I ran across this paper when I typed the subject into Google: Animal rights, animal minds, and human mindreading https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2563326/
I thought I'd troll with it, here, since we've had so many discussions of monism and behaviorism. The question came up in this: Sam Harris & Jordan Peterson - Vancouver - 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jey_CzIOfYE I don't know where the question came up in their discussion. But it's clearly relevant for evolutionary psychology. If we could prove that non-human animals don't psychologize, then many of Peterson's arguments might hold some water. (Especially in light of what they're calling "metaphorical truth" ... e.g. "cargo cults".) Personally, it seems to me the idea that they *don't* psychologize is preposterous. Even without assuming a fine-grained spectrum between humans and our nearest non-human relatives, it seems reasonable that our "mind reading" is simply a more reflective (deeper) algorithm for the prediction of the behavior of others (or ourselves in counterfatcual situations). -- ☣ uǝlƃ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
