Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Animal consciousness experience
Do animals have minds
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Animal consciousness experience
Humans have for centuries pondered on the mind, its existence, its beginning, it’s limit, it’s substance, and fought many different arguments against them all. But how do we know if any animals have a mind? Is intelligence unique to humans? Professor Donald Griffin has pointed out that “consciousness is not a tidy all-or-nothing entity, it varies with age, culture, experience and gender. And if animals have conscious experiences, these presumably vary widely as well.” If humans have minds, it must be possible that animals also have minds. And though no one would believe that earthworms and earwigs have thought processes like our own, it has been proven that chimps share 98% of genome with humans. Chimps have also shown that they can lie and cheat their competitors, with apes being able to recognise themselves in a mirror- this showing they are capable of self- awareness, the very thing which separates us from the animals. From this we can easily see that chimps and apes must have minds, but to a lesser capacity than that of our own. Professor David Armstrong has thrown at us the inadequacies of behaviourism- it is not to be trusted fully in establishing the ability of the mind in other animals, but it will certainly help us in finding it.
In this day and age, we look to science for reason. Science has been what has excelled us so quickly since its revolution in the 17th century and onwards. We have created many advanced machines with science—we have banished their faults with science. And so in looking for the mind in other animals we will be looking toward science, reasonably. ‘Human intelligence seems to be composed of a number of correlated and cooperating neural functions, many of them already present in other primates, su...
... middle of paper ...
... become a very reliable thing. What is self- evident is not necessarily true, but what is scientifically proven generally is.
Humans are aware that other humans have minds because we can share these experiences. The difficulty with validating whether animals have minds is that we cannot share experiences with animals, communication is difficult. Though this may be changing. Experts in symbolic language with chimps and apes are able to communicate with each other in sign language. ‘Experiments with chimps Koko and Washoe and gorilla Kenzi have shown that they are able to invent new words, construct abstract phrases and express their feelings using American Sign Language or computer-based symbolic language.’ This is hard scientific evidence proving that these primates do have intelligence and a mind nearly like our own, though the extent is far from being displayed.
9. Research on the language capabilities of apes clearly demonstrates that they have the capacity to:
This article, titled Common Ground, written by Barbara Smuts, points out the main differences between humans and apes, such as our upright stance, large brains, and capacity for spoken language and abstract reasoning. However, the main point of this article is to emphasize the many similarities that apes share with us. Smuts goes into great detail about how human social and emotional tendencies are very reflective in the family of apes.
One of the major differences between humans and animals is our ability to reason and differentiate our actions from our instincts (Barrett, 2011, p. 3). Justin Barrett further explains this distinction in the first chapter of his book, Cognitive Science Religion and Theology. He explains that cognitive science recognizes the uniqueness of the human mind and focuses on explaining the thinking processes that take place(Barrett, 2011, p. 5). This may seem similar to what the field of neuroscience aims to do but, cognitive science is not as interested with the biological functions of the brain. Instead of looking at physical structures Barrett writes, that cognitive science focuses on broader processes such as perception, attention, memory, reasoning and learning (Barrett, 2011, p. 7). All of these processes interact with each other to create the big questions asked in cognitive science. Some of these big underlying questions of cognitive science are explored in this first chapter, questions such as “What is innate?” or “How are mind and bodies
In this example, two primates were placed behind either a transparent or an opaque screen. Between these screens was a banana and I learned how a primate reacted when approached with the option if he should go for the banana when put against a dominant primate. I was impressed that they didn’t engage in a brawl over the banana, but instead used thought in regard to hierarchy. This to me, without doubt, proves once more that primates are able to produce complex behaviors that relate to humans. Thinking like this insinuates that primates as well as creatures other than humans have the ability of using
Non-human primates are the only animal that imparts a large number of essential cognitive aptitudes with humans.
All primates have the same sensation and are capable of receiving excessive amounts of information. All senses, sight, smell, taste, hearing, and touch are essential to the development, survival, and overall well-being of living primates. It is fascinating how non-human primates, without language, can communicate in the same ways as human primates, with language. Non-human primates and human primates are highly developed mammals that possess many of the same communicative characteristics, but still differ greatly. Non-human primates fit into the category of not having language, but being able to communicate.
Rene Descartes and David Hume lived in two completely different time periods, yet they shared interest in some of the same philosophical categories. Could animals reason? How did humans expand their knowledge compared to animals? Questions like these were answered both by Descartes and Hume even though they had two opposing views. Descartes was the first to address the questions about animal instincts, and later on Hume set out to refute some of his ideas.
Language is commonly held to be the province of humans, but other inhabitants of earth possess their own forms of communication. Birds, dolphins, and whales are some of those that have a language. Primates also use vocal communication with each other. Their utterances have varied uses and volumes, with each primate’s voice being distinct just as human voices are. These unique calls have given researchers insight into the social workings of primate groups. The very fact that primates have a language offers insight into the evolution of language and calls into question what the term human truly means.
Human intelligence is an eel-like subject: slippery, difficult to grasp, and almost impossible to get straight [3]. Many scientist and psychologist have made numerous attempts to come up with an explanation for the development of human intelligence. For many years, there has been much controversy over what intelligence is and whether it is hereditary or nurtured by the environment. Webster's dictionary defines intelligence as "the ability to acquire and apply knowledge; which includes a sensing an environment and reaching conclusions about the state of that environment [7]. In this paper I am going to examine the factors, which make up ones intelligence. I will be investigating whether or not intelligence is fostered by genetic heritance or nurtured by ones environment.
Monkey see, monkey do. Apes have always been thought to have an increased level of intelligence. Over the years, researchers have attempted to understand the degree of intelligence these primates possess. However, it is essential to understand the definition of intelligence in order to determine the amount of intelligence primates have. Intelligence is the capability of obtaining knowledge and being able to utilize it in everyday situations. There are many hypotheses that focus on the evolution of intelligence in primates that view a number of factors including brain size and modernism. Primate intelligence has been a topic of interest to many because it will allow us to further understand the close relationship between humans and primates. Additionally, we will be able to understand the difference between human and primate cognition. Some studies suggest that the human and primate brains possess many similarities. This demonstrates why primates tend to respond to stimuli in a manner that is closely related to humans. Researchers have conducted a number of studies in an effort to understand primate cognition.
Many of the most prominent critics of Evolutionary Psychology (Buller and Kaplan) are deeply skeptical of Evolutionary Psychology’s two defining tenets. The first tenet says the human mind is “massively modular,” composed of a myriad of independent, special purpose (“domain-specific”) modules, each evolved to help our ancestors survive and reproduce during the hunter-gather period of human evolution. The second tenet focuses on the idea that no subsequent cognitive adaptations to novel environments have occurred (Machery 2007; Rellihan 2012). According to prominent critic David Buller (2005), evolutionary psychologists think that humans are a le...
The traditional notion that seeks to compare human minds, with all its intricacies and biochemical functions, to that of artificially programmed digital computers, is self-defeating and it should be discredited in dialogs regarding the theory of artificial intelligence. This traditional notion is akin to comparing, in crude terms, cars and aeroplanes or ice cream and cream cheese. Human mental states are caused by various behaviours of elements in the brain, and these behaviours in are adjudged by the biochemical composition of our brains, which are responsible for our thoughts and functions. When we discuss mental states of systems it is important to distinguish between human brains and that of any natural or artificial organisms which is said to have central processing systems (i.e. brains of chimpanzees, microchips etc.). Although various similarities may exist between those systems in terms of functions and behaviourism, the intrinsic intentionality within those systems differ extensively. Although it may not be possible to prove that whether or not mental states exist at all in systems other than our own, in this paper I will strive to present arguments that a machine that computes and responds to inputs does indeed have a state of mind, but one that does not necessarily result in a form of mentality. This paper will discuss how the states and intentionality of digital computers are different from the states of human brains and yet they are indeed states of a mind resulting from various functions in their central processing systems.
It is nearly impossible to say whether non-human animals are intelligent. Most studies, in this field of psychology, were carried out on primates, and it is thought that these animals are naturally superior. It seems most behaviour in the research discussed in this essay can be explained through association learning, therefore not actually a result of intelligence. It is difficult to falsify whether animals are intelligent or not because, although they are able to solve problems they only show some aspects to suggest ToM.
It's hard to imagine that, at one point, a bunch of brain cells just worked together to grant humanity and so many other creatures the ability to be aware of their surroundings, think, and feel emotions. It's also hard to describe being conscious.
Animals can be perceived in many different ways. While some humans consider animals to be mindless machines programmed with instinct, others view them as spiritual creatures capable of coherent thought and emotions. I feel that animals are somewhere in the middle. Although they rely heavily on instinct, the ability to feel emotions shows that their mental capacity is not far from that of a human.