Spiders are intelligent

What do you mean by unique? Using rocks to open things I wouldn't have thought was unique to any particular mammal. A crow or gull, for example, would repeatedly drop from a height small shellfish and molluscs onto rocks, in order to break the shell.Then there is the factor of environmental pressure. Why should a spider choose to change its web if it is doing the necessary job? And would we necessarily notice if it made changes to its mating dance?

The question stands.Are there any examples of an individual spider coming up with new and uniques solutions to a new problem?

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

And my question stands. What constitutes 'unique'?First, clarify the question you want answered.It is not clear from your example what sort of 'uniqueness' you are referring to. At best it looks like some fuzzy sort of 'impressiveness' factor.

Have you any evidence of gulls/crows using new techniques in response to new situations?Have you any evidence of spiders using new techniques in response to new situations?For example:A case report of a novel type of stick use by wild chimpanzees
Primates
Volume 44, Number 2 / April, 2003Or this:Tool use previous as environmental enrichment for previous captive chimpanzees
Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Volume 81, Issue 2, 19 April 2003, Pages 171-182 Got anything to offer?

Quit stalling and answer the question.

The topic is "Spiders are intelligent".What examples are available showing individual spiders coming up with a new solution for a new problem? Unique would be something different than other spiders of the same local population.

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Cleverest crows opt for two tools

You know, this is really frustrating.In essence, Sin's position is this:I would like to debate "spiders are intelligent".I will not define spiders.I will not define intelligent.Discuss.

Fabulous.Now. How about spiders?btw.Don't post bare links.

Now, are there similar examples of spiders finding new solutions to new problems?

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

I don't have access to dedicated studies.But something I have observed is that spiders make use of windows and mirrors (like car wing mirrors) to build their webs, improving the chance that a bug would blunder.

You might try reading what you just wrote. You are asking people to agree with you because you believe you are correct. But surely, that's an unreasonable expectation.Most people believe that there are clear distinctions between instinctual behavior and intelligent behavior. Your saying that there are no differences isn't likely to sway minds. If you want people to agree with you, then you have to present a persuasive argument. Up to now, you haven't done that.The other alternative is for you to stake out your own position, describe it carefully and give reasons for it, but not be concerned about whether people agree with you. To an extent, you have done that, except you have not given very good reasons.Your mistake is to want people to agree with you. I suggest you concentrate on giving good reasons, maybe examples of things that people think of as intelligent and why those are not importantly different from what is done instinctively. And expect disagreement.Hmm, just noticed you are a brit. My spell checker flagged your British spelling of "behaviour" in the quoted text.

---

Let's end the political smears

I would love to see that study, and see if it is actually an objective as opposed to simply opportunity.When you find the link to the study let us know.

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

Yes, you do.Pubmed can be used by anyone:PubMedShould you find a study that supports your position, I would be happy to take a look at the paper. This is ridiculous, Sin. You can't read a spider's mind.Provide support for your contention that a spider can use new techniques in response to a new problem.

I am definitely not suggesting that every animal on this planet shares a common neurobiological system. I think I used the word "massive" in an earlier post to describe the difference between our brains and those of spiders. Rather, you seem to be implying that only one kind of neurobiological system could produce something that could be described as intelligence. There's no reason why a completely different biological system on another planet couldn't produce intelligent creatures. Is there a standard scientific definition of intelligence? You seem to want to make the definition of intelligence as narrow as possible. In which case, you'll win your argument with sine, but only by making the rules.Essentially, the discussion ends up with definitions, which is why I said in an earlier post that the statement in the thread title "Spiders are intelligent" is neither true nor false. It's relative.It's like asking whether human beings are fast. Compared to snails, yes, but compared to cheetahs, no. Putting a measure on adjectives like "fast" and "intelligent" is impossible. Not having that level of extraordinary adaptive ability doesn't mean they have none. Put a dog up there, and it would probably need help.If your definition of intelligence includes being as adaptable as we are, then we're the only intelligent animals there are.I've been googling around for a scientific definition of intelligence, but no luck so far. Can you help? The system is biological evolution, and intelligence is a characteristic that could be advantageous. You don't need to have primate intelligence, or mammalian intelligence. I'd certainly give intelligence to birds, for example, but then I'm very liberal about it.Intelligence is certainly something that could be produced by convergent evolution. Within mammals, if we traced our own lineage back to the point of divergence with that of the dolphins, I doubt if we would credit the common ancestor with anything like the level of intelligence of either descendant.What's the strict, tight, generally accepted, consensus scientific definition of intelligence, then, because if there is one, you'd certainly have a strong argument that it should be used on this thread, because we're in "Science Forums".