Re: whale brains
Phillip Bigelow (firstname.lastname@example.org)
22 Nov 1995 11:19:47 -0800
>email@example.com (Benjamin H. Diebold) writes:
>>This pretty clearly says, if you want to measure intelligence you first
>>have to start by assuming that humans have more of it than chimps, chimps
>>more than dogs, etc. That is, you have decided, before any measurements
>>have been made, what the comparative results will be.
firstname.lastname@example.org (H.M. Hubey) attempted:
>You got it half right. Measurements with instruments provide
>better accuracy and precision. In order to produce the
>instruments you already must have made "measurements" with
>your naked senses, those things we call "observations".
>There is no applemeter except our eyes and perception.
email@example.com (Benjamin H. Diebold) wrote:
>>If you can devise a measurement for intelligence, first explain what you
>>mean by intelligence, and then provide a mechanism to generate the
firstname.lastname@example.org (H. M. Hubey) stated:
I have to laugh at the direction this dialog has taken. The problem is
discussed in the perceptive musings of S.J. Gould in _The Mismeasure of
Man_, and Carl Sagan's tome _Boca's Brain_. (two good reads that relate to
the history of science, and how it is often mis-applied).
It is truely frustrating to try to identify the tact that Hubey is trying
to take on this subject. He seems to have some type of agenda, but it