this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2023
177 points (95.9% liked)

Today I Learned

18084 readers
472 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I know that they do this. The primitive ant species fight for the queen position all the time. However, in the more modern ant species this behaviour is rare or doesn’t really exist as far as we know. In bees it is also not the norm.

And there still are no cognitive abilities of any insect that have been shown to come close to those of somewhat intelligent vertebrates. I don’t think that insects are robots, however their behavioural repertoire is very limited in comparison to birds for example let alone humans.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You sound like someone who flunked AP biology

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok, any arguments to back that up?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I already gave them to you.

There is no "primitive" or "modern" species. Ant, or otherwise. Thats not a thing, biologically speaking, for extant species.

And, again, lacking cognitive testing is not proof of lack of cognition. Even if we do ignore the examples of play, a behavior that requires developed thinking.

Youre making up blind assumptions based on your belief that insects are below humans. Its a false assumption, one with no facts to support it, and it flies in the face of the actual facts.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. I used primitive and modern as a way to refer to more basal or derived traits in ant colonies that I hoped would be more accessible. This is commonly used in literature although a bit dated.

  2. Where did I say ants don’t have cognition? You just assumed this. Also, there are no examples of playing behaviour in ant species so far. Only the bumblebee paper. If you know of any publications on this topic that I don’t know about, please feel free to share. Maybe they do, still doesn’t really change much.

  3. Show me an insect manufacturing or using tools. Or one learning new techniques by watching others, or one teaching its offspring. These are some of the complex cognitive traits found in mammals and birds that have not been shown for insects as far as I know.

Believe me when I tell you that I have a profound interest and appreciation for insects, enough to shape career and education choices around them. But claiming that insects are cognitively even remotely on the same level as humans is not supported anywhere and a bit of a silly hill to die on.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. you used it incorrectly, both originally and now.

  2. you heavily implied this, and are doing so again here. Again, lack of research is not proof of null.

  3. leafcutter ants teach each other the neccessary steps for fungal feeding. They do not naturally know how to prepare the leaves. As far as you know is not a far distance, and is not a basis for dismissing an entire branch of the animal kingdom as lesser.

The silly hill to die on is you acting like your lack of knowledge is equivalent to fact. It spits in the face of scientific research.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. I didn’t. I meant it, to use another terminology, as ancestral/derived traits. Maybe you get that.

  2. I didn’t, also you can’t prove absence of something as you should know.

  3. Do you actually believe ants have closely similar cognitive abilities to humans? Where does this idea come from? At the beginning of the century entomology textbooks actually featured flowcharts to predict insect behaviour. We found out that there is more individuality and adaptability but it’s still not comparable to animals with more complex brains.

You have provided effectively 0 evidence to prove anything as wild as ants forming some elaborate society that would be even nearly as complex as that of humans. Show me this research that you speak of or maybe try to lay off the pop-sci a little.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You dont read well, huh? You literally just agreed with me, and apparently dont even realize it.

Ironic, considering youre the one spouting pop sci.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Guess you’re happy then 👍