• Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Do they have them when they are little too? Or maybe it worked out that it was less likely predators would yoink their babies because it seemed like they were always watching. Can’t sneak up on someone with eyes on the back of their heads, that never close, even while sleeping.

  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Well, they are kind of solitary animals. No one will warn them about something big getting close from behind.

  • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Their predators are other tigers. There are tribes in Asia who wear masks on the backs of their heads with large eyes to deter tiger attacks. Apparently the tiger is very much about stabbing you in the back, and not so big on open confrontation.

  • kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Wild tigers, as apex predators, have few natural threats. Their primary competitors include Asiatic wild dogs (dholes), which can harass tigers in packs.

  • pinkystew@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    No living thing has a feature “to” do anything. That implies decision making, which is intelligent design.

    Tigers have spots on their ears, which can confuse attackers.

    Tigers did not develop those spots “to” confuse attackers.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Yes, they did though. That’s the purpose of this evolutionary trait. I see what you’re getting at, but you seem to be implying this was a concidence

      • pinkystew@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Every evolutionary trait is coincidence. If it was adaptation we’d be able to regrow vital organs.

        • Umbrias@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          that’s not how that works, we cant regrow (most) vital organs (liver says hi) because of “engineering problems” not because evolution is random. we personify adaptations to understand them, it can lead to issues but yours is a massive overcorrection.

    • homura1650@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      All models are wrong, but some are useful. Thinking of evolved features as having a purpose is wrong, but it is also incredibly useful.

      Why do we have eyes? In some sense, there is no reason, just a sequence of random coincidences, combined with a slightly non-randon bias refered to as “survival of the fittest” (itself an incorrect model).

      However, saying that we have eyes to see has incredible explanatory power, which makes it a useful model. Just like Newton’s law of Universal gravity. We’ve known it that is wrong for a century at this point, but most of the time still talk as if it’s true, because it is useful.

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I hear what you’re saying, and you’re 100% correct, but I think most people will realize it’s a figure of speech, and easier to say than “Via the process of gene mutation trial and error over many, many generations of tigers, spots have developed on their ears that look like eyes, resulting in predation from behind being discourged.”

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        One way of thinking of it could be that since all of our intention and decision making originates in such a process, the line between them isn’t that clear.

  • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Fun fact the South American short face bear is the only Ice aged giant that is thought not to be driven extinct by humans and fact humans could not hunt it, Tigers would be a pleasant snack for them.