Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

At Mind Matters News: If octopuses are really smart, should we eat them?


Proposals to farm octopuses are meeting with opposition on grounds of animal cruelty

Underlying the ethical issues is the admitted fact that the evolution of animal intelligence, however it happened, is nowhere near as tidy as we once believed:

Octopuses present something of a puzzle. As Canadian investigative journalist Erin Anderssen pointed out earlier this month, “The octopus has already challenged our theories on evolution, intelligence and consciousness.”

Evolution? We have tended to assume that intelligence rose with the development of a spinal cord and brain (vertebrates), and warmbloodedness (mammals and birds). So invertebrates like octopuses were expected to be “naturally” less intelligent than, say, raccoons. But they are not less intelligent. They have been called a “second genesis” of intelligence and the jury’s still out on how they came to be so. Some have made the argument — only partly in jest — that they might be alien life forms.

They defy stereotypes. Intelligence is believed by many researchers to have evolved naturally because of the need to get along in groups:

Denyse O’Leary, “If octopuses are really smart, should we eat them?” at Mind Matters News

But the octopus defies that plausible evolution of intelligence thesis because it isn’t social at all; it is a loner.

Did you know: On account of their apparent (and unique) intelligence, octopuses are currently given more legal protection than most invertebrates.

You may also wish to read: Octopuses get emotional about pain, research suggests. The smartest of invertebrates, the octopus, once again prompts us to rethink what we believe to be the origin of intelligence. The brainy cephalopods behaved about the same as lab rats under similar conditions, raising both neuroscience and ethical issues.

@BobRyan most Darwinists are just liberals in disguise. They don’t take their own theory to heart I mean look at the thread currently being argued about how science turned it’s back on atheism You’ll see the token atheist arguing for the human dignity of anybody from the LGBTQ And they fight fiercely for that while sitting there and claiming Christians are hypocrites for hating them when Christians really don’t hate the LGBTQ many of them just don’t agree with their behaviors What’s amazing is that their scientific viewpoint of Darwinism, that they hold dear as a proof that god doesn’t exist, is the very same view that reduces the LGBTQ down to psychological disorders caused by genetic mutations very likely caused by their environment and passed down to the next generation. It’s evolutionary Sprandel caused by random and epigenetic mutations You can try to argue that it might be for kin selection but that’s debatable There are billions more examples of heterosexual mating pairs vs homosexual mating pairs throughout the entire Animal Kingdom which lends to the obvious success of heterosexual mating pairs So they love the point the finger at Christians and say that we pick and choose what we want to believe out of the Bible but turn around and do exactly the same with their own precious belief Evolution doesn’t support the LGBTQ, liberals that think evolution is true do, but evolution however does not it’s an evolutionary dead end And if evolution supported it then it would be a tad bit more successful than it really is AaronS1978
According to Darwinists, we are nothing more than animals. Animals have no more responsibility to protect anything. We are the top of the food chain without free will, which means we should eat and do as we must. The only way humans are humans have any responsibility is if humans alone have free will. Darwinists cannot have it both ways. Either humans are animals or humans have responsibility. Only if the Judaeo-Christian God is real can there be expectations of man to be good stewards of the Earth. BobRyan

Leave a Reply