You must log in or # to comment.
It’s fault tolerance. “I know a guy like that, his beak fell off. He’s still a pigeon though.”
Does this imply that pigeons don’t experience the Uncanny Valley? Does it mean that we can determine whether non-human animals experience the Uncanny Valley? Because I would love to see a deep dive into how common that is in the animal kingdom.
I’d also be fascinated if we figured out a way to do it
I personally suspect it’s not common in the animal kingdom. It’s quite likely a defense against leprosy, a disease that is most dangerous in larger society type communities, without outside predators (to pick off the sick).
That theory might be wrong however. Its distribution would tell us a lot about what it defends against.
It might also be their version of the uncanny valley applies for different things.
A dog’s uncanny valley could be something that smells slightly off, but humans wouldn’t think much about a human that smells funny, for example.
Whereas a pigeons may well focus on other features instead of the face.
Very good point! Would love to see that researched as well.
Pigeons are immune to analogue horror
You mean body horror?
You mean woke horror?
You mean being torn apart by dogs?
That diagram literally says that they don’t look the same to the pigeons, and seems to suggest that pigeons may place more value on the beak than they do on the eyes.
Imagine for a moment that you have never seen a photo of yourself , ever. Or anyone who is a human.
Your whole life you grew up in a white room with other animals like you in cages.
The problem with using 2d images in animal research is that it is assumed that animals understand what photos are.
But they probably don’t. Or at least they don’t rely on them or interpret them like we do. From a young age we watch tv. Read picture books. Look at photos albums. Even draw each other.
Animals don’t have those experiences. Especially lab animals. They don’t even have the experience of seeing billboards or posters.
This is a huge problem in forming any type of conclusions from animal research like this.
It’s not impossible. But their perception is not like a humans.
They don’t see a photograph of a bird and recognize it’s their kind they are looking at.
They probably just think it’s a screen or paper. Or something like that.
Because 2d is unnatural. They likely have limited ability to understand it’s a representation.
Even humans have to learn to interpret representations (I can explain this more if someone asks).
How do birds identify each other?
Sounds they make ? Location? Movements ?
I’m not sure exactly but I doubt it’s solely visual face recognition.
Even dogs use smell more than visual face recognition.
It’s still an interesting study. But we just have to keep in mind the limitations I mentioned when interpreting the results.
if they are all seen the same, what are the comparison symbols for?
you lie
Some time ago I saw a video of a Pigeon trying to impress a Falcon, perhaps this could be the reason
horrors beyond my comprehension = everything
