New Scientist - UK (2022-05-14)

“ Different brain

architectures

may have

advantages and

limitations”

14 May 2022 | New Scientist | 45

outperform other species as much as you

might think. Take Ayumu, a chimpanzee

taught to remember random sequences of

nine numbers that a screen flashes at him

for only 60 milliseconds – less than the blink

of an eye. Humans don’t do very well at this

task. But Ayumu easily types out the digits

in the right order. Once, he competed against

the world memory champion Ben Pridmore –

and won handily.

Despite such shortcomings, human

intelligence does seem to be special, and

constructing a periodic table might help

highlight how. “There is something different

about it because other organisms on this

planet are not having conversations about

this,” says Barron. “I don’t think it’s a story of

human exceptionalism. But there is something

interesting about human intelligence and it

will be lovely to understand what that is.”  ❚

intelligence around us. “Whenever you

ask, is this species cleverer than we thought?,

the answer is yes,” says Cooperrider. “It’s

like overturning rocks in the stream bed and

we’ve only overturned an extremely small

percentage of the rocks so far. Every time we

turn one over, we find something cool.”

The project could also fundamentally

change how we view other species. “Whether

or not an animal is intelligent often informs

how we think that animal should be practically

and ethically treated,” writes Marta Halina, one

of the project’s researchers and a philosopher

of cognitive science at the University of

Cambridge. “Some argue that the ability to

act intentionally and flexibly is connected

to autonomy, and autonomy is sufficient for

personhood.” Personhood, in turn, might

entitle an animal to legal protections.

Already, lawyers have argued in court cases

that chimps deserve rights usually reserved

for humans, including freedom from unlawful

incarceration – although unsuccessfully so far.

We might even learn something about

ourselves by trying to work out where we sit on

a periodic table of intelligence. Humans don’t

Ute Eberle is a science journalist

based in Baltimore, Maryland

related project that tries to map out non-

human cognition into an Atlas of Intelligences.

However, not everyone is convinced that

a periodic table of intelligence can succeed.

“Is it meritorious? Obviously. Is it realistic?

I’m not so sure,” says Edward Wasserman at

the University of Iowa, who has spent five

decades studying the cognitive abilities

of eight species, including humans. It is

extremely difficult even to systematise

intelligent behaviour, he says. “There are

so many variables that critically determine

the results. It’s mind-boggling.”

Blurred lines

Barron admits that the whole concept

might be completely wrong. “There could be

no clear boundaries between the different

dimensions of intelligence – they could be

blurred,” he says. If this were the case, there

would be no meaningful structure and,

hence, no periodic table. “But even if it falls

over, we’ll have learned a lot,” he says.

That might include a deeper appreciation

and sense of wonder for the multitudes of

Mosquitoes are
fast learners, while
African elephant
brains have far more
L:^ E neurons than ours

RIC

BA

CC
EG
A/A

GE

FO
TO

ST
OC
K/A

LA
MY

;^ R:

AM

AZ
ON

• IM

AG

ES
/AL

AM

Y