(December 6, 2014 at 7:54 pm)Rhythm Wrote:(December 6, 2014 at 7:10 pm)boothj1985 Wrote: Seeing an insect run for its life doesn't mean it is experiencing the same level of fear a human does when they're running for their life. Think of color-depth for instance. The more colors an image is made up of like 8-bit vs 24-bit has a big impact on how realistic and vivid the image appears. The image may have the same basic appearance and describe the same thing but it's accuracy is based on the quantity of information used to express it.What's your favorite rube goldberg? Quantity or complexity of effect can be misleading. You recognize that in the ant....how about us? How can we imply that our fear is more accurate, or on some other level....when you have no criticism for the ant that would not apply for the man? Aren't both sitting at nil presently with regards to level of consciousness- if we decide to downplay the role of observation?
(Insects lack sufficient hardware to provide recognizably mammalian emotional responses, would ant emotional response be lesser somehow for being different? What are the differences between the two that stick out to you?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ani...of_neurons. http://mri.ucsd.edu/irina/Publications_f...202005.pdf. The second article doesn't say exactly that the number of neurons involved determines the intensity of a sensation but the mere fact that neural activity has been shown to correlate directly to feeling, it only seems logical to assume that the less material one has to work with, the less they can experience.
