As animal rights activists are quick to point out, the line between sapience and sentience does not always appear to be a clearcut division. Lewis and those following him, it refers to the qualities of phenomenal individuals, such as color patches, tastes, and sounds.
Should qualia be considered as physical properties of the nervous system or nonphysical mental states? Philosophers presented differing opinions. As computers became more advanced, philosophers and scientists developed theories about how a processing unit could qualify as sentient or sapient being. In , English mathematician Alan Turing famously invented a test to determine whether a computer could think. The most basic, primary level is sentience, which is essentially the ability to have a point of view.
The next level is sapience, the ability to hold a train of thought and form opinions. I don't know; I'm not sure the terms apply to nonliving entities. But logically, it would make sense. Well maybe sentience is conscious awareness. I mean there's a differences between reacting to the heat of the fireand feeling the heat of the fire. Yes, sentience is a state of awareness, it does denote the patterning of awareness called "consciousness" or being "conscious" Ah Lin you must be fun at parties.
It's tragic when people fail to realize that colloquial phrases can change the meaning of terms without impacting the nature of the meaning as we see here. Oddly, even if you are technically correct, everyone else was fine with the term meaning it wasn't wrong.
Language's sole purpose is to convey a message, so detracting from the message to spout some bull trying to make yourself feel superior just makes you an ass. Also I'd put forth that conscious awareness is distinct enough from awareness to warrant a use of the term. Awareness knows there is a predator you should avoid nearby, conscious awareness knows why you should avoid it. It's not truth vs truthful truth, it's truth vs full truth.
Very closely related, but still distinct. Plants, even grass, can give chemical warnings to other plants in response to stimuli. Doesn't make them sentient.
Conscious awareness is simply "being aware that you are aware", isnt it? Like "knowing that you know" or something akin to that. And he made the right decision at the time in a split second that I balked on. I've recently posted my own blog post about the difference between sentience and sapience in which I've quoted a sci-fi novel that discusses this. Woody - One of the arguments that I read about sapience is that sentient animals sometimes can have flashes of sapience to understand how to handle new problems.
The argument went on to say that humanity crossed from sentient to sapient when the environment forced them into a sustained thought using until it became the norm. Thanks for pointing out your post! I love the quotes you used; they really do a good job of describing the difference. And good point about "flashes" of sapience. By this definition then the majority of humans are not sapient? Is that what you are saying? Well, that would explain my dog's flash of sapience.
She might have crossed over, but probably not. I showed her that the reflection in the mirror is her's, when she was barking at it. She just sat there, looking, and wagging her tail. She's pretty happy about it, from what I can tell. Actually being social. She literally ran to the door when I came home, and was quite happy to see me.
She never does that, she isn't that social. XD I want to say that Niles and Woody, and the summary of their perspectives conclude that while humans are more sapient than animals, we are still just as bound to our sentient nature as animals.
I know I sometimes act out of what I feel over what I think, aka, emotions over logic. I will react to stimuli based on what is sensed in my environment ow, hurt, hand away from stove! I should turn that off. And animals do show capacity for sapience as described by woody with his dog wouldn't mind hearing more about the circumstances to that incident but I think that it isn't so much a question of who or what is sapient or sentient, but how much each entity whether human or animal is capable or willing to use each that defines us.
In which scenario is it worse? If the only restriction is being able to reason then dogs are also sapient. Dogs may only have thoughts at the complexity-level of a two-year-old, but if you've ever been around a two-year-old or a bright enough dog, even you'd definitely say they can think and reason.
I find it hard to believe that a dog could figure out how to open a door with a round doorknob without reasoning or thinking just a teeeensy bit and I had a dog that learned to do that, though she wasn't perfect at it, she did it at least a few times. That being said, yeah, I realize my dog isn't as "wise" as I am or at least I certainly hope not, given she eats dirt, gets confused by her own reflection in the mirror, and chases her own tail until she falls down dizzy on a regular basis , but that doesn't mean her entire existence is simple, non-conscious chemical or built-in responses to stimuli.
I dunno Many birds and mammals can problem solve. People including myself usually notice tjis most on cats and dogs. Do they get jostled into sapience alot from the complexities of navigating human environments? Or do we just observe them way more? Non human primates are the most sapient animals after us. Id grant the other great apes gorilla, orangutan, chimpanzee, bonobo, perhaps gibbons sapience.
But even if you take something like a macaque, they are constantly problem solving and not just physical problems like how to steal items from tourists at indisn temples lol. Their society is very complex with politics and social norms that seem to require that flash of sapience pretty frequently. In a troop of you gotta know the different statuses and who is which status- or at the very least, whether each individual you encounter is a higher or lower status than you are -- based on their matrilineal ties and how many other monkeys they can bring to bear in a conflict.
Because I study macaques not in person yet i can think of many examples for them. One example occurs when kidnapping. Kidnapping is s social norm on macaque communities. It is common for a adult or even subadult female to kidnap the baby -usually age newborn up to q few mos- of a lower status female. The baby screams and tries to grab mom but once she has him, the mkm cant do anything but follow and patiently wait for kidnapper to get bored maybe groom her a bit so when she lets baby go or it breaks free she can grab him.
Because it is against their social contract for her to take something from a higher rank female, even her own child! Sentience Sentience is the capacity to be aware of feelings and sensations.
Sapience Illustrations. Popular Comparisons. Adress vs. Comming vs. Label vs. Genius vs. Speech vs. Chief vs. Teat vs. Neice vs. Buisness vs. Beeing vs. Amature vs. Lieing vs. Preferred vs. Omage vs. Finally vs. Attendance vs. Latest Comparisons Tubercule vs. Glyptal vs. Faucet vs. Com vs.
0コメント