to mark as “true” that which cannot ever be disputed by rational means.

    The contentiousness of the Middle East conflict is intimately informed by pilpul. Whether it is Alan Dershowitz or Noam Chomsky, both of them Ashkenazim who had traditional Jewish educations, the terms of the debate are consistently framed by pilpul. What is most unfortunate about pilpul — and this is something that will be familiar to anyone who has followed the controversies involving Israel and Palestine — is that, since the rational has been removed from the process, all that is left is yelling, irrational emotionalism, and, ultimately, the threat of violence.

    It is this agitation that continues to mar a political process that has long abandoned the rational understanding of the issues involved in its construction.

    and a commentary, one that contains useful techniques, on the Huffington Post article:
    https://www.winterwatch.net/2021/01/the-use-of-pilpul-to-cloud-and-obscure-issues-and-discussions/

    The key to dealing with this is framing the debate and not allowing the pilpuler the full luxury of doing so. If you use low-hanging fruit in your arguments, say about the behaviors of specific named Judiacs, then you can use the nitpicking as a martial arts move that takes advantage of the pilpuller’s weight. Luckily, most of the time the pilpuller operates by rote and rarely comes up with anything very original. Here is a quote from the article:

    Here is an example of such a duel pertaining to a Winter Watch article about the fraudulent Milgram and Zimbardo experiments . . .

    If you look for it, you will see the structure of pilpul in many of the comments even on unz.com, which is relatively free of pilpul.

    For that matter, you can see it in mass media propaganda:
    * Attempting to change the “stolen election” conversation into a “questioning election results (even if the elections are stolen) is a threat to democracy” conversation.
    * Attempting to change the “Investigate a stolen election before accepting its results” to an “Attempted coup, with mob violence” discussion. Note that in this case an actual ambush of Trump supporters was manufactured to support the pilpul maneuver.
    * Manufactured evidence is not unusual — see: https://www.gopusa.com/bubba-says-hes-pissed-his-noose-was-a-rope-used-to-pull-down-the-garage-door/comment-page-2/ for a failed effort at changing the discussion from reward for winning auto races to reward for having been wronged.

    So: look for pilpul, and label it as pilpul, say you don’t do that, then go on. Pilpul is simply not an accepted form of discourse in the West. This practice will save you hours of fruitless work.

    https://www.politicalirish.com/threads/a-sephardi-on-ashkenazi-and-yiddish-talmudic-discussion-styles-and-their-influence-today-understanding-mercurial-and-roc_.36191/

    until recently, http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12153-pilpul defined pilpul sympathetically, but the URL now leads nowhere.

    Here is a comment on the Huff Post article above. It gives a Sephardic view of pilpul: https://www.politicalirish.com/threads/a-sephardi-on-ashkenazi-and-yiddish-talmudic-discussion-styles-and-their-influence-today-understanding-mercurial-and-roc_.36191/

    Note that pilpul is fundamentally different from quibbling or casuistry. “Quibbling” is a simple delaying tactic, “Casuistry” is (in common use) a misuse of logic. One is a simple attempt to prevent action, the other is a misuse of logic that can, eventually, be corrected. Neither tries to change the conversation to the unprovable.

  39. MEH 0910 says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    , @MEH 0910
  40. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

    Forgot the original tweet:

  41. MEH 0910 says:
    @MEH 0910

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?