comment: >
  
  We don’t have low expectations for them, we have proportional expectations. Humans have gained tons of advantageous evolutionary traits like opposable thumbs that open the door to millions of potential “smart” activities, but we only deem them this because we are the smartest by our standard. If tool use and other metrics don’t count to you because the animals were incentivized, then explain to me how you you could be smart without an incentive to learn. Smartness isn’t the number of IQ points or farthest deviation from the usual behavior, it’s aptitude for learning and retaining information in a meaningful way efficiently.
context: They also overestimate humans. >
  
  Humans overestimate humans lol >
  
  Not really, we measure their intelligence by seeing what they are capable of doing which are usually things like problem solving and tool use which can indicate high intellect with a few examples of of highly intelligent animals like
  
  Cats
  Dogs
  Pigs
  Elephants
  Corvids
  Parrots
  Octopi
  Other great apes like Chimpanzees
  Racoons
  Dolphins and other cetaceans
  Fringed jumping spider
  
  And perhaps a few more >
  
  Ants dolphins rats >
  
  Added dolphins and thanks >
  
  Oh, primates and elephants. >
  
  ‘smart’ is complicated and nuanced and mostly subjective, and definitely relative. You are an animal. Are you smart? The gulf between humans and other animals only exists culturally, as in we’ve formed it like a religion in the recent few thousand years. >
  
  That has to be the dumbest thing I have heard. >
  
  I mean my guide dog is pretty smart in my opinion. Has saved me from being hit by silent deadly electric cars that make no noise more than once. >
  
  That is a very good dog. And guide dogs are more intelligent than other dogs. But your dog was trained to do it. It didnt figure it out on its own. It was normal that it did that because it's goal was to protect you. >
  
  I mean humans are also trained how to do most things no? Thats called school and parents. >
  
  Lol wtf. There wasn’t just “one guy”. It was tons of people who learnt from each other over 100s of years! >
  
  Same with animals genius… it’s called evolution. >
  
  Not what I’m referring to. Humans write things down and our knowledge is an accumulation of previous people’s findings. Dogs might teach their young pups some stuff, but not as much as humans do. We basically spend our first 20 years just learning about things people figured out before us. >
  
  Rubbish my cat could do a PhD in astrophysics if she wanted to. >
  
  Animals are very smart, they are extremely capable at surviving in their natural habitat with the means that are given to them. 
  People have this bad habit of anthropomorphizing things and holding them to human standards within human contexts.
  Wolves for example are incredible hunters, if you were to take away human tools and weapons most humans wouldn't even be able to compete against them. >
  
  I feel like surviving in your natural habit is a basic thing and not a sign of great intelligence. If you locked a wolf in a house it will die because it doesnt know how to open a fridge. >
  
  Definitely unpopular, because you’re incredibly wrong. Oversimplifying a massive topic, as eloquently as you have, may be the very proof of the possibility that humans aren’t the most intelligent living beings on our planet. Would you mind explaining your definition of “great intelligence” is it like the invention smartphones? Im pretty sure the natural world doesn’t waste its time on useless behaviors. 
  I’d honestly be curious to see (without your phone) how well you could navigate a 2500 mile migration from Canada to Central Mexico when compared to a butterfly. Monarchs do it every year. Arguably an insect is more intelligent and resilient in this regard to the vast majority people. Don’t even get me started with birds, sea turtles, whales…. Or even down to more basic forms of life like trees, fungi, viruses, bacteria.
  Human intelligence is not the only, or highest imo, form of intelligence on earth. We’re clearly not doing a great job at figuring out how to exist with nature without destroying it over the past 200,000 years. Intelligence of any species should probably be measured on how quickly they make their habitat uninhabitable and die off. Just because we have an understanding of what we qualify as intelligence (which is mostly hypothesis, theoretics, along with data based conclusions and laws), doesn’t and shouldn’t imply that it’s superior to massive parts of natures functionality of which we have essentially zero understanding or comprehension of. Animals have been here long before us, and likely for long after.
  To debunk your refrigerator theory, just go camping in an active carnivorous predator area with food in your car.. 
  Most predators would get into the fridge eventually…some much faster then others. Have you never been in an area with active wildlife like say, bears, wolves, mountain lion, lynx, fox, coyote, hell even racoons? Bears will straight up open a car door, house door, break through windows, tip dumpsters for any trace of food or trash left inside. Source: myself and everyone who’s been around wildlife at any point throughout recorded humanity.
  Edited for spelling >
  
  I wouldn't call an incorrect opinion unpopular. >
  
  How so? Typically people (should) base their beliefs, or  opinions, off of facts found by empirical evidence…  Incorrect opinions are often times unpopular as they’ve been repeatedly debunked; say flat earthers or people who believe birds aren’t real. I see what youre saying but the terms aren’t mutually exclusive. >
  
  The way I see it opinion and beliefs are different things.
  If you have an opinion on something it may be subjective or unpopular, but it's your personal idea of something (like someone may think coffee is the inferior breakfast beverage), it's not something that can be factually wrong.
  Whereas a belief is something more akin to a fact, or an idea that is objective (like the fact that bird exist).
  Maybe it's because I'm not a native English speaker, but I've always thought that they were different things. So, with this reasoning, an opinion that is just factually wrong isn't unpopular and wrong, it's just wrong. >
  
  Like I said before- I understand what you're getting at.. Where I agree with you is really the spirit of this board- Subjective opinions- like your example of coffee. There's no inherent truth on ones preferences in this case, or many of the actually engaging posts on this board. Unfortunately, there's been a ton of opinions flooding this board based off of false beliefs as of late.
  Where we don't agree is that beliefs are typically based off of facts. It's actually quite the opposite. Beliefs are convictions based off of ones personal values/enviornment/behavior/character. By definition, beliefs are permanently subjective. From belief structures, you draw your own opinions. Take for example religion, or the validity of vaccinations, or Hilary Clinton being a "Lizard Person".... Very weird times lol. Many people hold false beliefs that color their also false opinion. 
  Another example is a child believing in Santa Clause. They also hold the opinion that Santa Clause is real. Spoiler alert-  >! Santa isn't real !< . So, in cases like these their belief is false, and so is their opinion. 
  In intellectual settings like the medical field, these words hold incredibly different values (when compared to this board), because they should be based off of data/statistics collected by empirical evidence collected through research studies. >
  
  They are very smart... For an example; ants can make bridges to cross massive water bodies they couldn't do by themselves. That's pretty intelligent. Or how dolphins literally are  second only to us humans in smarts >
  
  
  dolphins literally are second only to us
  
  That’s means nothing. In any given ranking system, there is always gonna be a second place… what’s your point. It doesn’t mean they are anywhere near first. >
  
  Some explanation of what 2nd place is capable of, so you can compare with 1st:
  Tool use, region specific language and accents, utilising environment for hunting, utilising prey biology for hunting, complex social systems, grief,surfing, drug use, sentience, self aware, tool use, teaching skills and language to the next generation - a form of culture. Etc.
  Seem pretty damn smart to me >
  
  My vote is on orangutans. They use tools. Observe and copy behavior, and then decide they want to continue that behavior. Like for example, they will steal soap bars to use on themselves. >
  
  And drive golf carts! >
  
  I think many animals are very smart but i also agree some arent and we call them smart.
  Like how we do toddlers, or our children. 
  But like the saying goes: "If we judge a fish for its ability to climb a tree, we'll think they're stupid." >
  
  The first thing I've ever learned in Artificial Intelligence lessons was "Intelligence is ability to survive in given environment."
  So, fish is super smart in water. But super stupid outside. >
  
  When people call an animal smart, they mean they are smart in the context of animals, not in the context of humans. You are just misunderstanding people and then disagreeing with them because you misunderstand. Perhaps it is you who is not smart my friend. >
  
  Humans are animals still. Yes no animal comes close to human interms of intelligence but i think its more of the fact people keep forgetting or don’t want to accept humans are animals >
  
  Yes, obviously. I haven’t forgotten that humans are technically a part of the animal kingdom, the term ‘animal’ is just commonly used to mean species in the animal kingdom that are not humans. I think my meaning was fairly obvious, and I’m not sure why you care so much whether people refer to humans as animals or not. >
  
  Not that i care but im mainly saying this because when people talk about animal intelligence they tend to think humans are some o different entity entirely >
  
  That's because the gap is so enormous. The main difference between us and other animals is our ability to share knowledge in the form of writing. We stand on the shoulders of giants >
  
  Depends how you define smart. Can any animals do long division... no. Are they debating philosophy... no. Their brains are different to humans and work in different ways.
  However...
  Pigeons have iron-containing structures in their beaks, which allows them sense earth's electromagnetic field independent of their motion and posture, thus identifying geographical position.
  Elephants can keep track of up to 30 absent members of their family by sniffing out their scent and building a mental map of where they are.
  I bet you can't do any of that on your own. In other news...
  Chimpanzees have also been shown to be better at memory tasks than humans. Dolphins have biological sonars and Caledonian crows understand cause-and-effect relationships. 
  Some animals are definitely pretty smart. >
  
  How very rude of you, take an upvote from me and my pets >
  
  I think i have very low expectations of you OP. >
  
  We are all animals. >
  
  You a human, are trying to say that nothing else is smart because it is not a human, makes sense. Even though many animals can't do things you can do.
  You do realize if you are the average person, you basically do the exact same thing as an animal, you just have to pay for it. You Eat, you Sleep, you have kids(or dont), and do tricks (games, puzzles, hobbies). Then you go to work to be able to afford it, that is all that is really different. All being more 'intelligent' then animals has gotten us is taxes, and anxiety, and safety from predators (at the expense of the average person not being able to handle predators at all). 
  When was the last time someone took you in rent free told you they loved you and gave you literally everything you could possibly need and mire and that awe you are so cute when you breath have some free treats and more free food... >
  
  Hahaha you are right. My son was so impressed the dog could do everything on his own (eat, poop, walk) while a human baby, the same age, cannot. >
  
  Cetaceans are proven to have advanced language capabilities that suggest a hominid level sentient and intelligence. 
  Crows have been proven to have the cognition of a developmental 7 year old and have surpassed high schoolers in problem solving experiments. >
  
  Yoo that's actually so cool can you send links to those studies? >
  
  Do you mind waiting a couple of days and having me dm you? Some are studies buried in my research from article platforms so I’d need to sift through my bibs XD >
  
  Yeah that sounds great, thanks >
  
  I agree with OP. Animal intelligence is sensationalized because they have mostly instinctual and evolutionary behaviors which are incredible in their own right, but anything intelligible outside of our expectations and we’re like 🤯 .. like, cmon. It makes for a cool video but none of these animals are really apex except us. >
  
  I mean obviously we would have low expectations of other animals. Humans are the number one smartest living things on Earth, second is Chimpanzee. Humans build cities, chimpanzees throw their shit around. >
  
  No one gets surprised by seeing an Animal eating or sleeping. I stopped reading after that. >
  
  OP good job on the unpopular opinion. You are the first redditor I've ever seen who has negative post karma. Well done >
  
  there are many problem solving tasks and memory tasks and similar that animals have been shown to be better at than humans
  humans mostly just seem smart because they've learnt to transfer knowledge between each other effectively. a human without any training from other humans would be extremely stupid by human standards and would probably be on par with most other intelligent animals >
  
  I think as humans we have a warped conception of what "smart" means. Some things seem extremely simple to us when they're actually quite difficult, while others seem really complicated but they're pretty common in nature.
  Example: We are amazed when we find out many animals mourn their dead but that's actually quite common. On the other hand, we take for granted things like having a concept of the "me", but most animals don't understand that idea, not even the smarter ones like dogs. One way to test this is seeing if they can recognize themselves on a mirror, which they can't. >
  
  I feel this same way about people >
  
  I know animals that are significantly smarter then some humans I know sooo >
  
  Still smarter than most of the human population >
  
  I dunno. My old dog pushed firewood into a corner until he could run up the pile and jump the fence >
  
  Discussion aside: lol
  But yeah is it a suprise that it did that? Tiny ants can build bridges why cant your dog? Your dog can think beyond food and play and sleep. >
  
  Human smart and animal smart is different. Nobody puts human intelligence benchmarks on dogs because it’s not fair. >
  
  Last I checked humans are animals… >
  
  A psychotic race of half apes with delusions of grandeur, but yes we are. >
  
  A very apt description >
  
  Humans have the advantage of systematic collective learning, which allows us to surpass other species in intelligence. But all animals have brains, many with the physical ability to perform better than ours. People tend to forget that! (Agree with op) >
  
  I think animals are very smart and we also have very low expectations. >
  
  Hey now, my dog is the smartest little idiot I know. >
  
  My rabbit is smart, I told him once that I felt the most comfortable with him and he snorted back at me saying that he feels the same way, he literally speaks to me. >
  
  they are smart. >
  
  They are super smart, but when people try to compare them to humans, it’s like come on dog, they’re still animals >
  
  Just like people there is a scale. Ever notice some dogs are smart and some are dumb?  Same with cats some learn really fast others are to dumb to ever learn. >
  
  Anyone who’s spent an extended period of time in the wild knows animals are much, much smarter than your typical academic will give them credit for.
  I remember watching a documentary where they shot this aerial view of manta rays dancing.  What was the purpose of this mysterious behavior, the narrator asked?  Simple, they were playing.  And because they had lots of time to sort it out, they were quite good at it.
  Seriously, buy some chickens or something and just watch them in the yard.  It’ll blow your mind, if you didn’t grow up around animals. >
  
  We have an extremely narrow view of what “intelligence” is based on our extremely limited experience. 
  It’s very likely that we can’t even conceptualize the intelligence of other species of animals. The research about whale populations is groundbreaking.
  There’s a legitimate chance that if aliens came to Earth looking for its most intelligent species, it’ll go into the ocean for whales, octopi, orcas, dolphins, etc. >
  
  That’s just straight up wrong.
  This is just an opinion based on lack of education. >
  
  The problem is that you are sticking to a rigid understanding of "smart".
  Words are just signs that signify concepts: sometimes a single word can refer to different concepts depending on context. If I referred to a chair in a restaurant it would be very different to if I referred to a chair when planning a meeting.
  So context matters. 
  In the context of animals when we say "smart" we usually mean that they demonstrate a certain standard of problem-solving or of conception.
  When it comes to children, we already accept that kids have these abilities so smart takes on a different meaning - usually indicating that this child's mental faculties are surprising to us, or that they are above the level of their peers. 
  When we refer to a phone or a TV as "smart" it just means "it has apps and certain set of features". 
  Your position isn't necessarily incorrect - people do underestimate what animals can do. The contention is with your understanding and usage of the word smart. >
  
  Nobody says that animals are as smart as humans, judging them as smart in the human context doesn't make sense. It just means that some species of animals are smarter than others, humans aside, based on some very strict conditions we identify as being capable of higher thinking. >
  
  Or maybe our expectations for ourselves are too high. >
  
  We do this or say those things so we feel superior to them. It makes us happy and proud to be human >
  
  They are smart when it comes to their natural role and order. Apart from that they are still quite smart. >
  
  Spoken like someone who doesn’t have anything to do with animals lol >
  
  Unpopular opinion is honestly a suicide attempt if your “unpopular opinion “ isn’t actually just a common opinion >
  
  I see that OP has never heard of orcas. >
  
  Humans are the 3rd smartest animal on this planet >
  
  below what exactly? >
  
  Mice and dolphins >
  
  I have a shingle back lizard living under my house that knows what's going on. Will sit and stare at me for dog food and sunbake with my dog. It's mates are slowly getting used to it but this one has been here 5yrs spitting out babies.  There's ones on my driveway that are street smart moving into the middle grass bit.  Seeing these has made me think alot about animals and their under rating.  Id never really thought reptiles would have personality like this and has given me a better respect for snakes. >
  
  Mayen animals think Humans are dumb sacks a shit too no? >
  
  I mean my border collie knows 30+ commands easily. He’s a sponge. He even reminds me if I’m late to give him his medication >
  
  We compare them to human standards of intellect by generalities for the simplicity of it. I don't think every animal adheres to a baseline of intellect no more than humans do. But its harder to have a nuanced opinion on animal intellect when there are enormous populations of them mostly out of sight and out of mind. >
  
  Still smart enough to where we shouldn’t eat them >
  
  If we said “smart for an animal” instead of smart would that solve your problem? >
  
  I agree with this person for sure. We definitely underestimate their abilities >
  
  I don’t think it’s a given that animals can empathise. That’s actually quite an abstract and complex process. Considering empathising is putting yourself in someone else’s shoes, I don’t actually think they can? >
  
  You compare animals to other animals. That’s what people mean when they say an animal is smart. Of course animals aren’t as smart as humans (most at least) >
  
  The point is, if we don't utilise and ignore any intelligence in animals, we lose the chance to better our own society. Dogs have better smelling and can help humans sniff drugs or diseases for example. It doesn't matter how smart an animal is, but the fact they have their own intelligence at all is something humans should acknowledge. Society would be doomed without animals. >
  
  As long as you you have humans included in the category of “animals” I agree >
  
  here >
  
  Bro is fighting for his life in the comments 💀💀 >
  
  Every living creature is "smart" in a way that they can survive and have evolved to that point. Place a person in the wild butt naked what's gonna happen? We will die or be eaten by every predator out there. We HAD to become smarter than everything to survive. Other animals like let's say a wolf evolved to where they can survive the weather with just the fur on their back and smart hunting. Their only competitor being us now for land space, or Bears, otherwise why would they NEED to learn anything else? They don't, they successfully thrive in their environment thus don't need to learn much more. And even then they are quickly learning to stay very clear of our population or if they're hungry they know we have pets they can prey on. >
  
  Yeah usually they do just the bare minimum. That's why we are surprised when they do anything more >
  
  expect that animals do not need to work from 8-5 every goddamn day, worry about pension, travel expenses, rent, and other things like that. I don't know which one is smarter. >
  
  Look up New Caledonian Crows. They have small brains but their neuron density is much, much greater than ours or our primate relatives >
  
  Humans are also animals js. >
  
  My birds are really smart…. Parakeet speaks English better than a lot of my students.. lovebird will come and sleep next to me when I’m sleeping >
  
  I think Orcas Break this logic wide open.
  They have figured out how to use Physics to kill their prey easier without having to do it themselves, saving energy.
  They have learn how to work together to use physics to make a wave to knock prey off of larger icebergs they can’t break
  They have NEVER attacked a human in the wild. Which some people assume it’s because they KNOW we are the True Apex predator. (which is creepy as shit personally)
  Some scientists have started noticing differences in Orca Pods(I think that’s what you call a group) to the point where they think they are not differences from Evolution, Rather they are from Culture! And although no specifically proven yet, they would be the first Animal to reach that milestone after humans. >
  
  Corvids as well. They know how to use water displacement and crap to get food. And they never forget a slight. You piss off one, generations will hate you. >
  
  All I know is that my dog is smart enough to pull off some very solid acting. He's a top-tier actor. He pretends to be EXTREMELY sad when we're eating because he just KNOWS that someone will eventually break and serve him a bit of whatever we're currently eating. >
  
  Smartness is subjective and depends on the organism we are talking about. All living beings are smart and intelligent in their own ways. >
  
  In some ways, animals can be a lot smarter than people. For instance, they are much more in tune with their instincts and reflexes than we are – you only have to watch videos on YouTube in ultra slow-motion to see how quickly they react to things compared to us. In fact, there are a number of abilities we have lost in becoming civilized. Throw a human baby in water, it will probably drown; throw a baby animal in water, it'll probably swim. How much wildlife survives out there in the world, with other predators, limited resources, extreme weather, etc.? How many humans could survive this way today – esp. without preparation and/or training? Yes, we can read and write essays on Shakespeare, do arithmetic and formulate the area of a triangle, discover medicines and combine basic elements, create and appreciate art; we build relatively advanced technology, and, through a multitude of means (e.g. laws, philosophy, and such), try to make the world a better place for ourselves and (sometimes) other creatures – all in the process of majorly screwing things up as well. Animals aren't perfect, of course, yet human beings have as much to answer for as to pat ourselves on the back about. >
  
  Wait, do you mean people? Sounds like people. >
  
  Pretty sure dolphins would've taken over if they could but they don't have thumbs >
  
  Judging by your comments here it would be a hassle to even train you some easy tricks. 
  Also, humans are animals. More evolved, but still animals. >
  
  Since humans are animals, I totally agree with you! >
  
  Case and point >
  
  Have you ever considered that Humans are animals? >
  
  A common crow is one of the smartest of the non-primates. Has the IQ of a 7 year old human child.
  A cat or dog has the IQ of a 3 year old. >
  
  Humans are animals and many of them we have low expectations of and when they do something bad we are surprised. Sheesh people >
  
  Not true, animals are very smart. Some may seem not to be too but that usually gets them treats, so they're not so dumb after all. >
  
  And yet decades of research says otherwise 🤔 >
  
  what I find remarkable is that people act  as if their children are stupid and dogs are smarter. this is the key, it takes time and work but you can get puppies to sit, stay, a few basic commands. like any youngsters they have their lapses. but I have watched parents let their toddlers run wild all over the place and when confronted 'only a child', 'only 3 years old'. Well, maybe if they actually put work into teaching the toddler they might just behave a tad better. Again, there will be lapses but not when they are allowed to be free-range and no consequences >
  
  Here before op deletes this post >
  
  when people say animals are smart they're comparing them to other animals. They aren't comparing them necessarily to humans. So no, the expectations aren't "very very low" its all relative. 
  For example, if a toddler could lift 50 pounds, that would be very impressive relative to other toddlers. If you were to compare that to a grown adult obviously it isn't impressive. It's all about what you are comparing between. So when you see a dog that can communicate through using buttons to form what we would consider coherent thoughts that is impressive compared to the chihuahua that eats rocks. >
  
  Upon what metric are we defining “smartness?” The issue is we have decided what it means to be smart and have conveniently placed ourselves on top. You’d be surprised how dumb people can be. >
  
  Interesting. I feel the same way about most humans. >
  
  They are smart af, you just don't know much about them 🫰
  Watch some nature docs, or better yet, hang out around animals more. I'm sure some animals think we are idiots too >
  
  When people say animals are smart they comparing them to other animals not to humans. >
  
  Why would you say something so stupid and wrong? >
  
  Humans are not even the smartest animal so don’t think we are the best to judge. >
  
  A lot of animals are smarter then people think and I love reading research on it but I always role my eyes when I hear about an animal being as smart as X year old child because it simply isn't true. >
  
  We try to see the world from a human lens but never think what if other beings think and act differently it makes us bias when things don’t ! >
  
  Well, this reddit became not an r/unpopularopinion, but an r/idontlikethingsmostofthepeoplelikes >
  
  Humans also aren't very smart, but maybe I just have to high expectations for them.
  Jokes aside, would you say children are smart? How about if they were your own children? I believe most parent feel proud, and believe their kid is a genious, when they learn to walk, talk, and not shit themselves several times a day.
  But how can we sure they werent just conditioned to do these things like a dog or a parrot?
  Well maybe being able to learn these things IS a sign of intelligence. You might have heard about the mirror test,  where you put an ink dot or something in the forehead of a child or an animal, to see if they recognize that the thing they see in the mirror is actually themselves. Not many animals can pass the test. >
  
  I mean, we’re the only ones on the planet who have invented and popularized the concept of intelligence as a whole in the first place so obviously we’re going to hold animals to our own standards because it’s all we know. It doesn’t necessarily mean we’re in the right. 
  If you take away our weapons and all the fancy gadgets we’ve developed throughout the course of human history (which does require intelligence, but I call it artificial intelligence in the sense that we’re not naturally born with it in our biology) we’re just useless, flailing meat blobs who wouldn’t stand a chance when it came to certain (or most) animals, everything from lions to poisonous snakes.