Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T18:03:25.026Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dual systems for all: Higher-order, role-based relational reasoning as a uniquely derived feature of human cognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 December 2019

Daniel J. Povinelli Open the ORCID record for Daniel J. Povinelli [Opens in a new window] ,
Gabrielle C. Glorioso ,
Shannon L. Kuznar  and
Mateja Pavlic
Daniel J. Povinelli
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA70504povinelli@louisiana.edushannon.kuznar1@louisiana.eduwww.danielpovinelli.com
Gabrielle C. Glorioso
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA70504. C00304772@louisiana.edumxp1503@louisiana.edu
Shannon L. Kuznar
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA70504povinelli@louisiana.edushannon.kuznar1@louisiana.eduwww.danielpovinelli.com
Mateja Pavlic
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA70504. C00304772@louisiana.edumxp1503@louisiana.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hoerl and McCormack demonstrate that although animals possess a sophisticated temporal updating system, there is no evidence that they also possess a temporal reasoning system. This important case study is directly related to the broader claim that although animals are manifestly capable of first-order (perceptually-based) relational reasoning, they lack the capacity for higher-order, role-based relational reasoning. We argue this distinction applies to all domains of cognition.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 42 , 2019 , e271
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barker, B. K. & Povinelli, D. J. (2019) Old ideas and the science of animal folklore. Journal of Folklore Research 56(1–2):113–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bugnyar, T., Reber, S. A. & Buckner, C. (2016) Ravens attribute visual access to unseen competitors. Nature Communications 7:10506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christie, S., Gentner, D., Call, J. & Haun, D. B. M. (2016) Sensitivity to relational similarity and object similarity in apes and children. Current Biology 26:531–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennett, D. (2009) Darwin's strange inversion of reasoning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106:10061–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flemming, T. M., Thompson, R. K. & Fagot, J. (2013) Baboons, like humans, solve analogy by categorical abstraction of relations. Animal cognition 16:519–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haun, D. B. & Call, J. (2009) Great apes’ capacities to recognize relational similarity. Cognition 110:147–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penn, D. C., Holyoak, K. J. & Povinelli, D. J. (2008) Darwin's mistake: explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31(2):109–30; commentaries, response, 130–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penn, D. C. & Povinelli, D. J. (2009) On becoming approximately rational: The relational reinterpretation hypothesis. In: Rational animals, irrational humans, ed. Watanabe, S., Huber, L., Blaisdel, A., & Young, A., pp. 23–43. Keio University Press.Google Scholar
Povinelli, D. J. (2000) Folk physics for apes: The chimpanzee's theory of how the world works. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Povinelli, D. J. & Barker, K. B. (2019) Appendix: Doctor Fomomindo's preliminary notes for a future index of anthropomorphized animal behaviors. Journal of Folklore Research 56(1–2):125–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Povinelli, D. J. (2012) World without weight: Perspectives on an alien mind. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Povinelli, D. J. & Giambrone, S. (1999) Inferring other minds: Failure of the argument by analogy. Philosophical Topics 27:167–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Povinelli, D. J. & Vonk, J. (2004) We don't need a microscope to explore the chimpanzee's mind. Mind and Language 19:1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, A. H., Hunt, G. R., Holzhaider, J. C. & Gray, R. D. (2007) Spontaneous metatool use by New Caledonian crows. Current Biology 17:1504–07.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vonk, J. & Povinelli, D. J. (2006) Similarity and difference in the conceptual systems of primates: The unobservability hypothesis. In: Comparative cognition: Experimental explorations of animal intelligence, ed. Wasserman, E. & Zentall, T., pp. 363–87. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar