The Case for Animal Consciousness

[Go Blue]

First of all, before I make the actual post, I just want to say that I've been a long time lurker of this forum, making occasional responces to posts and and starting or two two of my own threads in the past. But I hope to become a bigger contricutor here in the future, as there is definitely a lot of intelligence in this forum, which is something that's hard to come across in everyday life.

Anyway, as for the post itself: Consciousness in non-humans is something I've been pondering for a while. Having taken several linguistics and anthropology classes (neither of these are my concentrations), I am inclined to believe that humans aren't the only ones "aware of life." Part of the reason is that humans can think in a complex manner DUE TO LANGUAGE and this is something that other forms of life don't really have.

If a typical human was raised without exposure to language, what would happen? (Have any experiments been done on this? I'm not sure.) How would this human "think"? We all think in terms of words, so if this human knew no words, would he still be able to think and feel everything that we can? Would he still be "aware" that he is conscious and such? Also, what about extremely retarted people? I'm guessing that they also are not aware of consciousness (given how most people define it), but if that's the case, then where do we draw the line between a human who is and isn't like this? Would a moderately retarted person fit either category?

I think that this can be extended to complex living things - anything like a dog, cat, monkey, etc. How can we be sure that apes, for instance, are not aware of life and consiousness? If they actually are, they wouldn't be able to express it to anyone else without language. I hope you see where I'm going with is.

Anyway, I posted this because this is something I've been thinking a lot about recently, and plus Sklansky just mentioned it in his recent post here. In addition, I saw some commercial (I think on the discovery channel or something) about an upcoming documentary addressing this topic. I'm curious as to what you all think about this issue.

[spoohunter]

Feral Children (http://www.feralchildren.com/en/index.php)

A quick google search revealed this (children raised in the wild by animals). It seems pertinent to this post.

[Sharkey]

What do you consider necessary indicators for consciousness to be present?

[Copernicus]

consciousness = memory imo

any animal that can be trained is conscious. (training here means performing a non-instinctual act in response to some trigger)

words/language is a process of associating symbols with experience, and isnt a prerequisite for either consciousness or thinking.

"Aware of life" and "Self-awareness" are different from consciousness and thinking. A dog that sees himself in a mirror does not seem to recognize the image as being himself, while if I recall correctly, some apes/chimps do. Thus on a certain level at least, they must be self-aware.

Life? theres enough debate about what life is, without getting into what animals might be aware of it!

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
any animal that can be trained is conscious. (training here means performing a non-instinctual act in response to some trigger)



[/ QUOTE ] The pyschology feild makes no mention of consiousness in Classical or Operant Conditioning, they actualy state that the learning is at a subconscious level.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
any animal that can be trained is conscious. (training here means performing a non-instinctual act in response to some trigger)



[/ QUOTE ] The pyschology feild makes no mention of consiousness in Classical or Operant Conditioning, they actualy state that the learning is at a subconscious level.

[/ QUOTE ]

There being a "subconscious level" implies there is "Conscious level". I didnt say where I believe the learning takes place, just that learning is evidence of consciousness.

[bisonbison]

Sentient = has pets

[Philo]

What exactly are you claiming here? That some animals other than humans are conscious and can think? Who disputes that? Are you (also) claiming that some animals other than humans are self-conscious? (you seem to conflate consciousness and self-consciousness in your post) That is more controversial, I think, but there seems to be pretty good evidence that at least some other animals are capable of some degree of self-consciousness.

[Sharkey]

Self-consciousness must be present to feel pain.

[MidGe]

No, Only consciousness need be present to experience pain.

[Sharkey]

Pain is not experienced as an object, but rather as an aspect of self. A creature cannot be aware of pain without also being aware of the subject of the pain.

[Copernicus]

it depends on what you mean by pain. An animal certainly doesnt need to be self aware for injurious stimuli to cause electrical impulses from the area of stimulus to the brain, and result in pulling away from it. Does your definition of pain goes beyond that (without your usual self-serving circular defintitions).

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Pain is not experienced as an object, but rather as an aspect of self. A creature cannot be aware of pain without also being aware of the subject of the pain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, yeah sharkey, you have never seen animals in pain I guess. Of course, that suits your view of god, all loving etc...

[AceofSpades]

[ QUOTE ]
Pain is not experienced as an object, but rather as an aspect of self. A creature cannot be aware of pain without also being aware of the subject of the pain.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hurt therefore I am? Are you equating self-awareness with any awareness? Because if you are then any creature that responds to its environment would be self aware.

[morphball]

I think many animals are aware of their existence. I think it goes in a spectrum, from robot (such as incests, etc.) to fully developed, as in man (although this is open to debate...lol).

Dogs dream, lions (and wolves) hunt with sophisticated group tactics, whales have dialects, some monkeys use tools, and Kiko (a gorilla) used sign language. I am surprised there is even a debate on this, maybe some people "choose" to think otherwise because they feel bad about eating a steak.

Were Neanderthals animals or men? Because they buried their dead. Come to think of it, don't elephants have grave yards too? Also I read about elephants taking their sick young to anti-poaching camps to seek verternarian aid.

[Philo]

[ QUOTE ]

Come to think of it, don't elephants have grave yards too? Also I read about elephants taking their sick young to anti-poaching camps to seek verternarian aid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, my cat sometimes steals my credit card and charges it up.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
I think many animals are aware of their existence. I think it goes in a spectrum, from robot (such as incests , etc.) to fully developed, as in man (although this is open to debate...lol).

Dogs dream, lions (and wolves) hunt with sophisticated group tactics, whales have dialects, some monkeys use tools, and Kiko (a gorilla) used sign language. I am surprised there is even a debate on this, maybe some people "choose" to think otherwise because they feel bad about eating a steak.

Were Neanderthals animals or men? Because they buried their dead. Come to think of it, don't elephants have grave yards too? Also I read about elephants taking their sick young to anti-poaching camps to seek verternarian aid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Freudian slip?

[Go Blue]

[ QUOTE ]
What exactly are you claiming here? That some animals other than humans are conscious and can think? Who disputes that? Are you (also) claiming that some animals other than humans are self-conscious? (you seem to conflate consciousness and self-consciousness in your post) That is more controversial, I think, but there seems to be pretty good evidence that at least some other animals are capable of some degree of self-consciousness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, what I'm claiming is that advanced primates and other complex livings things are likely all capable of thinking on some sort of a complex level...to a certain extent. The reason that humans are so advanced though, is due to language. We think in words and numerous studies have shown (including the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) that languages actually dictates thought. If you think about it, your first memories as a child begin to form when you begin to leaern words and can think in terms of these words.

That link to that list of children raised in the wild is very interesting. However, I'd be curious to know what happens to people like that after they group up and don't know how to speak (I don't think it mentions it on that site). A professor told me that if humans don't learn a language by a certain point in life, then they will never be capable of learning a language to the extent that we all know languages. So, how do these people think? Are they just as "conscious" as other animals? Can they comprehend something like why the sun rises every day and why the seasons change? If they don't posses knowledge of words, they how can they think through these complex matters?

All in all, I am inclined to think that languages almost solely responsible for our intelligence and thought. Maybe if cats could communicate and make different, complex sounds, they they would be able to think about life and to think about...well, thinking, as well.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What exactly are you claiming here? That some animals other than humans are conscious and can think? Who disputes that? Are you (also) claiming that some animals other than humans are self-conscious? (you seem to conflate consciousness and self-consciousness in your post) That is more controversial, I think, but there seems to be pretty good evidence that at least some other animals are capable of some degree of self-consciousness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, what I'm claiming is that advanced primates and other complex livings things are likely all capable of thinking on some sort of a complex level...to a certain extent. The reason that humans are so advanced though, is due to language. We think in words and numerous studies have shown (including the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) that languages actually dictates thought. If you think about it, your first memories as a child begin to form when you begin to leaern words and can think in terms of these words.

That link to that list of children raised in the wild is very interesting. However, I'd be curious to know what happens to people like that after they group up and don't know how to speak (I don't think it mentions it on that site). A professor told me that if humans don't learn a language by a certain point in life, then they will never be capable of learning a language to the extent that we all know languages. So, how do these people think? Are they just as "conscious" as other animals? Can they comprehend something like why the sun rises every day and why the seasons change? If they don't posses knowledge of words, they how can they think through these complex matters?

All in all, I am inclined to think that languages almost solely responsible for our intelligence and thought. Maybe if cats could communicate and make different, complex sounds, they they would be able to think about life and to think about...well, thinking, as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

The strong version of Sapir-Whorf, which you appear to ascribe too, is no longer accepted. In fact it isnt clear that Whorf even believed in the strong version.

Take a person who is deaf, dumb and blind from birth. They have no capability of learning a language as we know it. Then a medical procedure is discovered at age 20 which gives them all three abilities. Do you really believe that they were incapable of thought for 19 years?

Cave men were unable to think before the invention of language?

I think the weak version of S-W...that the way we think and veiw the world is influenced by language...is certainly true. However it can just as easily be extended in the opposite direction from the strong version. Ie while the strong version says that language is responsible for our intelligence and thought, it may well be that language inhibits and constrains our intelligence and thought. Unencumbered by conventions of language thought might be liberated to allow direct and clearer observation of nature and life.

[Aver-aging]

There's actually a simple answer to this, and that's that all living organisms exhibit a form of consciousness. Even the most basic virus' which are pretty much just complex protein (RNA) are even able to identify environments which are suitable for them to replicate in. So in other words, virus' are conscious of their chemical environment.

Consciousness is something that simply varies from organism to organism. Organisms, through the process of natural selection, develop forms of consciousness that are beneficial for their ecological niche. For example, a strong olfactory sense is a huge advantage to carnivorous animals, and in that sense dogs, cats, and so forth are much more conscious of their olfactory environment than we are, simply because it's of greater advantage to them.

The difference in a human being's form of consciousness is that human's ecological niche is social one. The most important aspect of our lives, is how we relate to other people. How we attract them, how we display ourselves to them, how we react to them, how we predict their reactions, and so forth. That's why humans have a consciousness that is very focused on self-awareness and social awareness. We're also keen observers of patterns in nature, because that was our greatest advantage that eventually allowed our ancestors ([censored] habilis, neandrathals) to be hunter/gatherers, which then allowed for the proper conditions (a large protein source for food, social conditions, hunting conditions) to allow humans to develop our complex neurological makeup we possess now. That's why humans have a very evolved consciousness of how their environment works.

In short, some animals sniff, some animals see, some animals sonar, some use chemistry, and some animals reason. All animals are conscious of certain aspects of themselves and their environment that other animals aren't quite capable of being conscious of. And remember, if you think "Well humans can use sonar, and humans can see all different forms of light with technology". Just tell yourself, we still haven't built a machine that can smell (things, that is. We've built many machines that emit odors!). And then take a look at dogs, their sense of smell is so strong that it can detect small traces of cancer in human beings. Something that no complex machinery or technique we have can accomplish.

Oh yeah, and the only organisms that can feel pain are the ones with nerve endings that allow them to feel pain. Once again, the ability to sense pain is just a form of consciousness - consciousness of yourself and how the environment is interacting with your body. Many organisms possess it, and at least every bird, mammal, lizard, and amphibian posssess it too.

Oh, and also on the topic of the feral children, language and all that. Feral children are very conscious of other people. They may not be able to talk all to well (the later they are found and taught language the worse their word memory and grammar ability (actually, if they're discovered past 6 or 7 they ability to form grammatical sentences are fairly non-existant). They are still able to deduce human emotions though (albeit not as well, because of under-exposure to social situations, but they can learn still), still able to form devious social traps (in other words - they can figure out how to manipulate situations in their favor). So they understand things like me and you, just not quite as well because of a lack of practice. They were too busy finding food to focus in on developing social skills and communication.

Language doesn't make us conscious by the way, its a tool to make us more informed, to allow us to manipulate other people and work with other people. It's a totally innate quality that is seperate from reasoning faculties. Some people can talk, but they are completely incapable of understanding social interactions, and other people's emotions. So, in other words, some people can talk, but they aren't conscious of the social landscape that's infront of them. Just goes to show that levels of consciousness vary even from person to person.

[Maddog121]

"Just tell yourself, we still haven't built a machine that can smell"

We have devices ("machines") that can "smell". We have many devices for detecting organic content in the air. OSHA uses them. We have devices for the detection of many vapors and air constituents which is what smell is. (sorry for being tangential to the topic, but that sentence bothered me in an obsessive/compulsive way).

[Aver-aging]

Hehe, sorry. I should have said 'a piece of technology that can smell as well as a dog'.

[Philo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What exactly are you claiming here? That some animals other than humans are conscious and can think? Who disputes that? Are you (also) claiming that some animals other than humans are self-conscious? (you seem to conflate consciousness and self-consciousness in your post) That is more controversial, I think, but there seems to be pretty good evidence that at least some other animals are capable of some degree of self-consciousness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, what I'm claiming is that advanced primates and other complex livings things are likely all capable of thinking on some sort of a complex level...to a certain extent. The reason that humans are so advanced though, is due to language. We think in words and numerous studies have shown (including the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) that languages actually dictates thought. If you think about it, your first memories as a child begin to form when you begin to leaern words and can think in terms of these words.

That link to that list of children raised in the wild is very interesting. However, I'd be curious to know what happens to people like that after they group up and don't know how to speak (I don't think it mentions it on that site). A professor told me that if humans don't learn a language by a certain point in life, then they will never be capable of learning a language to the extent that we all know languages. So, how do these people think? Are they just as "conscious" as other animals? Can they comprehend something like why the sun rises every day and why the seasons change? If they don't posses knowledge of words, they how can they think through these complex matters?

All in all, I am inclined to think that languages almost solely responsible for our intelligence and thought. Maybe if cats could communicate and make different, complex sounds, they they would be able to think about life and to think about...well, thinking, as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not think that all thought must be linguistic. I think this has been shown, and in any case is pretty self-evident in the world (of course being able to think in complex ways and being conscious are not the same thing). It seems to me that there are lots of other intelligent creatures in the world that do not have language, or at least not the sort of complex language that we have that is so closely linked to our cognitive capacities, that obviously are conscious and can think.

[Sharkey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Pain is not experienced as an object, but rather as an aspect of self. A creature cannot be aware of pain without also being aware of the subject of the pain.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hurt therefore I am? Are you equating self-awareness with any awareness? Because if you are then any creature that responds to its environment would be self aware.

[/ QUOTE ]

Self-awareness is different than object awareness, which is a more primitive capacity possessed by robots, namely the ability to respond to the environment in an appropriate way. Subjectivity implies an internal experience. A robot programmed to move away from a flame is qualitatively different than an animal motivated by feeling the heat, though the results are similar in a simplistic, mechanical sense.

[ElaineMonster]

[ QUOTE ]


All in all, I am inclined to think that languages almost solely responsible for our intelligence and thought. Maybe if cats could communicate and make different, complex sounds, they they would be able to think about life and to think about...well, thinking, as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must not have cats. Because if you did, you would realize they CAN communicate. Hello? They meow, purr, growl, hiss, howl, whine, whimper... Also, their tails and body language communicates. You'd be surprised how quickly you pick up Catese when you MUST understand what the cat is telling you before you stick your bare hand into its cage.

However, I do agree with you that language plays an important role in our intellectual development. For example, multi-lingual people can often think about more things. That's because each language has it's own limits that reflect social and political values. No one language can possibly describe all that is.