Posted: Dec 10, 2017 5:01 pm
Matthew Shute wrote:... Ants themselves might seem a relatively "selfless" bunch, an individual ant not counting for much on its own; but you might also reflect that, if there's a lack of self-identification among ants, this isn't accompanied any lack of brutal ant-conflict, so jamest's "rot" remains. What's the next ontological error, then? Nest identification?
...
IMO, the ontological error is assuming that ants are conscious of anything - that they even have a self to be aware of. I suspect that they have too small a brain for that - thinking just isn't their style! Instead, they blindly and automatically obey their command instincts, following scent trails (even to the death, if some researcher creates a closed circle using their "follow this " scent, attacking whatever smells wrong, nurturing what smells right, cutting up what smells like food and taking it to the nest, etc. They don't even think about what little their eyes can see, which is easily over-ridden by their sense of smell.