- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Scientists investigating video of a cow using tools, and later conducting some basic psychology experiments on said cow, say their findings could expand the list of animals capable of tool use.
The title seems to suggest the scientists are disputing the claim that the cow is using tools, but the article itself says the opposite.
I’m also a bit confused on why any of this is news. Cow scratchers are a thing you can just buy. Cows readily use them.
A cow using a scratcher is doing something that provides an immediate reward. The cow that selects and manipulates an appropriate stick is planning ahead for a future reward.
I think they make a distinction between acting on an object and merely using the environment. The first requires more agency, I guess.
I guess we’re used to hearing “this was not an accident” as meaning “this was rigged”, but for scientists it translates more to something like “thank god, it’s a real finding and not just one of those weird things that happen every now and then”.
That quote by itself is fine, but when they combine it with “unravel” and “supposed” it puts a different interpretation on it.
I usually equate “unravel” with “tear apart”, but maybe they meant something more like “unpack”.
Yeah the title is clickbaity for sure.
I dunno—in this case, confirmed tool use seems more noteworthy than debunked tool use.
Maybe the implication of a dispute just sounds more dramatic.
To me it sounded like someone was trying to manipulate the video or the findings or something. They could have gone with the much more straightforward “researchers observe signs of tool use in cow”, but they didn’t.