Bekoff begins badly. I know that Johnson mentioned this in class, but I wanted to expound. "We must not think that monkeys are smarter than dogs for each can do things the other cannot. Smart and intelligent are loaded words that are often misused: dogs do what they need to do to be dogs-they are dog smart in their own way."
Well, I do agree that 'smart' and 'intelligent' are words often misused. This is where the merits of Bekoff's paragraph stops. First of all: the ability for one species to do things that the other cannot is no measure of it being smarter than the other, and therefore, the fact that species A and species B can both do things the other cannot does not denote that neither is smarter than the other. For instance, if I cannot play the piano Professor Johnson (this is hypothetical) cannot create a crossword puzzle, is it not still reasonable to claim that he is smarter than I?
Secondly. 'Dogs do what they need to do to be dogs' is, simply, a tautology, and therefore cannot be used in support of any other claim. Do dogs do what they need to do to be dogs? of course they do, otherwise they wouldn't be dogs. My soccer ball is very smart. After all, it does what it needs to do to be a soccer ball. This claim of his does nothing.
Question: Have I been fair. Does Bekoff's tautology accomplish a task of any sort?
Jacob,
ReplyDeleteI think we need to be much more charitable than this; Bekoff presents a strong argument that is not dependant on the above claim. I responded to this entry.
Keane,
ReplyDeleteMy intention was not to depreciate the entirety of Bekoff's argument. I intended to only demonstrate the uselessness of the claim in question, upon which, as you correctly point out, the rest of his argument is not based.
I will, of course, read your post.