#pokemon intelligence

[pokemon-academy-official]

Hypothetically, what would be your response to a Ribombee capable of activities such as, oh, I don't know, running a Rotomblr blog? Again, completely hypothetical of course. I have thumbs

- Definitely not a Ribombee

Thanks for being our first ask! To answer... well, it would certainly be unusual!

Thumbs and Language

As the asker noted, the absence of thumbs does pose an obstacle for a Ribombee hoping to run a Rotomblr blog. Without thumbs, or fingers at all, it would certainly be difficult to operate a keyboard or smartphone! This obstacle is one that can be overcome with specialized equipment and determination. However, the larger barrier to entry for nearly any Pokémon would be the use of human language.

While there is some debate on whether Pokémon speak a language of their own, the consensus is that they do not, and communicate through body language, tone, and scent, similarly to animals. Even if they do speak a language, however, it would be a very simple one. As intelligent as Pokémon are, human language is incredibly complex.

There is some evidence that trained Pokémon can understand human speech to some extent, more than an ordinary animal (such as a dog) would. However, understanding a language is very different from being able to communicate in a language. For example, there are trainers who claim to be able to understand their Pokémon's "speech", but are not able to speak back in the same manner.

But is it impossible?

There are many examples in literature of speaking Pokémon. Most of these are folktales and anecdotes, but their sheer number suggests some seed of truth. Additionally, there are examples of Pokémon being able to speak with assistance, such as Rotom Phones, or Ghost-type possessions. And of course, many, many stories of mythical and legendary Pokémon involve some form of telepathy, indicating at least the intelligence to allow for full communication.

The largest remaining obstacle to a Pokémon running a Rotomblr blog is literacy. But even this, it seems, is not insurmountable. There exists a single case study of a Meowth with the ability to speak and read human language. While this study is not fully accepted by the academic community, the fact remains that there is a possibility that a Pokémon could, in theory, overcome every difficulty and facet of becoming literate and running a blog online.

So, what about Ribombee?

While not one of the smartest types (Fighting, Psychic, and Dark), Fairy types are generally quite intelligent, especially in comprehending the emotions of others. Cuitefly is only slightly more intelligent than is typical for a first-stage Bug-type Pokémon, but Ribombee takes more after the Fairy-typing in its intelligence. It is able to detect aura of other Pokémon to determine their upcoming behavior, and avoid incoming moves. It is also able to predict the weather with surprising accuracy; if you see a wild Ribombee out and about, you can be all but positive the next few days will be clear, warm, and sunny! Ribombee in particular also use their aura-sensing capabilities to detect the emotions of other Pokémon, and even people. It may decide to gift another one of its balls of pollen, apparently in order to cheer them up. This implies the ability to feel sympathy, a remarkably intelligent trait for a Bug-type!

Final thoughts

A Ribombee running a Rotomblr blog. On the face of it, it seems blatantly impossible. And putting all the facts together, it probably is. But the simple fact that there is, at the very least, a theoretical way for each and every obstacle a Pokémon would face doing it to be overcome... who knows?

[ranger-rai]

What is the average intelligence of a Pokémon?

Most Pokémon are pretty intelligent, it's just a matter of how much they have picked up from humans or for survival.

In the wild you'll see that most Pokémon know how to well, survive. But you might find that wild Pokémon near cities or towns might be a bit more capable of doing things that we humans would consider smart.

Meowths know how to extort food from people, some flying types can use doors, etc.

It's all about adapting to their environment.

I'd say the "average" intelligence is thay they are smart enough to survive, anything higher than that might be considered a greater intelligence.

[antialiasis]

I think there's more evidence to say that Pokemon ARE sapient then to say they AREN'T. Case in point, go look at Pikachu and Meowth in the anime. Pikachu consistently stands up for its own autonomy - staying out of the Pokeball, refusing the Thunderstone. Meowth proved that he's capable of learning a second language, and it's implied any other Pokemon could do it if they put in the effort.

Well, yeah, in the anime Pokémon are clearly and undeniably sapient - you’d have to go through some pretty impressive mental contortions to deny that Meowth’s intelligence is on par with a human, and even nonspeaking Pokémon display clearly sapient behaviour and an obvious ability to communicate complex ideas to one another. Some fans, though, are adamant that in the games (meaning the main series games, not the various spin-offs like PMD or Detective Pikachu) Pokémon aren’t meant to be sapient, and that the anime is altering the original canon in this regard.

I guess you only saw the ethics of sapient vs. nonsapient Pokémon post? The quote in the ask was from this post, which was discussing specifically how unlike canons like the anime and PMD the main series games have historically been fairly ambiguous about exactly how intelligent Pokémon are, but I prefer to think of them as sapient for ethical reasons. (Turns out B2/W2 already had a Zoroark impersonating a human with complex, intelligent dialogue, even before the talking Rotom Pokédex in Sun and Moon, so game canon has indicated at least some Pokémon are sapient before.)

[antialiasis]

"I very much prefer to think of Pokémon as sapient, because I think the whole concept gets a lot more ethically uncomfortable if they aren’t" - What's your line of reasoning here? I prefer to interpret them as sapient as well, but I'm curious because plenty argue the complete opposite.

Because sapient beings can understand and consent to things like battling for sport.

I think it’s really weird when people go “But it’d be way worse to carry sapient creatures around in little balls and make them fight for you” - that line of reasoning only makes sense if you’re assuming that the Pokémon are unwilling participants, which in itself would make the whole thing morally wrong, whether the Pokémon are sapient or not. This isn’t like taking an animal to the vet, where they suffer and don’t understand why but you know you’re doing it for their own good, to prevent them from suffering later on - if your Pokémon don’t want to fight, then making them do so (and thus suffer completely unnecessary pain, fear, stress and exhaustion) simply for human glory and amusement is pretty indefensible.

You could arguably defend battling with nonsapient Pokémon if they themselves actively seek out fights in the wild and are generally happier doing it than not, and are not distressed by the confinement of Pokéballs, but even then, ethically it’s on much more solid ground if the Pokémon simply know and understand that these fights are nonlethal, in a safe and controlled situation, and that if they get hurt they’ll be recalled to safety and their injuries healed, and that the Pokéballs are just a convenience for traveling and they’ll be let out when they get to their destination. That way, they can make an informed, conscious decision to participate in battles and consent to being carried in a Pokéball (or not). As far as I’m concerned that’s by far the most genuinely ethical interpretation of Pokémon, and thus it’s the one I’m imagining when I play the games.

(There exist great fanworks that go with ethically dubious interpretations and actually tackle them interestingly, mind; there’s nothing wrong with that kind of fan exploration, but I must confess it does kind of baffle me when people claim to love these games while personally choosing to headcanon an interpretation of the world where everyone in it is a horrible person, especially the player.)