It is pretty clear that “sapience” is not a hard line but a continuum. The Miesti might draw the line in a different place than we do.

More likely still, they may draw it in a different way. What you are describing is looking at what we do with our hands as indirect evidence of what we can do with our minds. I can certainly imagine that a telepathic species with no effective hands might be more inclined for direct rather than indirect measurement of mind power, judging mental ability by what the mind can do directly. What is built may not figure into the calculations at all.

I wonder how we can tell whether ants, bees and termites are self-aware or not. It’s not as if we can ask them.

I think this would be a good time to note that problem solving =/= self-awareness and consciousness. It’s a useful survival strategy, but not more than that. Going further afield from chimps, dolphins, and birds, I’d note that ants, bees, and termites all have complex societies – complete with architecture – but not self-awareness.

It’s worth noting that races, cultures, and species all have blind-spots due to their natures. We consider technological sophistication to be a sign of intelligence and self-awareness. We also tend to favor intelligent aliens that are like us – i.e. bipedal beings with two arms and hands, with sensory organs in a head, preferably two eyes, two ears, a mouth… This holds true not just in live-action science fiction TV and movies (where admittedly budget limits favor humans-in-funny-clothes-and-makeup) but also in comics, animated shows, and even written fiction. Nonhumanoid aliens that are friendly or neutral are rare.

Those are our blind-spots. What might the blind spots of the Miesti be?

As readers we can only speculate on their evolution, but let’s look at what evidence is present. The Miesti are small, fragile creatures with no manipulatory appendages present. We can surmise their evolutionary ancestors were no more robust. So the capacity to influence large creatures can pose an advantage. The proto-Miesti that can control predators and turn them to defense or labor have a better chance of surviving than the proto-Miesti that can’t. Once the advantage is gained, evolution can refine it – in fact, I bet such control is what drove the Miesti to advanced intelligence. Bottom line is that the Miesti have had up to hundreds of thousands of years of controlling larger creatures and hence the mental connection of “big creature = beast of burden” is probably so ingrained it’s almost instinct.

Now throw in contact with humans. Here are big creatures (beasts of burden) that can build things. What are the Miesti more likely to think, given their background? That humans are their equals? Or that they’ve stumbled onto a new type of advanced beast-of-burden?

Note that I’m not saying this attitude is *right* – simply that the Miesti, like us, are more than likely to rely on assumptions and their own version of “common sense” than make an intuitive leap that goes against hundreds of thousands of years of experience. Like us, such assumptions can lead them down paths they would never imagine themselves travelling down.

http://www.fallenlondon.com

And I agree that we totally need Fraggle Galaxion in the worst way. I’m seeing it in my head and really wishing I could draw Zandarin Fraggle now…

As cool and surprising as it is to discover that chimpanzees and birds and such can do a certain level of sapient puzzle solving, or that, it’s still below the threshold required to bootstrap a species into a technologically advancing society. If the Miesti don’t consider humans sapient, then it’s an ideological judgement, not an empirical one.