Instinct is pseudoscience

Author: badger

Posts

Total: 36
Topic's author
#1
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
I can't think of anything that's more pseudoscience than the idea of instinct. I mean there's some parts that are obviously instinct or something just baked into whatever creatures: baby turtles running for ocean immediately after being born; generations of butterflies taking turns flying over and back between places; salmon, whatever they get up to. List goes on. And some creatures aren't much more than automata for sure. But there's so much else that sounds total bullshit. Social and solitary creatures for example. Polar bears living in conditions where food is incredibly scarce, forced apart for a chance at better hunting and because in hunger cannibalism is not unknown. Lions in the savannah, pushed together by all the other big monsters, elephants, crocodiles, hippos, other lions. Tigers solitary for no need of each other, kings of their jungle, their only competition being other tigers. All things that make a whole lot of sense. If you put humans in these animals' positions, we'd do the same of cleverness. But for the animals it's instinct. Then in captivity polar bears and tigers are plenty social. Some instincts.

We observed some crazy shit in nature and took an idea in it and applied it needlessly across the board. The idea also hinders adaptability massively.
#2
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,259
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@badger
Religion is more pseudoscience for a start.

And everything that you stated above contradicts itself.

Instinct is subconsciously stored operational information.

Why the big downer on instinct.
Topic's author
#3
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
Religion gets no credence as any sort of science. Instinct does. 

Instinct is subconsciously stored operational information.

You've sure shown me. 

I just think that along the way intelligence takes over. What's the need of both? 
#4
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@badger
It sounds that you dislike how often people use instinct as the explanation for a behavior,
But at the same time, you identified and admitted some instincts exist.
Maybe even you feel there is no need for instincts.

Myself, I like instincts well 'enough,
Though I'm probably broader in my definition than is correct,
Personally, I don't see why instincts shouldn't be learned, or developed, resisted, or followed,
People be a soldier, a gamer, a hunter, a painter, learn reflexes in response to stimuli, develop intuition in certain situations, even if what is sensed cannot be identified.
Might be better if 'can be identified,
But to me that's just leaning 'into the instinct, following through on it.

People have proclivities, born into, developed into,
Often useful.

Though I'll say again, after reading Wikipedia,
Pretty sure my 'broad view of instincts is considered wrong by educated people.
#5
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@badger
And you’d be wrong. 

Try looking up the definition: 

in·stinct
noun
/ˈinstiNG(k)t/
an innate, typically fixed pattern of behavior in animals in response to certain stimuli.
"birds have an instinct to build nests"

Humans have instincts too. For example, it’s part and parcel to our fight or flight response. It’s also a part of why we pull back from pain or even the anticipation of it. 


#6
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,259
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@badger
Instinct isn't science.

Science might evaluate instinct.

Intelligence is the conscious manipulation and utilisation of data.

Intelligence cannot (yet) replace the necessity of instinctive function.

And religion is pseudoscience.

Popular Middle Eastern religions hypothesise that a floaty about bloke created the universe.
#7
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 167
Posts: 3,837
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
Studying what instincts are actually instincts among humans and other animals is an important part in anthropology, sociology and biology. It doesn't become pseudoscience until it attempts to categorize baselessly what instincts are present in groups of organisms.
#8
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,264
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Instinct is subconsciously stored operational information.
Zed, got it on the button head there.  If we here a large bang, or zinging noise, some will instinctively duck there head lower in case it is bullet flying through the air.

Instincts and common sense are similar.


#9
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,011
3
2
4
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
4
-->
@badger
I can't think of anything that's more pseudoscience than the idea of instinct. I mean there's some parts that are obviously instinct or something just baked into whatever creatures: baby turtles running for ocean immediately after being born; generations of butterflies taking turns flying over and back between places; salmon, whatever they get up to. List goes on. And some creatures aren't much more than automata for sure. But there's so much else that sounds total bullshit. Social and solitary creatures for example. Polar bears living in conditions where food is incredibly scarce, forced apart for a chance at better hunting and because in hunger cannibalism is not unknown. Lions in the savannah, pushed together by all the other big monsters, elephants, crocodiles, hippos, other lions. Tigers solitary for no need of each other, kings of their jungle, their only competition being other tigers. All things that make a whole lot of sense. If you put humans in these animals' positions, we'd do the same of cleverness. But for the animals it's instinct. Then in captivity polar bears and tigers are plenty social. Some instincts.

We observed some crazy shit in nature and took an idea in it and applied it needlessly across the board. The idea also hinders adaptability massively.
I couldn't agree more, instinct is a descriptive term rather than an explanatary term, it seems to be a term that is used to pretend we understand something, as if use of the word fills in the gaps in our understanding.  I see it as another "gaps" argument,  a lot like the “God of the gaps” fallacy, which takes many different forms, a few being  "emergent properties of the gaps", “evolutionary advantage of the gaps”, “complexity of the gaps”, and “hidden variables of the gaps”; and I will contend that they are all one and the same theory in principle. All of them are only different forms of the argument from ignorance, illogical attempts to say that the lack of an adequate explanation supports my presumptions, and not yours, which is a logically invalid argument.   In practice, invoking the word "instinct" is something of an incantation that magically transforms something we don't understand into something we do understand.  
#10
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,011
3
2
4
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Religion is more pseudoscience for a start.

And everything that you stated above contradicts itself.

Instinct is subconsciously stored operational information.

Why the big downer on instinct.
There you go, "instinct of the gaps" is better than "God of the gaps",  proof positive that "instinct of the gaps" supports Zed's s presumptions, and not yours.  
#11
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,011
3
2
4
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
4
-->
@Lemming
Personally, I don't see why instincts shouldn't be learned, or developed, resisted, or followed,
I think instinct is considered to be more like something that operates below the level of awareness,  like an "automatic" response to a stimulous,  sort of like saying we don't need to understand this, the solution was already worked out by evolution long ago.
#12
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,011
3
2
4
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
4
-->
@Intelligence_06
Studying what instincts are actually instincts among humans and other animals is an important part in anthropology, sociology and biology. It doesn't become pseudoscience until it attempts to categorize baselessly what instincts are present in groups of organisms.
I think his point is that it's pseudoscience when we pretend that the word "instinct" provides a scientific explanation.

#13
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,011
3
2
4
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Instinct isn't science.

Science might evaluate instinct.

Intelligence is the conscious manipulation and utilisation of data.

Intelligence cannot (yet) replace the necessity of instinctive function.

And religion is pseudoscience.

Popular Middle Eastern religions hypothesise that a floaty about bloke created the universe.
Allow me to explain this post scientifically, you see, for the species known as "atheist", this is an instinctive response to the stimulous of seeing the word "pseudoscience".  It's nothing but an emergent property that was worked out by evolution long ago, think of it as a hidden variable.
#14
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Sidewalker
But humans 'are aware, conscious,
Well, of a 'fair bit.

Take TWS1405_2's comment on fight or flight,
Valuable I am sure to our ancestors,
One is walking outside with a friend, t's dark, and suddenly there's a lion,
Getting pumped enough to kill the lion, valuable,
Getting pumped enough to outrun the lion or one's friend, valuable.

We're 'aware of fight or flight,
By research and experience.
It's even something we take into account, as it can be dialed back or up.

Because we're aware of it, we might habituate ourselves to not suddenly shooting whatever surprises us in the woods,
Especially if hunting in a group, need to look and verify.

Maybe if we were being attacked by wolves, more our habit to just shoot whatever surprises us,
As we have reason to expect the wolves, better to 'use the instincts.

Sometimes instincts get screwed up, from a perspective,
Take PTSD,
DANGER DANGER,
There's value, in some situations, when surprised, woken sleeping, unaware,
Of fighting,
War, or being hunted by wolves,
In safe home with family and spouse, No,

And so the instinct must be tuned, therapy, control.

. . .

Though I'd agree,
People might just use instinct as a vague explanation at times,
Without looking towards reason or other explanations.
Topic's author
#15
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
Birds building of nests is an interesting example. Birds are highly intelligent creatures, parrots, pigeons, crows and ravens being high up on any list you'll find on the  question of animal intelligence. Why is some "instinct" necessary that these creatures whose physical advantage lies in being out of reach should build houses that are out of reach? 

Here's a fun little video: https://i.imgur.com/LXbzy4V.gifv

That bird is very clearly aware of the cat's physical limitations. 
Topic's author
#16
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
Sidewalker is a legend from way back. 
#17
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@badger
There are absolutely cases of innate instinct, like turtles running to the sea when hatched, as you described. Hunting is usually learned from the parents/pack, so captive-bred predators usually cannot be released to the wild. Snakes, however, usually do fine, presumably because they are on their own from birth, all hunting behaviors are some combination of instinct and self-taught.
A lot of people overestimate how much is instinctual.
Topic's author
#18
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@K_Michael
Hunting is usually learned from the parents/pack, so captive-bred predators usually cannot be released to the wild. 
That's a great point. Thanks man. 
#19
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,259
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Sidewalker
I'm only aware of a programmed primate species known as homo-sapiens.

Programmed with all sorts, including programming with a variety of religious pseudo-sciences, or not as the case may be.

One assumes that previous hominids functioned similarly but perhaps more instinctively, and by default, more logically.
#20
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,259
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@badger
The necessity of procreation is instinctive, hence LGBTQ etc.
Topic's author
#21
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
The necessity of procreation is instinctive, hence LGBTQ etc.

Says who? Sex is a pretty simple jigsaw puzzle to solve.
#22
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,259
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@badger
Not really, unless you contain the relevant information.

Same as eating...... Why would you bother unless you contained the relevant information.
Topic's author
#23
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
You don't think the fact of food being tasty takes care of that? Or sex pleasurable?
#24
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,011
3
2
4
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
4
-->
@badger
Sidewalker is a legend from way back. 
LOL, yeah, I was a legend in my own mind, man, that was a long time ago. 

I thought I recognized you, Irish, heavy drinker, pervert...ok, that's redundant...you're Irish right?   

I think Airmax was around back then too, and Sadolight maybe, other than that, I'm thinking most everybody else at this site wasn't even born yet.
#25
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,259
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@badger
Not at all.

When the teat or the nipple was first offered to you how did you know what to do?

What drives younger people to constantly feel the need to satisfy sexual urges.

Two examples of innate subconscious messaging.
Topic's author
#26
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
So what's the point in these things being pleasurable then? Why layer incentive atop instinct?
#27
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,259
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@badger
The point is the survival and perpetuation of the species.

And what is pleasure, other than a sub-conscious, internal electro-chemical response to a stimulus.

So the conscious thinking brain makes up all sorts of other stuff as well.

And sometimes it's easy to overthink and thereby overlook the distinction between the two levels of internal function.
Topic's author
#28
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
None of that means anything. I asked you a fairly simple question. 

Isn't there redundancy in eating and sex being pleasurable if instinct takes care of our drive to do these things?
#29
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,264
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
And sometimes it's easy to overthink and thereby overlook the distinction between the two levels of internal function.

Ive been accused of overthinking stuff many a time.  I may do that with my cosmic explorations of cosmos, biology, geometry and numerical associations.

I dare to be naive, as I never had overly educated set of circumstances. ..... ' My educations was one of the biggest impediments to my learning '...A Einstein

Biologic dogma:
DNA { 64 codons includes RNA } > RNA { mRNA, rRNA, tRNA }, > Protein { 20 amino acids defined by 61 codons }

Cross-over transitional dogma to Meta-space:
innate > instinct/intuition > fight or flight good or bad { ex putrid/decay smells = bad }

Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts dogma:
ego > common sense > logic > critical thinking > 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 etc

Cosmic dogma:
Universe { gravity and dark energy whole } > black holes { gravity and dark energy{?} coding egg and seed }  > quantum entanglement { gravity and dark energy{?} ultra-micro lines-of-relationship coheres }





Topic's author
#30
badger
badger's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,087
3
3
3
badger's avatar
badger
3
3
3
-->
@Sidewalker
Half the drunk these days. Twice the pervert lol. But yeah that was the good old days. Ain't what it used to be. 

Nice to see you still kicking anyway. You were a fairly fierce combatant in the philosophy board as I remember it.