虎鯨的大腦比我們的更復(fù)雜，這說明虎鯨比我們聰明嗎，還是它們的大腦血液流量不如我們?
Orcas'' brains are more complex than ours. Are orcas smarter than us, or do they not get as much blood flow to their brains as we do?
譯文簡介
大腦的復(fù)雜性和智力密切相關(guān)。
正文翻譯
Orcas' brains are more complex than ours. Are orcas smarter than us, or do they not get as much blood flow to their brains as we do?
虎鯨的大腦比我們的更復(fù)雜，這說明虎鯨比我們聰明嗎，還是它們的大腦血液流量不如我們?
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 2 )
收藏
Excellent question!
Brain complexity and intelligence are closely correlated. In simple terms, the more folds and convolutions a brain has, the more intelligent the possessor of that brain is. Orca brains are densely folded and convoluted, much more so than human brains. Some sections of their brain are much larger than the corresponding areas of our brains, notably the regions associated with emotions and social intelligence. Their brains also have some features that ours lack entirely, such as the region associated with processing sensory data from their echolocation.
One rough measure of relative intelligence is to compare brain-to-body-mass ratios. In humans this ratio is 1:40, about seven times larger (relatively) than the average mammalian brain. Orca brains, at a ratio of around 1:100, are about 2.5 times larger than the average mammalian brain, which is comparable to great apes like chimpanzees, but also to house cats. So using this measure we would say that humans are “more intelligent” than orcas.
Below: An orca brain compared to a human brain.
好問題！
大腦的復(fù)雜性和智力密切相關(guān)。簡單地說，一個(gè)大腦的褶皺越多，這個(gè)大腦就越聰明。虎鯨的大腦密集地折疊和彎曲，比人類的大腦更復(fù)雜。他們大腦的某些部分比我們大腦的相應(yīng)區(qū)域大得多，尤其是與情緒和社會(huì)智力相關(guān)的區(qū)域。它們的大腦也有一些我們完全沒有的特征，比如與處理來自回聲定位的感官數(shù)據(jù)相關(guān)的區(qū)域。
相對(duì)智力的一個(gè)粗略衡量方法是比較大腦與身體質(zhì)量（體重）的比率。人類的這一比例是1:40，大約是哺乳動(dòng)物平均大腦的7倍(相對(duì)而言)?；ⅥL的大腦比例約為1:100，是哺乳動(dòng)物平均大腦的2.5倍，這可以與黑猩猩等類人猿媲美，也可以與家貓媲美。所以用這種方法我們可以說人類比虎鯨“更聰明”。
下圖:虎鯨大腦與人類大腦的對(duì)比。
But it’s not that simple. Intelligence is a tricky thing to quantify. An ant’s brain-to-body-mass ratio is about 1:7, and no one believes that ants are more intelligent than humans. If you play chess with a squirrel (ratio 1:150) you are probably going to win. But if you had to keep track of hundreds of nut caches in your head, how well would you do? What about things like memory? Problem solving? Language? These things are all difficult to measure, and any comparison between animal brains and human brains must necessarily fall victim to the apples-and-oranges fallacy.
Confused yet?
Perhaps the best way to think of it is that orcas have different intelligence than humans. Their social intelligence seems to be far more advanced, but on the other hand orcas have never developed algebra or string theory. Orcas are self-aware, intelligent creatures with brains that are distinct from human brains in many respects. And while humans may be more “intelligent” based on measures that we ourselves created, it is worth noting that orcas can learn our language, but so far we have been unable to learn theirs. Food for thought.
Seafood, in this case.
但事情沒那么簡單。智力是一個(gè)很難量化的東西。一只螞蟻的大腦與身體質(zhì)量之比約為1:7，但沒有人相信螞蟻比人類更聰明。如果你和一只松鼠下棋(比例為1:150)，你很可能會(huì)贏。但如果你必須在頭腦中記錄數(shù)百個(gè)堅(jiān)果儲(chǔ)藏地，你會(huì)做得多好?記憶?問題如何解決？語言？所有這些都很難去測量，任何對(duì)動(dòng)物大腦和人類大腦的比較必然會(huì)成為蘋果和橘子謬論的犧牲品。
還是感到疑惑嗎？
也許最好的解釋就是虎鯨的智力與人類不同。它們的社交智力似乎要高得多，但另一方面，虎鯨從未發(fā)展出代數(shù)或弦理論?；ⅥL是有自我意識(shí)的智慧生物，它們的大腦在很多方面都與人類的大腦不同。雖然根據(jù)我們自己創(chuàng)造的衡量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，人類可能更“聰明”。值得注意的是，虎鯨可以學(xué)習(xí)我們的語言，但到目前為止，我們還無法學(xué)習(xí)它們的語言。
“For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.”
“例如，在地球上，人類總是認(rèn)為自己比海豚更聰明，因?yàn)樗呀?jīng)取得了如此多的成就——輪子、紐約、戰(zhàn)爭等等——而海豚們所做的只是在水里玩得很開心。但與此相反，海豚一直認(rèn)為它們比人類聰明得多——原因完全相同。”
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Good answer. And the fact cetaceans brain have also to process their echolocation, which should require a considerable space.
好答案。事實(shí)上，鯨類動(dòng)物的大腦必須處理回聲定位，這需要相當(dāng)大的腦容量。
Your point is that dolphins are not actually smart the brain is only big for echo location etc?
你的意思是海豚實(shí)際上并不聰明，它們的大腦只是用于回聲定位之類的?
No, my point is their are not “smarter” than us, que cannot use only brain size as an absolute value.
不，我的觀點(diǎn)是他們并不比我們“聰明”，不能只用大腦的絕對(duì)值來衡量。
We should stop trying to determine the intelligence of a Chimpanzee by its IQ Test score because those things were designed for a human brain. For example, we may have the best engineers from the human species but I bet none of them can build a tunnel like ants could or a dam like beavers could. Even some of our “super technological advancements” were taken from the physiological aspects of animals, such as the way a car’s auto-parking feature is copying a bat’s echolocation abilities.
Thank you for this answer.
我們應(yīng)該停止試圖通過IQ測試分?jǐn)?shù)來判斷黑猩猩的智力，因?yàn)檫@些東西是為人類大腦設(shè)計(jì)的。例如,我們或許擁有人類最優(yōu)秀的工程師，但我敢打賭，他們中沒有人能像螞蟻那樣建造隧道，或像海貍那樣建造大壩。
甚至我們的一些“超級(jí)技術(shù)進(jìn)步”也借鑒自動(dòng)物的生理特征，比如汽車的自動(dòng)停車功能是如何模仿蝙蝠的回聲定位能力的。
不過還是謝謝樓主的這篇答案。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
IQ tests aren’t even that accurate for testing human intelligence. Like many such metrics, it is far more useful when talking about large groups than individuals.
智商測試在測試人類智力方面同樣沒有那么準(zhǔn)確。像許多這樣的指標(biāo)一樣，當(dāng)談?wù)摯蟮娜后w時(shí)，它比個(gè)人更有用。
Yes, everything about metrics like that is about statistical analysis. But that also means that IQ is more likely to predict than not, because the statistics say so. Examples of low-IQ individuals doing very well are abundant, and maybe vice versa. If I were to take my IQ score as a measure, I would expect myself to be economically independent, but I’m just an individual with other issues, so I work a job (albeit a fairly good one) to the best of my ability.
是的，這些指標(biāo)的一切都是關(guān)于統(tǒng)計(jì)分析。
但這也意味著智商更有可能預(yù)測，因?yàn)榻y(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)是這樣說的。低智商的人做得很好的例子比比皆是，反之亦然。
如果我用我的智商分?jǐn)?shù)來衡量，我希望自己經(jīng)濟(jì)獨(dú)立，但我只是一個(gè)有其他問題的人，所以我盡我所能地工作(盡管是一份相當(dāng)好的工作)。
I’ve met people who are smart in an “immediate, matter-of-factly of course obvious” way, who do really smart things in situations reactively, without thinking. I think it’s a different kind of smart than the ones who first review the facts and then come to a conclusion.
我遇到過一些聰明的人，他們以一種“直接的，顯而易見的”的方式行事，他們?cè)谝恍┣闆r下會(huì)做出非常聰明的事情，不需要思考。
我認(rèn)為這是一種不同于那些首先回顧事實(shí)然后得出結(jié)論的人的聰明。
Sometimes that is described as wisdom vs. intelligence. But yes there are absolutely different types of intelligence. I think we’ve all known someone who was super smart academically but had no common sense whatsoever!
這就是智慧的類型的區(qū)別。
確實(shí)存在不同類型的智力。我想我們都認(rèn)識(shí)一些人，他們?cè)趯W(xué)術(shù)上非常聰明，但卻沒有任何常識(shí)！
Now this is interesting. If we can accept that there are different kinds of “smart” amongst people, why can’t we accept that other types of animals are smart in their own way?
這很有趣。如果我們能接受人類中有不同種類的“聰明”，為什么我們不能接受其他種類的動(dòng)物有它們自己的聰明方式呢?
Humans are terrible, or incapable, of measuring the intelligence of other animals.
What we actually measure is their abilities to think like us is certain situations.
and we should be amazed when They do it, because it essentially says “l(fā)ook, I can do a bunch of stuff you can’t, think in a way you can’t even understand AND we do a bunch of things that you consider to be hard as well”
人類是可怕的，或者說沒有能力去衡量其他動(dòng)物的智力。我們真正衡量的是他們?cè)谔囟ㄇ闆r下像我們一樣思考的能力。
當(dāng)它們這樣做的時(shí)候，我們應(yīng)該感到驚訝，因?yàn)樗举|(zhì)上是在說，看，我可以做很多你做不到的事情，以你甚至無法理解的方式思考，我們也可以做一些你認(rèn)為很難的事情。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
About ants, I do believe they’re an evolved specie, like humans. They also use chemicals to preserve their food, to cure illness and wounds or prevent their disease with vaccine. They have a society, or a civilization, and do both good and bad things, the same humans do. Yet, we humans and ants can’t communicate each other and can’t find a way to do so, we tend to not see each other as intelligent specie, for most of us ants are just annoying insect, for ants we are just warm blooded giant being.
Is fascinating, that may tell us about a possible encounter with an intelligent alien species, even though ants are Earthlings too.
關(guān)于螞蟻，我相信它們和人類一樣是進(jìn)化的物種。他們還使用化學(xué)藥品來保存食物，治療疾病和傷口，或者用疫苗來預(yù)防疾病。
他們有社會(huì)，有文明，有善也有惡，和人類一樣。然而，我們?nèi)祟惡臀浵伈荒芟嗷ソ涣?，也找不到溝通的方法，我們往往不認(rèn)為彼此是智慧物種，對(duì)我們來說，大多數(shù)螞蟻只是討厭的昆蟲，對(duì)螞蟻來說，我們只是溫血的巨人。
很吸引人的地方在于，這可能告訴我們?cè)谟龅揭粋€(gè)聰明的外星物種時(shí)的情景，盡管螞蟻也是地球物種。
How to keep track of them? Easy. Preset locations. Each location contains set number of stashes, each stash have its own sign. To find them got to preset location, where i know the number of stashes.
And squirrels forget and lost a bunch of locations, planting trees.
如何記住貯藏處?簡單，預(yù)設(shè)位置。每個(gè)地點(diǎn)都有一定數(shù)量的藏身處，每個(gè)藏身處都有自己的標(biāo)志。要找到它們就得先去預(yù)設(shè)的地點(diǎn)，我知道那里有多少藏身處。
再說了，松鼠也會(huì)忘記很多地方。
They do forget some. But they remember a lot of them. Far more than I would, that’s for sure lol.
它們確實(shí)忘記了一些，但它們會(huì)記得很多。
比我想的多得多，這是肯定的，哈哈。
Speak for yourself. I know of all the marketplaces within 10 km of me, and what is sold where within every marketplace and where, and whether the nuts are any good and…
為自己說話。我知道離我10公里內(nèi)的所有市場，每個(gè)市場都在賣什么，堅(jiān)果是否好吃，以及別的……
One of my favorite aspects of squirrel personalities (and they do have personalities!) is that they practice deception. If they believe they are being watched by other squirrels they will pretend to bury their acorns in one location but actually put them somewhere else entirely. Crafty little buggers!
松鼠性格中我最喜歡的一個(gè)方面(它們確實(shí)有個(gè)性!)是它們會(huì)欺騙。如果它們認(rèn)為有其他松鼠在盯著它們，它們會(huì)假裝把橡子埋在一個(gè)地方，但實(shí)際上會(huì)把橡子完全放在另一個(gè)地方。狡猾的小家伙!
Hmmm. Sounds rather like the Planet Of The Apes guy, saying that humans could never be intelligent because…we don’t understand their language, but we conveniently ignore the fact that they (other animals) manage to understand ours!
Since we don’t understand any language of the orcas, why are we so dead certain that they haven’t developed any theoretical sciences?
I would be as surprised as anybody else if they have, but I wouldn’t categorically rule something out, just because of my own ignorance on the topic!
嗯。聽起來很像《人猿星球》，說人類永遠(yuǎn)不可能有智慧，因?yàn)槲覀儾欢麄兊恼Z言，但我們很方便地忽略了一個(gè)事實(shí)，即它們(其他智慧動(dòng)物)設(shè)法理解了我們的語言!
既然我們不懂虎鯨的任何語言，為什么我們?nèi)绱丝隙ㄋ鼈儧]有發(fā)展出任何理論科學(xué)呢?
如果它們這樣做了，我會(huì)和其他人一樣感到驚訝，但我不會(huì)因?yàn)樽约簩?duì)這個(gè)話題的無知而斷然排除某些事情!
I suppose that’s true. Maybe they have it all figured out and they’re watching us like, “Aww… How cute! The hairless monkeys are trying to figure out fusion!”
我想這是對(duì)的。
也許它們都知道了，它們看著我們，就像在說:“哇，多可愛??！無毛的猴子們正在嘗試解決核聚變問題！”
The brain is as big as it needs to be to survive in the environment and hunt and socialise.
I suspect mammalian brain anatomy had to adapt to the 3D space of ocean challenges for hunting more than flat terrain.
大腦的大小與它在環(huán)境中生存、狩獵和社交所需要的大小相匹配。
我懷疑哺乳動(dòng)物的大腦構(gòu)造需要適應(yīng)海洋的3D空間，而不是平坦的地形以適應(yīng)狩獵的挑戰(zhàn)。
Great post. To be fair though, I doubt they have tried to teach us their language as we have ours to them.
優(yōu)秀的文章，但公平地說，我懷疑它們沒有像我們教它們語言那樣教我們它們的語言。
Speak for yourself: I certainly didn’t develop algebra or string theory! The smarty pants of previous generations came up with that! However, I do agree it’s perplexing that linguists can’t interpret some animal communication with ease. Considering the complexities of Mandarin Chinese alone, or James Joyce’s Ulysses, why would animal communication be so cryptic?
為你自己說句話:
我顯然沒有發(fā)展代數(shù)或弦理論！這是前幾代人的智慧結(jié)晶！然而，我確實(shí)同意，語言學(xué)家不能輕松地解釋一些動(dòng)物令人困惑的交流。
單單考慮到漢語的復(fù)雜性，或者詹姆斯·喬伊斯的《尤利西斯》，為什么動(dòng)物之間的交流如此神秘?
Written Chinese looks complex. Spoken Chinese — Mandarin or any other variant — is anything but complex.
漢字書面語看起來確實(shí)復(fù)雜，但漢語口語以及各種方言則一點(diǎn)都不復(fù)雜。
English spelling is honestly probably harder to master than even written Chinese.
Well, maybe. Now I’m second guessing myself.
老實(shí)說，英語拼寫甚至可能比中文書寫更難掌握。
嗯,也許我是事后諸葛亮。
No need to second-guess. They’re at least neck-and-neck.
沒必要，至少，它們?cè)谶@方面不相上下。
Well, it is true that English spelling lacks consistency, and when it comes to grammar or idiomatic expressions, it’s usually just someone’s opinion that rules the day, until wider acceptance prevails, and some sort of consensus begins to form over time.
Culture and language are things that have definitely caused squabbles, after all, and continue to do so. Your LGBTQ friends might bristle over pronoun use, for example, or your feminist friends may not be particularly enamored with outmoded connotative adjectives with underlying misogynistic or sexist origins. But hey, it’s better than several Romance languages, like Spanish, which have gender differences inextricably tied to their essential codifying symbols and grammatical constructions.
的確，英語的拼寫缺乏一致性，而當(dāng)涉及到語法或習(xí)語表達(dá)時(shí)，通常只是某人的觀點(diǎn)說了算，直到被更廣泛地接受，并隨著時(shí)間的推移開始形成某種共識(shí)。
畢竟，文化和語言肯定會(huì)引起爭論，而且還會(huì)繼續(xù)。你的LGBTQ朋友可能會(huì)對(duì)代詞的使用感到憤怒。例如，你的女權(quán)主義朋友可能不會(huì)特別喜歡那些帶有潛在歧視女性或性別歧視根源的過時(shí)形容詞。
但是，嘿，它比一些羅曼語好，比如西班牙語，這些語言的性別差異與它們的基本編碼符號(hào)和語法結(jié)構(gòu)密不可分。
Chimpanzees outperform humans in computer screen split second visual recognition tests.
黑猩猩在電腦屏幕瞬間視覺識(shí)別測試中表現(xiàn)優(yōu)于人類。
Makes sense. Memory is important for keeping track of stuff like where food is located. Humans have learned to write stuff down, so our memories don’t need to be as good any more.
說得通。記憶對(duì)于記住食物的位置很重要。人類已經(jīng)學(xué)會(huì)了寫東西，所以我們的記憶不需要再那么好了。
Orcas haven’t learnt our language, we’ve taught them a few voice commands, even chickens have 20 to 25 words they use.
I remember where hundreds of nut caches are, I have thousands of parts I find that aren’t properly catalogued, as I’ve moved house many times since losing everything in a fire, and haven’t had time to separate and catalogue the stuff I use in my biz, so I quickly remember where it is.
Also, a q, does brain size have to do with generating enuf electrical energy to stimulate muscles?
虎鯨還沒有學(xué)會(huì)我們的語言，我們教過它們一些語音指令，即使是雞也會(huì)使用20到25個(gè)單詞。
我能記住有數(shù)百個(gè)堅(jiān)果儲(chǔ)藏處，我可以找到數(shù)千個(gè)未被歸類的零件。自從我在一場火災(zāi)中失去了所有的東西、搬了很多次家，沒有時(shí)間把我在工作中使用的東西分開和分類，所以我很快就學(xué)會(huì)記住它們?cè)谀睦铩?br /> 此外，大腦的大小是否與產(chǎn)生足夠的電能來刺激肌肉有關(guān)?
Even dogs learn our language but we don’t understand theirs. For that matter, many animals, like parrots, cows, etc do learn our language. And yet here we are, looking up into the blank sky, hoping to get an alien to talk to.
甚至狗也能學(xué)會(huì)我們的語言，但我們卻聽不懂它們的語言。就這一點(diǎn)而言，許多動(dòng)物，如鸚鵡、牛等，確實(shí)在學(xué)習(xí)我們的語言。然而我們卻在這里，仰望著空白的天空，希望能找到一個(gè)外星人交談。
We actually have a pretty good handle on canine communication. (Which is not surprising after 30,000 years together!) Their brains are less complex than ours, so the “information density” they convey through sound is far lower than for humans. It’s not really accurate to refer to dogs’ communication as “l(fā)anguage.”
Cows, of course, think only of murder.
事實(shí)上，我們?cè)谌惤涣鞣矫嬲莆盏煤芎谩?在一起3萬年之后，這并不奇怪!)它們的大腦沒有我們的復(fù)雜，因此，它們通過聲音傳遞的“信息密度”遠(yuǎn)低于人類。把狗的交流稱為“語言”并不準(zhǔn)確。
當(dāng)然，牛，我們只想到吃掉它。/笑
But they also communicate through chemical deposits and receptors, i.e, sniffing. We don’t have a clue how to do that, or at least I don’t.
但它們也通過化學(xué)物質(zhì)和受體進(jìn)行交流，也就是嗅探。我們不知道該怎么做，至少我不知道。
Yes that is very true and a great observation. Dogs have way more olfactory receptors than we do and can communicate information by smell that is completely lost on us.
Perhaps the most interesting things about dogs, though, is the way they have changed through their close contact with humans. There is evidence, for example, that dogs understand human laughter and what it means. Perhaps most impressively, dogs possess a trait called joint attention. This is when one individual draws the attention of another individual to some obxt or person outside themselves. Let’s say you are with a friend and they point and say, “Hey, look at that car.” Your eye follows where they are pointing and you know that your friend is referring to the car. Dogs can do this; wild canids (and indeed most other animals) cannot.
是的，這是非常真實(shí)和優(yōu)秀的觀察。
狗的嗅覺感受器比我們的多得多，它們可以通過嗅覺來傳遞信息，而我們完全不能。
例如，有證據(jù)表明，狗能理解人類的笑聲及其含義。也許最令人印象深刻的是，狗擁有一種叫做聯(lián)合注意力的特征。這是指一個(gè)個(gè)體將另一個(gè)個(gè)體的注意力吸引至它們之外的物體或人身上。
假設(shè)你和一個(gè)朋友在一起，他們指著你說，“嘿，看那輛車。”你的眼睛跟著他們所指的地方，你就知道你的朋友指的是車。狗可以做到這一點(diǎn)。野生犬科動(dòng)物(實(shí)際上大多數(shù)其他動(dòng)物)不能。
I see your point but disagree in part. I think once a person has lived in close quarters with other animals they come to lean and interpret each other’s actions which is a form communication.
communicating may not be discussing the weather or what they thought of the food they had last night, but you come to know how they feel and, when they are expressing affections and their wants and needs. These are achieved through both actions and to some degree verbal.
我明白你的觀點(diǎn)，但在某種程度上我不同意。我認(rèn)為，一旦一個(gè)人與其他動(dòng)物生活在一起，他們就會(huì)變得彼此相互依賴，并理解彼此的行為，這是一種交流的形式。
交流可能不是討論天氣或他們對(duì)昨晚吃的食物的看法，但你開始了解他們的感受，以及他們何時(shí)表達(dá)情感和他們的需求。這些都是通過行動(dòng)和某種程度上的言語來實(shí)現(xiàn)的。
Your answer is going very deep into the crux the matter. Thank you.
Are humans the smartest species on the earth? It gets tricky to give the correct answer. I always remember feral children, which accommodate lifestyle, senses, behavior, intelligence, and way of living as such of the species that adopted them. It would be interesting to observe what kind of behavior and intelligence we can get when we swap brains and bodies in the animal kingdom?
樓主的答復(fù)深入到了問題的癥結(jié)所在。謝謝！
人類是地球上最聰明的物種嗎?給出正確答案是很棘手的。我一直記得野性的孩子，他們適應(yīng)生活方式、感覺、行為、智力和生活方式，就像收養(yǎng)他們的物種一樣。
觀察當(dāng)我們?cè)趧?dòng)物王國里交換大腦和身體時(shí)，我們會(huì)得到什么樣的行為和智力，這將是很有趣的。
The orca’s brain size has to compensate for the total absence of sleep of a juvenile and the mother during the long return to the pod from the birthing site. This aspect is still under research, but for more details see “Why We Sleep” by Matthew Walker.
虎鯨的大腦大小必須彌補(bǔ)幼鯨和母親在從產(chǎn)房返回鯨群的漫長過程中完全缺乏睡眠的不足。這方面的研究仍在進(jìn)行中，但要了解更多細(xì)節(jié)，請(qǐng)參閱Matthew Walker的《我們?yōu)槭裁此X》。