Elephants now join an elite club of social cooperators: chimpanzees, hyenas, rooks, and humans. In the video Elephants show cooperation, the article Elephants can lend a helping trunk, and the passage Elephants know when they need a helping trunk in a cooperative task, The authors demonstrate the intelligence of elephants. They conduct an experiment which shows how elephants work together to achieve a goal. All three sources illustrate the cognitive ability of these sagacious creatures. In the video
Did you know that elephants can use different tools and understand the human body language? These skills can help elephants go through experiments in order to get a treat. The elephants needs cooperation skills in order to pull a rope at the same time with another elephant, and that allows them to get the treat. Each piece of writing and the video presents the idea of the experiment differently. In addition, all of the tones in each piece is very different, and that affects the way each piece explains
Not surprisingly, elephants are known for being more emotional and empathetic animals than the rest. According the three articles, “Elephants Can Lend a Helping Trunk”, “Elephants Know When They Need a Helping Trunk in a Cooperative Task”, and “Elephants Console Each Other” elephants understand when they need each other’s assistance. All two authors describe the studies of elephant behavior differently, but with a similar purpose. As portrayed in “Elephants Can Lend a Helping Trunk”, an experiment
Six Blind Men And The Elephant + The Red And Blue Coat Essay Do you think that an elephant looks like a spear, or maybe a tree? No? Well have you ever seen a Multicolored coat? Well in Six Blind Men and an elephant the six blind men thought the elephant looked like a that and many more strange concoctions. Also in The Red And Blue Coat there is actually a blue and red coat. It's true, just read my essay and you will know the main events of the two events of the two stories, the character's action
In Orwell’s “shooting an elephant” he gets stuck in a situation where he has to choose between what the people want him to do, or what he believes is right. An elephant escapes and is loose in the town. Orwell decides that since he is an officer, it’s his duty to help return the elephant back to where he came from. Orwell gets a rifle, and chases after the elephant. When the elephant calms down, he and a crowd of people watch the elephant as it eats. Orwell is the only one with a rifle, and the Burmese
be taken as well? In the memoir “Shooting an Elephant,” by George Orwell, the elephant who trampled a villager was shot by a police officer within bounds of the law and within moral standpoints, and it was most definitely justified. The animal had previously killed a villager and destroyed property. He disrupted the peace of the village and instilled fear in the people. All of these would legally make the man who shot him in the right. Since the elephant killed a man, the officer, who was licensed
Comparison In the two short stories, Shooting an Elephant and the Things They Carried there are certain similarities and differences that George Orwell and Jimmy Cross hold. Each character in the short stories has there own different situation they are in, but they both are in a foreign land and they both have to take orders and do what there country is asking of them. However, even though each situation is different they both deal with some of the same emotional issues throughout each story. In
receive a food reward. Researchers built an apparatus where both elephants had to pull a rope at the same time in order to obtain food. A sliding table was attached to two ropes, and was separated by a net so that the only way the elephants could obtain food was to pull on the ropes at the same time. The first part of the experiment entailed a delayed release of one of the elephants. It was observed that the elephant released first learned to wait for the other individual before pulling the rope
If you’re not paying attention, the mind can be a tricky labyrinth. The less you know about it, the more inexplicable and frightening it becomes. For example, why do seemingly benign elephants wreak havoc upon villages? In “An Elephant Crackup,” Charles Siebert explores the aberrant nature of these elephants and correlates them to their traumatizing upbringing, deprived of community and kinship. The biochemistry of the human mind, analyzed in Love 2.0 by Barbara Frederickson, serves as a worthy addendum
Elephant has long been known as one of man’s best friends, who have peacefully coexisted along with humanity for thousands of years. However, the relationship between the two is no longer in the equilibrium state. In “An Elephant Crackup?”, Charles Siebert discusses the downfall of the elephants. He gives a depiction of the recent raging and violent acts of the elephants among themselves and toward other species, including humans, and presents an educated and almost unexpected explanation to their