Because this got thread-sized:
Quote from: limetomA human with 20/20 vision can see details as small as one minute of arc.
To put that into perspective, the Sun and the full Moon are 30 minutes of arc across. That's half a degree. Or the width of your little finger at arm's length.
Also, human vision several thousand years ago averaged 20/16 to 20/12. Excessive reading, and the fact that we no longer operate as endurance predators, has reduced this over the last couple of centuries.
That's because things used to try to eat us, but they were sprinters. The humans who outran them survived.[/quote]I believe limetom actually said human vision is quite good (he was just saying that it was even better in the past). I also know for a fact that it is extremely good. Our vision has to be good though as all our other senses are mediocre at best. We are creatures based very heavily on sight. [/quote]We're designed as predators, and predators typically rely heavily on at least one of the three "distance" senses. I wouldn't be surprised if either our hearing and/or smell used to be better, too.[/quote]I think the latter especially is probably due in part ot the same things limetom cited in his explanation of why our eyesight is typically not as good as it used to be. Although, actually I figure there has probably always been a degree of both, and those with poorer eyesight were the ones that got picked off before. Since we are not threatened by predators now, and have done so much with medicine, those with eye disorders have survived where they would not have in the past.
Sorry, that was @ Llum.[/quote]@Nomadic: our eye's aren't really spaced /that/ far apart, really. On a round(ish) head, eyes can only be spaced so far apart before they start to be at significantly different angles to each other.
Notice that predators-- canines, felines, raptors, etc-- typically have their eyes at the front of their head (good depth perception, to focus on a 'target'), where as prey animals-- rabbits, squirrels, deer, etc-- typically have their eyes further out to the sides (good field of vision, to notice danger in a wider area).[/quote]That's because we can invent boats, knives, rope and pretty much anything else, which makes us better than the specialized animals.[/quote]
Ignore the bit about spaced eyesight. I can't remember what that was about. I have something I call super-dyslexia (only cause I don't know what it actually is). I confuse meanings, words, phrases, ideas and other things from time to time. An example being that I might say "that tree is wide" when what I meant was "the area that tree moves through blowing back and forth in the wind is large". And then of course when I try to go back and correct myself I have trouble remembering what I actually meant.
Math! Poetry! Have carnal relations for longer than a few seconds! :P
Humans only real asset is their brain. Their smart which allows them to copy and improve on any design they see in nature.
Beyond that... For a bi-pedal creature, we can run fairly fast!
I don't know if it counts as something we can actually do, but as far as survival traits go, we're omnivores. If the supply of prey animals dwindles in a certain area, we can get by on edible plants; wolves can't. If the supply of edible plants dwindles in a certain area, we can get by on meat; rabbits can't. If I'm not mistaken (I could be), we're even apex omnivores, which means we don't have to worry as much about natural defense mechanisms. An apex omnivore is the most spoiled creature on the food chain.
Edit-- I second EE's third example of what we can do. That's damned impressive, all things considered.
With a very few notable exceptions (whales, a few reptiles, certain molluscs, and biologically immortal creatures like hydra) we're one of the most long-lived animals out there. Compared to the vast majority of creatures we're ridiculously long-lived.
Here are a few I can think of:
- Human eyesight as was mentioned is quite highly developed. The positioning of our eyes and their link with our brain gives us quite a few interesting abilities. For one our eye positioning gives good depth perception coupled with a decent sized field of vision. Furthermore the design of the eye makes us sensitive to far more colors in our visible spectrum than almost any other creature. The biggest things though are due to our brain. The vision part of our brain is based around making up for what we don't see and for combining it with what we do. As we mature visually our brain records more and more information which it then uses to fill in gaps (this is why visual illusions work). You can actually see things without light from them hitting your eye because of this.
- Human musculature. We may not be elephants or the like but we still have a muscle and skeletal system based off apes. The ape body build is very good in terms of raw power. We may not have quite the strength of say a chimpanzee or a gorilla but it isn't all gone. In fact our brain has to limit us to only using a fraction of our strength as using our full strength could tear our muscles tendons and seriously injure us. This is why we see incredible feats of strength where a person picks up a car or a fallen steel beam or something else in a danger situation. The fight or flight response in us temporarily disables the brains regulators that prevent us from using our full strength.
Didn't see this was here before I put it in the Tavern:
Well, I think the right-brain influence is very important for what makes humans different from other animals--the creativity. There are a lot of animals that can problem solve, but few if any that can do it as well as we can. We are very creative at coming up with ways to overcome a challenge, or to circumvent one (as any DM will tell you of his players' ability to destroy his plans). It is this creativity that has allowed us to think abstractly enough about things to imagine how to create tools, and increasingly complex tools, and to come up with complex social orders and ways of communication and interaction, speech, song, gesture, eye-contact, even silence as ways to get a message across.
Humans are one of the longest lived species compared to our size. We beat whales in this category. Like Steerpike said, certain molluscs, the hydra, some reptiles (mostly turtles and the like) beat us on this.
Birds however beat us hands down, they live extraordinarily long for their size. Birds also have a superior system for cleaning our cellular waste from our bodies, with their high metabolisms its seems like they should suffer from cancer and related illnesses even more then humans. However cancer is nearly unheard of in birds, they can clean all kinds of free radicals and crap extremely well.
Quote from: LlumBirds however beat us hands down, they live extraordinarily long for their size. Birds also have a superior system for cleaning our cellular waste from our bodies, with their high metabolisms its seems like they should suffer from cancer and related illnesses even more then humans. However cancer is nearly unheard of in birds, they can clean all kinds of free radicals and crap extremely well.
The Perks of being related to Dinosaurs!
If I recall correctly, our senses are, in general, tremendously well attuned, considering how good the other ones are.
To me, the big advancement that propelled the human "predator" to the top of the food chain was the realization you could sharpen a stick, throw it, and kill your prey at distance. No other animal hunts like this. It is immensely powerful, and keeps you safe from most of their defenses. Things like keen vision and good depth perception are likely traits that evolved in support of this "stick throwing hunter" ability.
You all fail.
Human's best asset is language.
And I'm totally not biased as a linguist or anything...
Quote from: Llum...some reptiles (mostly turtles and the like) beat us on this.
Yet again demonstrating the superiority of turtles.
To add a few things:
-The most obvious one is that humans are the only existing species of bipeds. No other animal on currently existing on earth can balance on two limbs for extended periods of time.
-As far as we know, humans are the only existing species capable of thinking in symbols in addition to emotions and pictures. Many other animals have crude forms of language, but only humans can actually think in words. We're also the only species capable of asking, "Why?"
-On a related note, humans are the only existing animal that can experience emotional reactions to entirely abstract thoughts. Other animals can experience emotions related to food and companionship, but only humans can experience emotions upon, say, solving a math problem.
(I say "existing animal" instead of just "animal" because in the past, there may have been as many as a half-dozen coexisting hominid species, any one of which may have matched or come close to matching human capabilities. So its entirely possible that humans weren't always unique on planet Earth.)
I think Language is the best asset we have. Stick enough monkeys in a room and they'll invent Shakespeare. However, if those monkeys can't speak to one another, they're just a bunch of monkeys in a room.
Quote from: Elemental_ElfStick enough monkeys in a room and they'll invent Shakespeare.
I believe the internet really puts a hole in this comment.
Just want to note that Birds are bipeds (who descended from Theropods). Crazy how the dominant species tends to stand on 2 feet eh?
Quote from: limetomHuman's best asset is language.
Inasmuch as only humans 'think' in words, yes. And thinking in words allows us to develop languages more complicated than those of other animals.
But humans are not the only species with a language. Honey bees, for example, can communicate abstract flight directions to one another using a series of complex gestures. A honey bee seeing the gestures understands that they represent a specific flight path, and can follow that flight path to a source of pollen even if it has never been there before without requiring further help from the communicating bee.
Quote from: LlumJust want to note that Birds are bipeds (who descended from Theropods). Crazy how the dominant species tends to stand on 2 feet eh?
Good point. I should have said that humans are the only bipeds who rely on their legs as their primary form of locomotion.
But you are correct: birds are bipeds just like us. And hey, aren't birds the ones that live longer than us? Damn birds. Who do they think they are, showing up us humans like that?
Quote from: LlumQuote from: Elemental_ElfStick enough monkeys in a room and they'll invent Shakespeare.
Not really. The internet is anonymity to the extreme. People are more malicious and act in ways they wouldn't otherwise simply because no one will know it's them. So if the Monkeys were using the internet, they'd prolly just throw digital poo at each other. However if they were stuck in an IRL room together, they would invent Shakespearean quality prose.
As for the Birds, once again, 65 million years of awesome evolution trumps our rat ancestors :P
Quote from: Elemental_ElfAs for the Birds, once again, 65 million years of awesome evolution trumps our rat ancestors :P
Say that to my 12 gauge loaded with birdshot :P
Going back to the thing about long-distance running, I remember being blown away a few years back by a documentary I saw on the only tribe in the world still to use endurance hunting.
These dudes basically chased this caribou or some similar animal across the semi-desert until it collapsed from exhaustion. The reasons it gave for the human superiority over distance is that we can sweat from more of our body than most other animals, and we have hands to carry containers of water with us, so we can keep the fluids in our system balanced while we run.
[blockquote=Epic Meepo]Good point. I should have said that humans are the only bipeds who rely on their legs as their primary form of locomotion.[/blockquote] Aren't kangaroos predominantly bipedal? And ostriches are flightless and so are entirely bipedal in terms of locomotion. Same goes for flamingos and penguins, though the latter admittedly does swim quite a bit.
According to wikipedia apparently cockroaches can also move bipedally and regularly do at surprising speeds.
I forgot about the fact that we can sweat! that's huge.
Yeah, we don't need to use our tongues for it, either.
I think the fact that we have a lack of over all body hair is another asset we have over other mammals. Its tied in with the fact that we can sweat compared to other animals.
I'm somewhat surprised no one has mentioned opposable thumbs yet, they're really handy in manipulating stuff.
Sure some other animals have em too, but combined with our abstract reasoning they really helped us out. Especially in the using pointy sticks to kill stuff department.
Quote from: LlumI'm somewhat surprised no one has mentioned opposable thumbs yet, they're really handy in manipulating stuff.
Sure some other animals have em too, but combined with our abstract reasoning they really helped us out. Especially in the using pointy sticks to kill stuff department.
I assumed that one was a given. :)
I'm convinced there were only a few really major advancements in the development of weapons-- in fact, I can only think of three. The first is the smash-y thing; sticks, bones, rocks, that sort of thing. Y'know, things that go smash. The second was the stabby-slashy thing. This is where knives, swords, spears (of all sorts), etc. come in. The third was the boomy thing. This is pretty much any kind of explosive. From there, it was just a matter of how to use these different things; guns are simply using a boomy thing to make a stabby-slashy thing go over there, rocket launchers are boomy things that make other boomy things go over [/i]there[/i], and so on and so forth.
I think our bipedal design might help us in acquiring fruits that grow higher then five feet. Instead of having to scurry up a tree, all we need to do is reach. I imagine it also helps with intimidation displays.
Quote from: Elemental_ElfI think the fact that we have a lack of over all body hair is another asset we have over other mammals. Its tied in with the fact that we can sweat compared to other animals.
Note that I am not disagreeing, just using this as a springboard. Humans actually have more hair then the nearest relative animal (chimps). The difference is that our hair is much finer and shorter than chimps (so we look less hairy even though we aren't). So it's more of an issue of the fact that while we have more hair, our hair doesn't restrict our ability to sweat like it would if we had chimp hair.
On another note I have never seen extensive training used in the animal kingdom. Please direct me to the proper resources if I am wrong but you don't see many animals training themselves both mentally and physically to the point where they go beyond their base abilities. Examples here being our self conditioning via things such as boot camp and martial arts training in order to more efficiently control our bodies. Likewise you have things like bodybuilders and gymnasts that can pull off incredible feats of strength and agility. On the agility note too, you don't see many animals (there are a few though) that have the coordination to do something like the uneven bars.
Quote from: NomadicNote that I am not disagreeing, just using this as a springboard. Humans actually have more hair then the nearest relative animal (chimps). The difference is that our hair is much finer and shorter than chimps (so we look less hairy even though we aren't). So it's more of an issue of the fact that while we have more hair, our hair doesn't restrict our ability to sweat like it would if we had chimp hair.
Good catch!
Quote from: NomadicOn another note I have never seen extensive training used in the animal kingdom. Please direct me to the proper resources if I am wrong but you don't see many animals training themselves both mentally and physically to the point where they go beyond their base abilities. Examples here being our self conditioning via things such as boot camp and martial arts training in order to more efficiently control our bodies. Likewise you have things like bodybuilders and gymnasts that can pull off incredible feats of strength and agility. On the agility note too, you don't see many animals (there are a few though) that have the coordination to do something like the uneven bars.
They do. The first difference is that they don't do it with the conscious intent of improvement, and the second difference is that their training is more practice-oriented. They don't use the push-up in any survival maneuver, so they don't use it in their training. Don't believe me? Watch kittens "play". Sneaking, pouncing, batting around, biting... that's training hunting skills.
Quote from: Halfling FritosQuote from: NomadicOn another note I have never seen extensive training used in the animal kingdom. Please direct me to the proper resources if I am wrong but you don't see many animals training themselves both mentally and physically to the point where they go beyond their base abilities. Examples here being our self conditioning via things such as boot camp and martial arts training in order to more efficiently control our bodies. Likewise you have things like bodybuilders and gymnasts that can pull off incredible feats of strength and agility. On the agility note too, you don't see many animals (there are a few though) that have the coordination to do something like the uneven bars.
They do. The first difference is that they don't do it with the conscious intent of improvement, and the second difference is that their training is more practice-oriented. They don't use the push-up in any survival maneuver, so they don't use it in their training. Don't believe me? Watch kittens "play". Sneaking, pouncing, batting around, biting... that's training hunting skills.
That is a very good point. I suppose the difference there is just that human abstract thought enables us to plan ahead and train in ways that most creatures wouldn't think of.
Quote from: NomadicThat is a very good point. I suppose the difference there is just that human abstract thought enables us to plan ahead and train in ways that most creatures wouldn't think of.
or simply train the skills we need in the near future rather than an entire set of skills, i.e. short term specialization.
Time for story hour, kids...
Simulation Semantics
A couple of years ago, scientists were doing experiments on monkeys to determine exactly how the brain controls motor neurons to move various parts of the body.
One day, while a monkey's brain and arm was hooked up for an experiment, a scientist decided to take a break and get a doughnut. As he reached down for the doughnut, he noticed the monkey was watching him. Not really out of the ordinary. The readings for the monkey's brain and motor neuron outputs, however, were completely unexpected.
As the scientist picked up the doughnut, the monkey watching him activated all the neurons, both in the brain and in the arm, involved with picking something up. These neurons, however, did not fire as intensely as when the monkey was actually picking something up.
Thus, the theory of simulation semantics emerged. Basically, simulation semantics says that we understand meaning in the world through simulations our brains run. If I think about jumping up and down, all the neurons in the brain and in my legs involved with jumping will fire at a very low level. The same is involved in speech. If I tell you "I jumped up and down yesterday," not only am I remembering as well as simulating this, you are also simulating this. In fact, by reading that, you would be simulating it.
Metaphorical terms are simulated in a similar manner. In English, we conceive of time as linear motion. The future is ahead, the past is behind, and the preset is where we currently are. We can be doing the motion (i.e. "I've breezed through the past couple of years.") or time itself can be doing the motion (i.e. "Finals week is sneaking up on us."). In both instances, we simulate not the abstract concept of time, but the very real concept of linear motion.
It's a bit mind blowing.
That does in part have to do with the constraints of our reality. With everything that we experience we experience it in a linear fashion. That is because the reality we perceive works linearly. So even with abstract thought we have to put things into linear terms in order to get our heads around it. This is why there are so many paradoxes. The paradox violated a rule based on linear concepts and we can't get our head around the non-linear possibilities.
Quote from: NomadicThat does in part have to do with the constraints of our reality. With everything that we experience we experience it in a linear fashion. That is because the reality we perceive works linearly. So even with abstract thought we have to put things into linear terms in order to get our heads around it. This is why there are so many paradoxes. The paradox violated a rule based on linear concepts and we can't get our head around the non-linear possibilities.
only[/i] in English.
Time in Navajo is metaphorically conceived of in the opposite directions: the past is in front and the future is behind. Time in Chinese is metaphorically conceived of vertically: the past is below and the future is above. Time in Mesoamerican cultures (e.g. Aztec and Mayan cultures) operates in a wholly different fashion: it is cyclical.
Time here would be called the target domain; the thing your talking about. In English, linear motion would be called the source domain. You map the source domain to the target domain to make a metaphor.
And I'd say we don't simply experience everything linearly. If we couldn't get our head around non-linear concepts, we'd have a lot of trouble. Every person who has learned the modern Gregorian calender system, for example, knows that the year starts over every 365 (or 366) days. Even more complicated would be the week, which isn't mapped to any observable, natural cycle, and starts over every 7 days.
Quote from: limetomTime in Mesoamerican cultures (e.g. Aztec and Mayan cultures) operates in a wholly different fashion: it is cyclical.
Beat me to it. Western culture is skewed to see time as linear while other cultures do different things. The Aztec and the Spanish had a very hard time relating to one another because their cultures, and the way each perceived the world, were so very different. Take a good look at an Aztec map and try to make heads or tails of it. Fundamentally, they viewed the world in a different way.
Personally, i think this is a strength of humanity. We're not bound to a single point of view but can, through abstract reasoning, extrapolate many different ways to view time and space.
Quote from: Map of Tenochtitlan
(//../../e107_files/public/1228900074_14_FT59321_map_of_tenochtitlan_.jpg) (//../../e107_files/public/1228900074_14_FT59321_map_of_tenochtitlan.jpg)
(Protip: East is up.)
(http://www.amerikanistik.uni-mainz.de/key/bilder/aztec-map.jpg)
Quote from: limetomAnd I'd say we don't simply experience everything linearly. If we couldn't get our head around non-linear concepts, we'd have a lot of trouble. Every person who has learned the modern Gregorian calender system, for example, knows that the year starts over every 365 (or 366) days. Even more complicated would be the week, which isn't mapped to any observable, natural cycle, and starts over every 7 days.
But note that when getting our head around something non-linear we use linear concepts. Note that cycles are still linear. I am not talking linear in the sense of drawing a line. This is linear in terms of one thing following another. A week cycles, so does a year (as do all other units of measurable time). However, it all follows a certain flow. If it didn't you wouldn't be able to tell time.
Quote from: NomadicBut note that when getting our head around something non-linear we use linear concepts. Note that cycles are still linear. I am not talking linear in the sense of drawing a line. This is linear in terms of one thing following another. A week cycles, so does a year (as do all other units of measurable time). However, it all follows a certain flow. If it didn't you wouldn't be able to tell time.
Yeah, sure, I guess.
Quote from: limetomQuote from: Elemental_Elf(http://www.amerikanistik.uni-mainz.de/key/bilder/aztec-map.jpg)
I know. Its like the T & O maps, really. They're conceptual maps of how the culture views the world and the heavens. I suppose it isn't really a map, per se, just a map of the heavens and the gods.
Also, you've mentioned that these maps top is oriented East. That isn't that odd actually. Many European maps (Mappa Mundi) were oriented that way because the North, prior to magnets and compasses, was of little interest compared to the East, where the Sun rose each morning. I actually really like the old
I think our ability to adapt has to be stronger than other animals. Some other animals use tools, and I've seen programs that show chimps modifying their tools (bending sticks, debarking them), but none go to the lengths we do. Even "back in the day", we chipped rocks to create blades which allowed us to efficiently butcher animals so we could take the food away from the carcass that attracted scavangers.
But language is definately what let us become what we are today.
As an aside, I watched a program on animal emotions and thought, which had one segment about a particular dolphin. This dolphin knew 30 tricks, and its trainers put it through an experiment. Each day the feeder would come out with his bucket of fish to feed the dolphin. But the feeder wouldn't feed the dolphin until it did a trick. So the dolphin did a backflip.
Next day the feeder came out and the dolphin did a backflip right away, but the feeder didn't feed it; the experiment called for him to wait for the dolphin to do a different trick. Confused, the dolphin flipped a few more times before it apparently realized that food wasn't coming, so it did a different trick. The feeder then fed it.
This continued for a month, with the dolphin exhausting the tricks it was taught. Apparently, the dolphin then began to mix the tricks together, and even create wholly new tricks, so that it would continue getting fed.
So we aren't the only ones with creativity. We have probably the most complex creativity (this website showcases that), but at least one other animal does as well.
And a point on language. The same program had a segment on a family of gorillas that all know sign language. Apparently the children of the gorillas that were taught by people use a fair portion of the signs the adults were taught. They even have observed the gorillas using signs with each other, and even with themselves (one gorilla was filmed playing with a black elephant figurine, and it kept signing "black, black" and then it got frustrated and threw it and signed "stupid").
One of the old female gorillas of this band (it might have been a different group) got very frustrated when one of the scientists went away for a long time. When she came back, the female gorilla was at first angry and didn't want to "talk" with her. But the scientist then signed to the gorilla that "her baby had died", and the gorilla quickly showed sympathy and even signed "cry".
I know that my pet rats even have actions that we attribute to emotions, even those that aren't related to food. One of them in particular will always clean herself where we can see her (she looks really cute when she does so, so we always give her attention), and will not leave you alone until you take her out of the cage and let her be a part of whatever you're doing (she'll sleep on my player's shoulders while we're playing D&D; otherwise she'll chew on her cage's bars and make all kinds of racket).
Aside from Elephants apparently recognizing the bones of other Elephants, I'm pretty sure we're the only animals aware of our mortality. Sure, other animals will generally try to avoid things that will kill it (unless the alternative is more certain death), but our realization has probably led us to some advances.
Quote from: Kapn XeviatOne of the old female gorillas of this band (it might have been a different group) got very frustrated when one of the scientists went away for a long time. When she came back, the female gorilla was at first angry and didn't want to "talk" with her. But the scientist then signed to the gorilla that "her baby had died", and the gorilla quickly showed sympathy and even signed "cry".
Aside from Elephants apparently recognizing the bones of other Elephants, I'm pretty sure we're the only animals aware of our mortality. Sure, other animals will generally try to avoid things that will kill it (unless the alternative is more certain death), but our realization has probably led us to some advances.
Those two paragraphs appear to contradict. Elephants aren't so much renowned for recognizing bones of the same species (my dog can do that), but appearing to have long and intense grieving periods.
I don't believe animals know that they themselves can die but they are aware of the disappearance (i.e. death) of others, which causes intense feelings of loss. Dogs have such feelings, I mean have you ever babysat for a dog whose owner went on vacation? They often mope around and appear anxious at the perceived loss of their of their friend & master.
Higher order mammals, like apes, will obviously manifest the same emotions but in a much more significant way because they have bigger, more powerful brains.
Quote from: Stargate525Quote from: Kapn XeviatOne of the old female gorillas of this band (it might have been a different group) got very frustrated when one of the scientists went away for a long time. When she came back, the female gorilla was at first angry and didn't want to "talk" with her. But the scientist then signed to the gorilla that "her baby had died", and the gorilla quickly showed sympathy and even signed "cry".
Aside from Elephants apparently recognizing the bones of other Elephants, I'm pretty sure we're the only animals aware of our mortality. Sure, other animals will generally try to avoid things that will kill it (unless the alternative is more certain death), but our realization has probably led us to some advances.
Those two paragraphs appear to contradict. Elephants aren't so much renowned for recognizing bones of the same species (my dog can do that), but appearing to have long and intense grieving periods.
Also, I saw a show on the Discovery channel about some type of monkey, and when one of the children was killed (I think in a food battle, but it's been awhile), the mother recognized that her child died. I don't know how "intense" the grieving period was, but there certainly was greiving to some degree.
Birds also recognize loss. When one of my birds died the others sat very still and only made very quiet noises for almost a week. This is very odd since these birds are so loud normally that I can hear them when I'm outside. Also they seem to be able to change "tricks". I taught one of them to wolf whistle and he started to make a whole little tune with the wolf whistle integrated into it.
Yeah, I was refering to the knowledge of self mortality.
As for the elephant thing, the program I watched showed that elephants would spend time with bones they found that belonged to one of their group, but would spend less time inspecting the bones of elephants from outside their group. It was as if they recognized who the bones belonged to.
Quote from: Kapn XeviatAs for the elephant thing, the program I watched showed that elephants would spend time with bones they found that belonged to one of their group, but would spend less time inspecting the bones of elephants from outside their group. It was as if they recognized who the bones belonged to.
That's actually quite cool!
Yeah, that is pretty interesting. I wonder if it has anything to do with the tusks?