I’ve raised and trained border collies for a number of years, and I’m pretty damned sure that they are self-aware.
Dog intelligence is not the same thing as human intelligence though. A dog has little use for mirrors or higher math or language.
The fact that they can learn the meaning to a large vocabularly of our language shows their intelligence and adaptability.
Dogs are trained better when you don’t use the reward, punishment scenario. They learn quickest and do what you want because they like maybe even love you.
Dogs have a reasoning ability, and can work out surprising complex problems and even demonstrate planning as long as you put it in their terms.
One must be very clear in training border collies, not to let them get into an ethical quandary over conflicting unprioritized tasks. If you don’t do it for them, they’ll make their own value judgements.
For example, our border collie shamus has the sovereign duty to bring the horses up to the barn for feeding. He also considers it his very serious responsibility to watch and play with my daughter anytime she is outside. We had to do a little retraining when my wife would call him to get the horses while he was watching my daughter. He would stand there in tortured indecision thinking it over. Finally he decided that staying with my daughter was more important.
So, in order to get him to bring the horses up, we had to bring my daughter inside. He then gave my wife an apologetic look and went after the horses. This was clearly not a matter of preference or disobediance. Watching my daughter is not fun (jogging or playing frisbee is,) he just figured out that his responsibility to my daughter was more important than his responsibility to get the horses.
We have now trained him so that he knows if I pick up my daughter and sit on the hammock his responsibility to her has been taken over by me, and he’s free to get the horses.
As far as the mirror thing, I think it’s kind of stupid. Dog scientists the world over have concluded that humans are not self aware because of our inability to recognize our own scent.
Dogs don’t look at the world the way we do. While vision is important, they rely heavily on smell and hearing to a much much greater extent than humans do.
Our brains are different. They value data differently and process it acording to criteria alien to us.
As far as dogs are concerned, as a dog, we are retarded.
Fortunately, dogs are smart enough to recognize that we’re different in ou outlook and don’t hold it against us.
Shamus for example is smarter in human terms than a lot of humans. He has a deeper sense of responsibility than many humans. He has ethics. He dreams. He has desires. He can remember things that happen for a long time.
He is very much aware that he’s a dog, and we’re human, and operate under different systems. He recognizes that we have responsibilities and he gets disapointed or even angry if we don’t fulfill them. He is also capable of forgiveness after the fact.
That being said, dogs don’t have the sheer mental wattage that humans have. Almost all of them are self-aware, I’m sure. Many are much more and qualify as persons as far as I’m concerned.
I did not intend to suggest that different species’ intelligence or worth should be judged purely in terms of human abilities and preferences. Moreover, I come at this from a biological philosophy. I “believe” humans and other species developed as gradual adaptations to natural processes. We may be at the top of the food chain, but we are not a pre-planned or ultimate goal of evolution/creation. The further we look into animal behavior and genetics, the more obvious this is (at least to me).
I find it hard to believe anyone could deny the incredibly close bond between us and the great apes, and abhor the killing of same. As a humanist, I believe we should respect and appreciate our world and all of its inhabitants. That does not mean, however, that all species are equal, and that you shouldn’t eat meat or wear leather.
I believe there certainly is a continuum of sorts. I previously mentioned the mosquito, which I believe is little more than an automaton (so much cooler to write and say than “robot”!) So if humans (or cetacens) are at one end, and mosquitos (or bacteria) are at the other, where do various species fit in between.
And yes, I am aware of the difficulties of identifying a specific continuum. Different species are “intelligent” in different ways. But I believe there can be a distinction between, say, instinct and volition.
Maybe to approach from a different slant, what types of mental processes differentiate humans, from our planetary brethren?
(IMO, this seems to be sliding towards IMHO range, rather than GD. Can the coveted double bump be in order?)
I too don’t think this means anything as discussed by Darwin’s Finch. Yoour dog identifies you as the Alpha to whom it must defer. If you yell at your dog for no apparent reason it will attempt to appease you where a human might ask you what the hell you are yelling about. Since there is no cause for your behavior your dog will learn the lesson that you are an unreliable being prone to fits of anger for no apparent reason and will probably avoid you or become even more appeasing to avoid future random outbursts.
Nevertheless dogs do know (usually) when they have done something wrong. It was kinda funny growing up when I’d come home and my dog would guiltily walk down the hall to greet me. Her guilt was written plain as day in her body language. Before I knew anything was wrong and even said one word to her she had already figured for herself that she had screwed up. As dropzone so eloquently put it, “Bowser knows darned well who crapped in the basement.”
One might argue that this is just learned behavior and the dog isn’t making any moral judgements on the right or wrong of crapping in the basement but then again humans are generally taught that crapping on the floor is a no no as well (loosely speaking…we’re really taught not to crap anywhere but a toilet).
As already mentioned defining self-awareness is difficult if not impossible. Still, loosely speaking I’d venture that it’s a sense of, “I’m me, you’re you and we are distinct and separate individuals.” Dolphinboy mentioned that he didn’t see how self-awareness could act as a survival trait that dogs or cats could use but further thought shows it is. By being able to see itself as an individual a dog can place itself in the pack hierarchy. It’s not a lemming or a mosquito. A dog knows where it fits in the narrow confines of its world. This allows a pack to form (as opposed to a mob that has little to no hierarchy or structure) and gain the benefits attendent with pack society (group hunting, group protection, a group to snuggle with and stay warm when sleeping, etc.). I’d say that counts as a useful survival trait.
Target training is merely using an object, like a large plastic bead (like you find on ropes used to divide the deep and shallow ends of a swimming pool), attached to the end of a long stick to “teach” an animal like a dolphin to perform a behavior.
A simple example is a forward flip that dolphins can naturally do in the wild and that you’ve seen at almost any marine aquarium. You take your target and train the animal, using secondary reinforcement (a bridge stimulus like a whistle) and a primary reinforcer (like fish)to follow and then touch the bead. You put the target in the water… the dolphin approaches and then touches the target… you blow the whistle and then feed them a fish. Within a short while the dolphin will be racing towards that target and will touch it whenever possible to get rewarded. They can usually be target training within a few sessions.
Now you can use the target to modify the behavior of the dolphin in any way you like. Take the target and move it in a circular motion underwater so the animal is doing a flip underwater. Pretty soon you can start to raise the target until the animal is now doing the flip half under and half out of the water. You continue to raise the target, continuing to use the primary and secondary reinforcement, and apply a cue for that behavior. I spin my hand a certain way, I move the target a certain way, the dolphin does a flip, I blow the whistle and feed them. Later you take out the target away and just use the cue and secondary reinforcement and the dolphin is now doing a flip “on their own” out of the water.
This, of course, can take several weeks to complete, but you get the idea. Since you can’t get in the water and manipulate the animal directly you use the target to guide the animal into performing the actions you need remotely. It’s really just an extension of your arm.
My cats, Lillian and Dorothy, certainly prove a great variance in intelligence, awareness and personality not only between cats, but from the same litter.
DOROTHY is creepily intelligent. Knows her own name, has actually tried to build something (a missile, I suspect) from kitchen implements; has wildly varying moods and vivid facial expressions. She creeps me out, quite frankly.
LILLIAN has two brain cells (labeled “eat” and “get petted”). She has actually had a cat-toy land on her forehead, and wandered vaguely around for hours not realizing it. Dorothy views her with ill-disguised disdain.
What could cause such a huge difference between cats from the same litter? Only thing I can figure out is, Dorothy cut off Lillian’s air supply in utero.
Had a cat who would spend hours creating in-the-round art, arranging and rearranging found objects until they were placed to her satisfaction. The other cats acted as if she was a great artist and would admire her finished work. And expected us humans to, too.
My collie has an understanding of sympathetic magic. I was late coming home, and she got worried. Wife watched as the wheels slowly ground in Trilby’s head. (I never said dogs were SMART. Just not as dumb as some people think. ) Finally, an idea dawned. Daddy is always blowing his nose! SHe ran and got three pieces of Kleenex. Two she draped carefully over the arms of my favorite chair. The third was spread on the seat. She then got her dish and put it in front of my chair and put some object of mine in the dish (can’t remember just what). SHe then put her bone on top of the dish. With the ceremony complete, she took her bone and went off to chew on it a while.
I would like to know how this behaviour differs from that of the Cargo Cultists.
FWIW here are some suggestive behaviors I’ve seen (mostly on Animal Planet)…
A monkey who’s baby died a few days after birth would not let go of her baby or put her down long after it had died. After awhile the dead body got pretty disgusting and eventually the handlers had to forcefully take the corpse away from the mom.
A chimpanzee youth who’s mom died pined for her unto its own death. The youth was a princess of sorts as long as the mom was alive. Upon her death the youth no longer enjoyed ‘special’ status among the troop. The child stayed near her mother’s corpse and would not leave it. The troop hung about for a bit on her behalf till forced to move on in search of food (or something). Eventually the child died as well from malnutrition (although it was old enough at this point to have sought its own food had it wished). While malnutrition was the physiological cause the underlying cause seemed to be a broken heart.
A meer cat gets mauled by a fox (or something like that) but survives the attack. However, it is badly wounded. The meer cat’s troop (tribe?, pride?) exhibits unusual behavior denoting concern for their injured comrade and will not leave her alone although moving on to the ‘next’ thing would have been normal behavior. The meer cat dies after a few days and the troop lingers a bit near her body before moving on.
A dog follows its master (guardian if you prefer) to the train every day and returns at the appropriate time when his owner’s train returns in the evening to greet him. One day the owner (a British Army Officer I believe) has a heart attack at work and dies. The dog continues to go to the train station twice a day at the appointed time, day in and day out, for something like 10 years till its own death. IIRC the town the dog lived in now has a sizeable statue remembering the dog and its loyalty.
I’ve also heard various stories of dogs staying by their owners sides when the owner has died. The dog does not eat them and frequently forgoes its own care in seeking food in the reluctance to leave its owners side. Some stories I’ve heard has the dog defending the dead body from other scavengers as well. Sorry I don’t have a specific story but I’ll try and dig one up if anyone cares.
This one, to me, is one of the most compelling. Elephants in Africa caress the bones of dead elephants when they come upon them. This isn’t just random and they keep going…they will stop and spend a good deal of time touching and holding the bones. One would assume elephants come across all sorts of bones in their travels across the savannah yet they recognize the bones of elephants and give them special attention. The elephants also exhibit some anxiety when ‘playing’ with these bones.
Obviously the anecdotes above could be interpreted in many ways but in the end I find it hard to conclude that animals are indifferent to death. If a sense of mortality is a prerequisite for ‘self-awareness’ then I’d say the question of how animals view death is unanswered. More than indifferent but less than human.
I’ve got a lot of experience with smart animals. I used to work in a dolphin center, I own a Border Collie, which is one of the smartest dog breeds, and we used to own an African Grey Parrot, which may be one of the smartest animals around (Check out ‘Alex’ on the web - Dr. Irene Pepperburg is teaching him to read.)
Anyway, the mirror test involves putting a mark on an animal, and then showing them a mirror. If the animal is not self-aware, he might reach out and try to touch the animal in the mirror, he might try to fight with it, etc. But if he’s self-aware, he’ll touch the spot on his own body. This is an indication that he understands the concept of his existance, and that he is monkey-shaped and his consciousness rests inside the creature he is seeing in the mirror.
So far, only Bottlenose dolphins and certain higher primates like Chimps have passed that test. Dogs don’t.
The intelligence of dogs may be nothing more than a sensitivity to the pack. Social animals have brains that are adaptable, because they need to modify their behaviour to fit into a social heirarchy. Animals like cats, that don’t have to be social, tend to be more hard-wired. I own cats as well as dogs, and it seems to me that cats are much farther down the intelligence scale. But that could just be me interpreting adaptability as intelligence.
It’s an interesting question, and damned hard to answer. Some people have defined intelligence as tool using, but then otters and blue jays would have be ‘intelligent’. For that matter, so would spiders. Lots of insects build incredibly complex structures, and some birds show the ability to problem-solve in the sense that if you take their standard nesting materials away, they will adapt and use other materials.
So for many, the only real difference to be seen between man and animal is that man is self-aware. We have the concept of our existance as individuals. And so, apparently, do Monkeys and Dolphins. Many other animals including dogs and cats may not (although the mirror-test isn’t definitive - maybe they just can’t get the concept of reflection).
dolphinboy - shorly after seeing target training explained at a dolphin show, Mrs. D used it to teach Daisy to bring in the morning paper. Worked like a charm. And now one of the highlights of our day is seeing her race out to get the paper and bring it back. At the risk of anthropomorpizing (sp?), she seems so proud of herself!
Scylla: You are certain Shamus is self aware. How exactly do you define that term?
Self Aware - having a conscioussness of one’s environment and one’s own existence, sensations and thoughts, posessing knowledge as a result of this, and capable of both thought and will.
I’m not trying to argue with you - I’m trying to figure this out for myself. And demands of work this aft prevent me from phrasing my thoughts more eloquently.
-Aren’t earthworms aware of one’s self and their environment, and learning, thereby possessing knowledge? I mean, they know they have to eat, they escape light and movement at night, etc, I have read that they midify their behavior following punishment/rewards.
-Sure, insects exhibit intelligence of their own sort - certainly some social insects collectively exhibit incredible intelligence and social behavior, raising the question of whether we talk of the intelligence of an ant, or an entire colony. But aren’t we able to make any comparisons? Aren’t there any absolutes? Isn’t Shamus (or Scylla) more intelligent than a worm?
-At what point do “thought and will” diverge from “urges or instinct”? I guess someone who denies dogs (and other animals) self awareness, might argue that what appears to be thought merely represents hard wired instinctual behavior.
-I am wary of assigning more to my dog than she deserves, simply because thinking of her as an intelligent individual enhances my relationship with her. Just because I would prefer such a relationship, does not make it so. Perhaps sDaisy, and Shamus, are simply extremely adaptable automatons.
-I am aware of the possibility of my desires and actions influencing the conclusions, as with Clever Hans. An incredibly perceptive horse, but not a mathmetician.
-Think about characteristics of computers. They can be programmed to learn, can’t they? And can make very subtle distinctions/perceptions. But that does not make them self aware or sentient, does it?
-Some elements I think might be relevant to “intelligence” in an animal. Personality. Communication. Ability to learn.
Sorry this is such a disjointed list. Must get back to work.
I’m not sure you cant each an earthworm, much of anything. You are basically dealing with a stimulous/response organsim.
You have a good point that it is wrong to anthropomorphize (sp?) too much about animals. It’s a danger while training them. In training a border collie, you have to do the opposite, and put things in their terms.
If you do so, you can receive a very high level of response.
Is it possible that dog are merely automotons mentally who somehow fool us into passing a Turing test of awareness. I guess so. But dogs do have a very complex psychology. An understanding of that psychology and development can lead to accurate predictions of actions based on the attitudes, thoughts, and emotions of the dog in question.
It’s possible that these could be hardwired responses and not really emotions, but it’s also possible that you are the only sentient being in the universe, and everybody else just seems that way.
Occam’s razor suggests a less egotistical conclusion in both cases.
Our interactions with dogs are easily limited because we do not share the same perceptive values.
Show your dog a mirror all day long, and you will be frustrated in that you will never get an “intelligent reaction” from him/her. That image will never be recognized as self. “Dogs just lack the intelligence,” you think and you leave it at that.
But, images are very important to the human mind. Most of us think visually. Our worldview is based upon visual cues.
For a dog it’s otherwise. They have a very complex worldview and are capable of an astounding amount of cogitation, but for the most part scent is what’s important to them. Scent is how they think and how they see the world.
So let’s say you put the mirror away in discouragement, concluding your dog is unintelligent.
Most dogs however will try the same thing with you. They will bring you objects that have scent cues on them as an attempt at communication, or to express their desires. You of course can’t interpret them, and the dog gets frustrated, concluding you are an idiot.
In order to have as deep as possible a relationship with a dog, that dog has to learn that you don’t react well to scent cues. Most do. On the other hand, you have to learn that dogs dont react well to visual cues.
If you think about it, most dogs do a very good job of understanding our world and the way we communicate. They pick up our verbal cues very well, and meet us more than halfway visually. They interpret our psychology.
Most people do not return the favor. They don’t bother to understand a dog’s worldview or it’s inherent psychology. That the relationship between dogs and humans isn’t always as deep as it could be is generally the humans fault.
Finally, the intelligence of various breeds of dogs varies wildly, with the working breeds being generally a quantum leap above the overbred muffins.
As usual, Scylla rocks when it comes to people of the canine persuasion. My working dog has shown more sense than a lot of humans I come in contact with. I have heard from anthro professors that while the posterior portion of a dog’s brain is far superior to our own, the frontal lobe is not nearly as developed. This is why you will always beat your dog at word problems, but he will always find the quickest way up the hill.
A note to Whack-a-Mole- the chimpanzee story is chronicled in the National Geographic video “People of the Forest” which follows a group of chimpanzee for several years. Flo, the mother of the group, spoiled her youngest son Flint to the detriment of her other sons & daughter, or so it looks to humans eager to personify the actions of primates to suite their own sensibilities. When Flo dies, Flint is unable to function within the group, since he can or will do nothing for himself, and I believe goes up into Flo’s last nest and dies there.
Yes, the video would like us to think that Flint died of a broken heart. While watching it, I bought it too. But I worry that we are reading more into it than we should, and seeing it differently than it actually is.
Some animals/dogs may be extremely good at complex tasks. Finding the fastest way up a hill, say. Or it’s hard to beat a greyhound for racing certain distances, or a bloodhound for tracking scent. But why do the dogs engage in these activities. Out of choice, or as the product of selective breeding. Sure, a greyhound can be described as having heart, or a bloodhound of being, um, doggedly determined. But I suggest their motivation to perform their “jobs” exists at a “lower” level than that of a human conterpart, say a track athlete, or a police officer participating in a manhunt.
Shamus’ ancestors were bred to herd sheep. An awesome accomplishment, and invaluable to a shepherd. But do you think the dog is doing it because he likes the sheep? Similarly, it is possible that as a working dog Shamus views your daughter as a sheep. And treats you as his dominant pack member.
Pack behavior is very complex, and I’m no expert. But I suspect the group interacts in a certain manner to enhance group and individual survival. Gotta pass on them genes. I’m not sure an animal’s understanding of his place in a group hierachy is the same as self awareness. Does he make changes based on his personality? Does he “decide” to challenge for alpha male? Or can a herding dog “choose” to he a pointer or a guard dog?
I referred to a worm because I thought I remembered reading of testing where they modified their behavior in response to stimulus - shocks. But I may be wrong. But you seem to agree, Scylla, that at least some animals, towards my mosquito/worm end of the spectrum, are NOT self aware. So where is the cut off? (As a dog person I have to say somewhere above cats!)
As an example, on one hand I think fish probably are not self aware. Yet in my tank, the serpae tetras school with each other, and the bleeding hearts school separately.
How about reptiles? Some or all birds? Are certain brain structures required?
What’s the difference? What are the motivations for what you do? Think about all the trouble and grief and planning you went through, all the cogitation and work etc that you did before you went on a date in the hopes you’d get laid?
You used all the powers of your aware and cognizant (albeit hormone deranged,) brain in pursuit of this very same goal that you share with earthworms. It’s hard-wired into your brain.
Instincts and intelligence are not mutually exclusive.
What motivation exists for a seeing idea dog? Do you think they do all that for a doggie treat? If you so desire and you qualify, it’s possible that you may be able to participate in the primary training of a potential seeing eye dog as a pup. If you do, you will find it a challenging and rewarding experience. Good prep for raising a kid. Here, you will hopefully instill the concepts of a work ethic, responsibility, and job satisfaction into the pup. You will learn to channel its curiosity, and you will learn enough dog psychology to make you a canine freud. Experts will spend time with the dog, to discern from its personality and actions what you are doing that is fucking it up, and either show you how to correct it, or take the dog from you.
A dog is an alien entity from humanity, but it’s still a “person.” Do that course and you will have no doubt.
Ahhh. Here it gets interesting. Technically, you are not correct. Shamus’ ancestors were not bred to raise sheep. Quite the opposite. All non-working dogs had what is sometimes called the herding instinct bred out of them. So, what I’m really saying is that Shamus’ ancestors were never not bred to herd sheep. Other breeds were.
Sounds silly, huh?
In fact there is no such thing as the herding instinct. What there is is the hunting instinct. This instinct is hardwired into his brain. In training a working animal, we use this instinct, though we alter its means and ends very carefully. A working dog that does not have an outlet for this instinct can become a very neurotic or even dangerous animal.
Don’t think less of the dog for this. Modern society has done the same for you. Many of your instincts have been modified by your intellect, society, and socialization. In your day to day life, you have outlets and fulfillments for these instincts though they have been altered from their original purposes.
I would categorically state that this is impossible. Were it so, he would be dangerous near my daughter both mentally and physically. Herding dogs use some scary intimidating strategies that look like naked agression. They intimidate and frighten their charges into compliance. They are trained to use a gradually escalating scale of violence to accomplish their tasks, starting with a stare, escalating to a bark, a charge, a nip, or even a simulated mauling. That would not be good shit for my daughter.
Shamus’ attitude (which he figure out by himself,) towards my daughter is one similar to a veteran Seargent placed under the command of a green lieutenant. Technically Shamus knows that my daughter outranks him. As a practical matter this is not always a fact.
Shamus is trained to do two things. Primarily he is a goose dog. basically this is the same training a sheep dog gets but with geese. Geese will return time and again to ponds or airports or lakes and crap the place up and chase away humans. They get used to all kinds of intimidation techniques used against them ranging from special shotgun pellets that make a large bang and flash, to a guy chasing them off with a baseball bat, and they keep coming back.
Send in a border collie to screw with their heads a couple of times, though and they’ll never come back.
His other task (which I have some conscious pangs about, since it’s not entirely appropriate,) is to bring the horses up to the barn.
In either case he is very serious about his work. He doesn’t play with the horses or the geese. He is all business. Shamus, and all border collies worthy of the name are consummate professionals.
Shamus though is quite happy to play with my daughter. They play tag with a tennis ball, and wrestle (and he knows to be gentle.) At the same time, and without my training he is very uncomfortable if she goes near the horse fence. He knows the horses are dangerous. He will cunningly “suggest” alternate areas to play in and entice her away. He will also create a very gentle but physical barrier, getting down on all fours and hunkering back and forth to block her path. If she tries to go over him, he will stand up. If she does other things that he disapproves of he will also seek to thwart them, and whine for our attention. If we reassure him that it’s all right, he’ll allow it to procede. Sometimes he will give me a dirty look of reproach as this happens. There is no question in my mind what this look means. “If you say so, you’re the boss, but I think your making a big mistake.”
When relatives with kids come over he is unfailingly polite but aloof to them. He knows his responsibilities and loyalties are to my daughter. If the play gets rough he becomes very nervous. This is an area we are still working on. He understands that it’s all in fun, but he’s not comfortable with it. His demeanor is pretty damn clear. He’s not happy with it.
It occurs to me that you might not be familiar with what a workign dog does. They usually work fairly autonomously. It is expected and an integral part of their job that they make decisions independantly, act on value judgements, and use a lot of initiative and discretion in their tasks, as well as some planning. They are useleless if they don’t.
Absolutely. Your place in society is little different.
They are not. They are interlinked though, just as they are with you.
Yes. For example, Shamus is usually enthusiastic about getting the horses, and accomplishes the task with the aforementioned professionalism and a high-degree of style. He brings them up without exciting them, and prides himself (I can think of no other word,) by doing it with a minimum of fuss. When we first convinced him that he didn’t have to watch my daughter and could go get the horses while I was watching her, he was not happy about it. He streaked off into the field at top speed postitoned himself behind the horse and barked and threatened like he was going to kill them all. In terror the horse bolted for the barn. Shamus then streaked back to my daughter. Usually he just kinda gets behind them and starts invading their personal space mildly, and they get the idea and amble up.
Our previous dog, Bernard accomplished the same tasks as Shamus but with his own style, that was very much a part of his personality.
Shamus is not in that role. But in the wild, yes. It is a decision.
Did you choose to use the toilet on your own, or were you trained? Same thing.
Well, there’s not a cutoff per se. You seem to think that stimulous/response on an instinctual level is mutually exclusive with cognizant thought. That’s simply untrue. There is a bundle of hard-wired instinct within you. At times your conscience mind controls or overrides them. At times they override your mind.
Do you think about breathing?
It’s a fine example, and it’s a very complicated compromise between your crocodile (instinctual,) brain, and your conscience one. Each can override the other in certain circumstances.
Let me assure you that if somebody sneaks up behind you and and covers your nose and mouth so you can’t breathe, You will very quickly revert to a primitive creature of pure instinct as your crocodile brain takes complete control of your body in an effort to break free and breathe.
If weights are tied to your legs and you are thrown into a pool, you will perform the exact same and very same specific behaviors that have been hardwired into your brain for millions of years.
It is possible that with great discipline effort and behavioral conditioning through practice that you may be able to overcome these instincts… to a degree.
Do these uncontrollable and involuntary instincts mean that you are not self aware?
It means you are a complex and layered entity. So is a dog. The main difference is that the layers are done differently and you have more sheer brainpower. But we are much more similar than our egocentric affectations would suggest.
[quotes]
As an example, on one hand I think fish probably are not self aware. Yet in my tank, the serpae tetras school with each other, and the bleeding hearts school separately.
[/quote]
Can you teach them to do otherwise? Why do they do so? Instinct alone could account for this behavior. Raise one in isolation and then put it into the tank with the other breed. Does it school? No. Now put it with it’s own breed. Does it school? Yes. It’s actions are programmed instinct, alone.
I don’t think so, but I wouldn’t know for sure.
Maybe. I’ve seen sparks of what I’d call personhood. Not much and a lot different from man or canine (which I think are pretty similar.)
Beats me.
For me it’s pretty simple. In people and dogs, I think it’s pretty easy to look at them and tell whether there’s a person inside looking back at you. In some cases it’s a strong blaze of awareness. In some it’s not.
This may sound awful, but I’ve met people who are so egocentric and live at such a primitive level of desire/fulfillment that there’s little of personhood in them.
I’ve seen severely retarded people whose intelligence never seems to burn hot enough to generate the fire of self awareness, though they talk to a degree.
I’ve seen dogs that blaze brightly with intelligence, and curiosity that those people can’t equal.
I don’t think self-awareness is a pure function of intelligence, or unique to humanity. I think many animals have it to a degree. Just like with humans, I think this trait is like a seed that needs layers of experience and learning and challenge to sprout and bloom.
If you were to put a human baby in a sensory deprivation tank, and keep it alive without stimulous, no person would take root within that body, no matter how complex the brain it was born with.
Similarly take a dog, and help it to be all it can be, and there’s a chance a person will grow there even though the soil is not as fertile in the canine fields as it is in the human.
Me too, Sorry about the long post. I get carried away.
No need to apologize. Despite my much-spoken-of lack of attention span I read the whole thing. Well, most of it. Never knew all this about you. I should spend more time in GD.
OTOH, my Scotch Collie LOVES her geese and they seem to like her. There is little threat in her gestures. The geese just seem to know she is the boss and they are safe around her. I have heard this is a difference between Scotch and Border Collies–a kinder, gentler herding style. However, she doesn’t get rid of the geese. She just keeps them on their side of the street. She could probably have them trained in a few hours if the Little League didn’t keep scaring them off.
According to this link only chimpanzees, orangutans, humans and possibly cotton top tamarins consistently pass the mirror test. Gorillas and rhesus monkeys fail. Humans do not succeed until 18-24 months, “at which time the prefrontal cortex begins to mature… Before this, nobody has experiences that can be consciously recalled in later life.”
The author argues that a sense of self allows a certain sort of empathy which dogs (for example) lack.
That last sentence may destroy the author’s argument, from Scylla’s POV. Dogs may not respond to a silent movie with a dog in pain, but once they hear a distress call they display either empathy or pack-behavior, depending on how you interpret it. OTOH, if dogs were empathic, perhaps the smells of stress alone should be sufficient to induce sympathy.
) Finally, an idea dawned. Daddy is always blowing his nose! SHe ran and got three pieces of Kleenex. Two she draped carefully over the arms of my favorite chair. The third was spread on the seat. She then got her dish and put it in front of my chair and put some object of mine in the dish (can’t remember just what). SHe then put her bone on top of the dish. With the ceremony complete, she took her bone and went off to chew on it a while.