This is a link to a biography of George John Romanes, the developer of the method known as "introspection by analogy." We learned about this method during our text's mention of Margaret Floy Washburn and, unfortunately, the link only elaborates a bit more on that particular method. It does, however, describe Romanes's work and the fact that he believed animal intelligence to be equal to that of humans. I find this idea, along with the concept of introspection by analogy, to be interesting, but I don't quite know what to make of it.
I certainly believe that animals are intelligent (although I am perhaps not as fond of inscent intelligence as Romanes was), but I don't know if analogizing human intelligence to animal intelligence really works. Based on principles of evolution, it seems that at least some of the mental processes would have to operate in the same way. But I tend to believe that there is something unique about human intelligence, or at least primate intelligence. I am not particularly swayed by Romanes's assertion that Jellyfish consciousness is the same as human consciousness. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with you that the notion of common intelligence with other species is fallacious and the method of introspection by analogy is fraught with problems. On the other hand, we have discussed in class how western psychology has been terribly biased by individualistic notions ... that could be generalized to a species individualism that might be otherwise. Zen traditions, as well as others, believe in and live according to a notion of connection with all living beings (and non-living in some philosophies) that would welcome and validate a method of introspection by analogy.
ReplyDelete