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(shuō)明虎鯨比我們聰明嗎，還是它們的大腦血液流量不如我們?

評(píng)論翻譯

Amyas Cavit
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(wèn)題！
大腦的復(fù)雜性和智力密切相關(guān)。簡(jiǎn)單地說(shuō)，一個(gè)大腦的褶皺越多，這個(gè)大腦就越聰明?；ⅥL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(méi)有的特征，比如與處理來(lái)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(shuō)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(méi)那么簡(jiǎn)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(méi)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(wèn)題如何解決？語(yǔ)言？所有這些都很難去測(cè)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(yǔ)言，但到目前為止，我們還無(wú)法學(xué)習(xí)它們的語(yǔ)言。

Pablo Emanuel
“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(zhēng)等等——而海豚們所做的只是在水里玩得很開(kāi)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?！?/p>

Sergio Diniz
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。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.ltaaa.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Whitla Lindsay
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?

Sergio Diniz
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(lái)衡量。

Relebohile Nkosi
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(guò)IQ測(cè)試分?jǐn)?shù)來(lái)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(méi)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(guò)還是謝謝樓主的這篇答案。

Amyas Cavit
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(cè)試在測(cè)試人類智力方面同樣沒(méi)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。

Per
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(cè)，因?yàn)榻y(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)是這樣說(shuō)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(lái)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(wèn)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)。

Per
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(guò)一些聰明的人，他們以一種“直接的，顯而易見(jiàn)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。

Amyas Cavit
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(méi)有任何常識(shí)！

Relebohile Nkosi
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?

Mateus B.
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(shuō)沒(méi)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(shuō)，看，我可以做很多你做不到的事情，以你甚至無(wú)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。