Thanks for sharing that article. Reading that awhile back contributed to my interest in “non-destructive testing” on animals, or rather, learning through observation and safer, more-ethical interaction. Learning dolphin languages rather than imposing ours feels better, and if we go into it thinking beyond our own lifetimes we might reduce ego and ecological disruption, and be more patient. Too often we investigate on our terms, in our controlled settings, rather than going to their natural environment. We do this to ourselves, to, with IQ tests and other standardized tests that value X over Y, when Y might be something my culture reasonably valued as intelligent.
That article just keeps escalating, what an unreal read.
Living with a dolphin in the same room for 6 days a week, trying to teach it English, letting him release its sexual urges on the researcher, injecting it with lsd and then after the experiment was over he commits suicide by drowning himself which apparently dolphins can do.
An utterly bizarre and twisted story that yet somehow feels wholesome?
I think you can feel empathy for the researcher and dolphin involved, but it isn’t wholesome; the experiment was traumatic and kind of insane. However, you can see that the caretaker really did try to do her best for Peter.
Fair point, I certainly don't endorse something like this happening again. It was more the human/dolphin friendship and bonding that led me to that conclusion.
The concept of human/animal communication is an interesting field when it doesn't involve abuse.
Essentially a woman, Margaret Lovett, literally lived in a watery house with three dolphins for several months.
Apparently things did not end well.
Here's the article I read about it: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/08/the-dolp...
Perhaps, fifty years later, we might go about things differently.