377
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by robocall@lemmy.world to c/science@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] loaExMachina@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 months ago

There's been scientific and philosophical debates for a long time about which cognitive traits are specific to humans and which are shared across species, and which trait is specific to each group. This is just another element to add to this debate.

If you're wondering how this can be applied, it's not the researcher's job to know. A lot of the time, a discovery's practical applications are only found decades after the discovery itself. Some are never used, but we can't know in advance which knowledge will be useful.

So ideally, those who work in fundamental research needn't consern themselves with the potential use of their work, they seek knowledge for itself. If there's useful stuff in there, applied scientists and engineers will pick it up later. Ideally, but unfortunately, researchers may need to convince a patron that their research will be useful if they need private fundings, which can be a problem. Sometimes, they'll have to put a little bullshit in their pitch for companies. But since this probably wasn't a very expensive study, maybe public grants were enough. Or maybe they convinced some company that they could use it to promote cat antidepressants.

this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
377 points (97.7% liked)

science

14597 readers
27 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS