the octopus and the evolution of intelligent life

Has Godfrey-Smith turned into one of those animal minds kooks (or pet owners) whose evident affection for their subjects robs them of critical distance? ‘The plural of anecdote is not data’, some will say.īut these concerns miss their mark. For philosophers and cognitive scientists, this same narrative intimacy will immediately raise red flags. That journey also provides the book with a narrative thread, from his initial encounter with octopuses, into his growing fascination with them, and then on to his study and theorizing about the inner lives of cephalopods. For the general reader this first-hand experience establishes his expertise, and also allows him a certain kind of intimacy with his subject that invites the reader on his journey. Other Minds emphasizes Godfrey-Smith’s first-hand experience observing and interacting with cephalopods, especially octopuses and cuttlefish. Here I will focus my attention on two additional aspects of Godfrey-Smith’s Other Minds: first, his contribution to the methodological question of how to approach the eponymous puzzle of other minds second, the implications of his conclusions for my own cause célèbre, the phenomenon of multiple realization. I am not myself surprised that there are knowledgeable philosophers who get out from behind their desks, though Godfrey-Smith’s stories are particularly impressive. They also seem impressed by the breadth of empirical knowledge that he brings to the subject-‘Godfrey-Smith is not a scientist but a philosopher’, notes the Washington Post, as though surprised. Popular media discussions of Godfrey-Smith’s book have tended to focus on his enthusiasm, on his anecdotes, and on the perceived novelty of a philosopher who is also a scuba diver-perhaps, of a philosopher who leaves his office at all. ‘Peter Godfrey-Smith is besotted with cephalopods’, begins a review of Other Minds in the Los Angeles Times.

The octopus and the evolution of intelligent life