*&OOKKLJJTTYGT^Y&YHHIGYUTI&^YUIJIKLLKMLKMJUTR^%$%#$$#R%TYYUGGH

After formal investigation in 1907, psychologist Oskar Pfungst demonstrated that the horse was not actually performing these mental tasks, but was watching the reaction of his human observers. Pfungst discovered this artifact in the research methodology, wherein the horse was responding directly to involuntary cues in the body language of the human trainer, who had the faculties to solve each problem. The trainer was entirely unaware that he was providing such cues.[citation needed]

In honour of Pfungst’s study, the anomalous artifact has since been referred to as the Clever Hans effect and has continued to be important knowledge in the observer-expectancy effect and later studies in animal cognition.”

While it has been claimed that this process enables persons with autism or mental retardation to communicate, peer reviewed scientific studies have found that the typed language output attributed to the clients was directed or systematically determined by the therapists who provided facilitated assistance.”

In a double-blind experiment, neither the individuals nor the researchers know who belongs to the control group and the experimental group. Only after all the data has been recorded (and in some cases, analyzed) do the researchers learn which individuals are which. Performing an experiment in double-blind fashion is a way to lessen the influence of the prejudices and unintentional physical cues on the results (the placebo effect, observer bias, and experimenter’s bias). Random assignment of the subject to the experimental or control group is a critical part of double-blind research design. The key that identifies the subjects and which group they belonged to is kept by a third party and not given to the researchers until the study is over.

Double-blind methods can be applied to any experimental situation where there is the possibility that the results will be affected by conscious or unconscious bias on the part of the experimenter.”

Sort of like, for us to progress, our brain had to selectively empty out some memories, so we can create out own. Think back to cave drawings. This is essentially what the elepahnt could be doing. Once he is trained in how the paint works(and if this is real, I doubt every elephant has this kind of dexterity) it could do this itself.

However, with that said, I still think it’s fake. I am not an expert in elephant movement, but there is something that just looks too detailed, and precise about it(however, that could be how they really are, I don’t really know).

Mainly, right when it’s done drawing that long line down, completing the sillouhette, and the trunk pulls away, it looks a little wierd. Apart from that, this doesn’t really seem impossible. I don’t see why someone would want to fake it either.

It’s like kids learning to draw cartoons by reading a step-by-step guide somewhere. The elephant eventually got to where she could draw this one thing from memory, without guidance. If your four or five year old followed a guide and figured out how to draw, say, a duck, would you think, “oh, that’s nice, but the kid wasn’t thinking; just imitating?”

I’d say the elephant’s effort is pretty good, even if it doesn’t have all the richness that a spontaneous representational painting would have.

But they do have some abstract skills I think.
Paintings like these:
http://humanflowerproject.com/images/uploads/elephant-painting.jpg

They are somewhat directed by humans, colorwise.
But I could imagine elephants becoming sapient in 10.000 years :)

I’m just glad that people are beginning to discover their humble, relative place among the animals, that we’re actually not alone here on Earth, that we’re not surrounded by a bunch of stupid life that we’re somehow obligated to exploit.

In recent years we’ve discovered that chimps have superior short term memories. We’ve discovered that lots of animals enjoy getting high (lemurs with millipedes is a fun example). We’ve seen a dog that’s obsessed with skateboarding. We’ve seen how mice laugh when tickled. We’ve seen how some male birds woo females with what can easily be called world-class installation art. And that’s just the beginning of what I hope will be a landslide of similar knowledge that can only improve the condition of life on this planet for all species.

I’d have no doubt that they enjoy the interaction and the praise…not so sure about being made drunk like I saw the other night here…

But they sure like water!

The elephant paints better than I do. Next they’ll be demanding equal rights. We have to nip this in the bud.

Ricky

It’s supposedly an authentic painting by one of these painting elephants, its of some flowers. Only 85 dollars with shipping.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Flowers-Painting-by-Elephant-Artist-of-North-Thai-3_W0QQitemZ280213811366QQihZ018QQcategoryZ551QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

The most interesting thing I noticed, was that there was a baby elephant in the group that produced a picture that was much less artistically refined than that of the adult elephants. The adults produced really good trees and bunches of flowers with stippled colour effects, all from memory. Their level of skill would be that of a good 12 year old human, the baby’s picture was similar to that of child of 6 years. The way they layered the colours was impressive though, I can easily see that given more time and training they could produce some really excellent work. Talented creatures, elephants.

I also got kissed by an Orang-utan at that place as well, but that is another story entirely.

Speaking of smart animals, I definitely recommend checking out the segment from a Scientific American Frontiers program called “Entertaining Parrots” which you can find here (just scroll dow to the segment and click ‘play video’ to watch)

I just have asked everyone here to show me proof that this is done without a handler touching the elephant.

Where you get the idea of telepathy from I have no idea, and did not suggest it.

Your feeble assertion that it would be easier to train the elephant to paint than move its trunk in response to physical commands is laughable. How do you think people ride horses?

Whilst it might be amusing to see elephants ‘behaving like us’ eliciting this behavior seems to involve a high degree of cruelty. I’d suggest people find other ways to amuse themselves that are more respectful to these quite amazing animals.

Do you get a lot of responses to these demands for evidence? I mean besides the sniggering and eyerolling. If you want to buy the plane tickets and pay for the hotel, I’ll be happy to accompany you on a fact-finding expedition. Aisle seat, please.

They lead the trained (horses or elephants) to an assembly. The king mounts the trained animal. Best among men are the trained who endure abuse.

Excellent are trained mules, so are thorough-bred horses of Sindh and noble tusked elephants; but far better is he who has trained himself.

Surely never by those vehicles would one go to the untrodden land (Nibbana), as does one who is controlled through his subdued and well-trained self.

The elephant is not satisfied with the food in luxurious places. It longs to go back to the jungle among its relations.

The man who is lazy and a glutton, who eats large meals and rolls in his sleep like a pig which is fed in the sty is reborn again and again.

Formerly this mind wandered about where it liked, wherever it willed, as it pleased; today, with wisdom (meditation) I shall control it as a mahout controls an elephant in rut.

Take delight in heedfulness. Guard your mind well. Draw yourselves out of the evil way just as the elephant sunk in the mud draws himself out.

Should one find a good companion to walk with and who is steadfast and upright, one should walk with him with joy so as to overcome all dangers.

If no such companion is found; it is better to travel alone like a king who has left his kingdom, or an elephant which has left its companions.

It is better to live alone; there is no fellowship with a fool. Let one live alone committing no evil, being carefree, like a Matanga elephant (roaming at will) in the forest.

When need arises, pleasant (is it to have) friends. Pleasant is it to be content with just this and that. Pleasant is merit when life is at an end. Pleasant is the shunning of all ill.

Pleasant in this world is ministering to mother. Ministering to father too is pleasant in this world. Pleasant is ministering to ascetics. Pleasant too is ministering to the Noble Ones.

Pleasant is virtue (continued) until old age. Pleasant is steadfast confidence. Pleasant is the attainment of wisdom. Pleasant is it to do no evil.

“I spent a week on elephant back, looking for tigers and riding through herds of rhino and other beasts. To think that I could have saved the effort and just watched YouTube. D’oh.”

If you are going to reply to my comment, at least make a sensible one based upon the content and context of mine.
If you can find any evidence in these Youtube videos to discount my claim, then please let us all know. It doesn’t look like you can, so you resort to some irrelevent nonesense instead.

It may well be that the “Root cause” of the animal mistreatment is human poverty; But that doesn’t mean we have to solve all the worlds problems before we stop abusing animals.

Interesting argument that the elephant is just robotically copying what it sees.

As Jesse already pointed out, there was a misunderstanding here. Being able to make a good copy of what you see in such a highly stylised way would be a sign of high intelligence and tremendous skill. There is no robot (yet) that could do this, and I’m sure there is no animal that could do it. The cognitive skills of apes are roughly comparable to those of human toddlers; I guess a chimp might enjoy abstract painting and might also be able to translate the sight of a physical object into a crude painted representation. But it would never look as good as these elephant paintings; the elephants aren’t copying what they see, but repeating strokes they were trained to perform, independently of what the picture is supposed to represent. It’s a completely different story.

So if the elephant paints abstractly, it’s a circus trick. And if the elephant paints something recognizable, it’s a circus trick.

When it’s a performance the elephant was explicitely trained to do for the entertainment of spectators, it’s a circus trick no matter what. There’s a big difference between recognizable to humans and recognizable to elephants. To the ‘artist’ featured here, the painting shown above is abstract.

Some animals are pretty good at recognizing stylized versions of other animals.

Which enables them to create such art themselves in about the same way in which being able to recognize water taps makes you a plumber.

Well the fact is we don’t know much about training elephants to “paint” representationally, and what is possible – the trainers here may well be the leading world experts, so their methods, if any, can only be speculated upon.
It can be seen how it is possible to control horses to an extremely fine degree by touch and sound (dressage avents, “western riders” who control with only their legs etc), and indeed sheepdogs who are controlled at a long distance with sound alone. These elephant trainers could be using many different or mixed methods, even remotely.

I think it is important to differentiate between the lifelike/stylised drawings these elephants are producing, and which is the real subject of this thread, and the adstract paintings other elephants do, who may well not be guided at all, but have indeed learnt to apply paint to canvas.

There isn’t a neurophysiologist in the world who would argue that an animal at the cytogenic level of an elephant was devoid of consciousness.

@ #61:

In spite of how sure you are, there are, in fact, animals that demonstrate the skill you’ve described… human beings. Also, the cognitive ability of an ape may be comparable to that of a toddler, but a toddler can’t defend against predators or feed itself.

It has loads of articles about elephants and about ele paintings such as “How elephant art is made” and “Are elephants helped when painting” and most appropriate to this thread “How can I spot a fake elephant painting” here http://www.elephantartgallery.com/learn/authentic/spotting-fake-elephant-paintings.php

This is getting old so this is my last post.

I was trying to point out that precise manipulation of animals is possible. The elephant is a very slow moving animal and has the capapcity to move its trunk in the precise manner you see in the videos. I doubt you could get a horse to move its head like this however much you abused it.
The fact is that people have seen this in real life and on video and have taken it as evidence that Elephants have good eye/trunk co-ordination, and an ability to memorise and paint abstract shapes. This, as been stated many times, is no way a scientific study, so there is no way such conclusions can be reached, even though people obviuosly want to believe such a thing. We like that idea don’t we.
The handlers are making money from tourists, and due to the horrific ways they “train” these unfortunate Elephants, can make them do anything they want, and this particular display probably brings in more interest and thus more money. They are always attached to the Elephant duing these painting displays, so I conclude it is far more likely they have developed a way to make the elephant move its trunk as directed. That is their job.

PS When Antinuous offered to accompany me on a fact finding trip and I declined, saying there was lots of video footage out there, I was referring to the evidence of this phenonenon, not that I learnt all about the world by sitting in watching YouTube. That just goes to show what happens when you snip the context from a post when replying to it, as he did.
I apologise for being a bit shirty with you, I just replied in a like fashion when you called my observations “feeble”. No hard felings.

So if the elephant paints abstractly, it’s a circus trick. And if the elephant paints something recognizable, it’s a circus trick. That’s some keen analysis there. But then humans are just trained to think robotically. You could scarcely call it ‘real’ intelligence.

I don’t think that’s what people were suggesting–rather, they were suggesting that the elephant might have learned to make a certain pattern of strokes without any understanding that they were supposed to represent something it could see in the real world (i.e. an elephant), sort of a like a human learning to write Chinese symbols in calligraphy with no understanding of Chinese. Like I said above, I think it would be possible to test whether the elephant understands the connection between these line drawings and other elephants it sees in the real world.