An Animal State of Mind Page 2

7/31/2019 An Animal State of Mind Page 2

1/4

more evident than that beasts are en-dowed with thought and reason as wellas man. The arguments are in this caseso obvious, that they never escape themost stupid and ignorant.

Charles Darwin, by presenting humansand animals on a continuum, was thecatalyst for scientific study regardinganimal intelligence. The studies con-ducted, both on an anatomic and obser-vational level, had mostly shown thathuman opinion differed greatly withregards to the existence of souls andminds in animals. Darwin also, in his1872 book The Expressions of Emotionin Man and Animals , highlighted theexistence of animal emotion. Early inthe 20th century, scientists and psy-chologists alike recognized the signifi-cance of emotion in animal behavior.

Edward L. Thorndike was the psycholo-gist who began the movement to pro-mote research on animal behavior. Hewas focused, not only on what animalscould do, but also on what they couldntor wouldnt do. He believed that theapproach would give us a better overallunderstanding of animal cognition. Hisexperiments, which mostly involved catsand the boxes from which they mustescape from, helped reinforce the be-lief that animal behavior could be fully

July 12, 2012

Tugging at obstinate knots, inassimilable longings, and thwarted strivings...By Kristy Young

An Animal State of Mind

Humans and animals have much in com-mon. In fact, from a scientific stand-point, humans are animals. But whilewe humans have prided ourselves on ourability to think rationally, impossible forthose irrational beings under our juris-diction, recent studies have shown thatanimals have, not only thoughts andfeelings, but also the ability to reshapethose thoughts and utilize them; a formof cognitive thinking.

All throughout history, there have beencases in which this form of thinking hasmanifested itself in animals. Experi-ments were conducted as far back asthe late 18th century to try and explainthe patterns in animal behavior, and

although most of the results were incon-clusive, the subject was not.

Conflicting views have existed on thistopic. Several renowned thinkers of their time, such as Descartes and Aristo-tle, attributed instinct as the maincause of survival and reproduction of

animals. The former expanded his phi-losophy to include the idea of a reflexas explanation of behavior in nonhumananimals, and that language is a neces-sary condition for mind. This view waslater shared by John Locke, who statedthat "words are necessary for compre-hensive universals."

There have been, however, severalphilosophers who disagreed with theprevious line of thought. Voltaire, forexample, shunned Descartes's view that

animals did not have souls and hencedid not have minds; he suggested thatthere was no evidence to prove that.David Hume even went as far as dismiss-ing the animal skeptics by saying, "Nextto the ridicule of denying an evidenttruth, is that of taking much pains todefend it; and no truth appears to me

The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Canthey talk? but Can they suffer? - Jeremy Bentham


2/4

that knowledge. "That kind of cognitiveconvergence suggests there must besome similar pressures selectingfor intellect," Herman said. "We don'tshare their biology or ecology. Thatleaves social similarities the need toestablish relationships and alliancessuperimposed on a lengthy period of maternal care and longevity as thelikely common driving force." His testsubjects were able to understand a se-ries of hand-and-arm signals along witha few simple words. They were also ableto imitate the movements of their in-structors; if a trainer bent backwardsand lifted a leg, the dolphin would turnon its back and lift its tail in the air.

It may seem like imitation, but that isnot so easy to accomplish; in order toimitate someone, the imitator must firstform a metal image of that personsbody and pose, and then alter its ownbody in accord to that image. Not sosimple, considering that the imitatormust be aware of itself and its body.

Surely, its mental processes surpassthose of effortless reflex and instinct.

explained in associative terms.

Later on, the laboratory experiments onanimals were replaced by ones in thespecies natural habitats. This, as ethol-ogists believed, would give true andconcise results that would not be affect-ed by human influence. Although theidea was foolproof, the procedureswerent; scientists found it very hard tostudy their specimens while they ranaround and eluded observation. That iswhy present-day scientists conduct ex-

periments in laboratory settings whileattempting to reconstruct the animalsnatural environment.

Nowadays, although philosophers andpsychologists alike tend to accept thatanimals have minds, they are not quitesure as to what that means. Some be-lieve that animals are conscious beingsand that some "are rational agents whohave reasons for action", while otherphilosophers simply believe that animalsprocess information, and are solely fo-

cused on their cognitive structures.

Whatever your point-of-view, one thingthat cannot be denied is the fact thatthere is sufficient evidence to say isthat animals can think, and can subse-quently act on those thoughts, regard-less of whether or not it is rational.

As the dominant species, humans haveenjoyed unlimited jurisdiction with re-gards to nature and all within it. Wehave exploited habitats, destroyed eco-systems, and wiped out several species,all in a day's work. We do not blameourselves. After all, wasn't nature creat-ed to be dominated by man? This Judeo-Christian line of thinking is the mostpredominant one within our society, andit's one that we've taken unnecessaryadvantage of. That, and the fact thatanimals were regarded as unthinking,

unfeeling creatures have unsettled theglobal balance and upset the naturalprogression of things.

One scientist once defended his contin-uous mutilation of live frogs by statingthat, since they had neither mind norsoul, they could not feel the knife. Re-gardless of whether they felt the knifeor not (there is no question; of coursethey did!), the effect was still thesame; the blade had still left its mark.And it is that mark, left behind by cen-turies of people with disregard for theconsequences of their actions, which isaffecting us today.

Animals have shown and will continue toshow elevated levels of intelligence andreasoning. The problem is that most of us dont realize this. We are either usedto it (as is the case with many pet own-ers) or we simply refuse to attribute itto intelligence. Its their instinct, wesay; the dog found a way to open a bolt-ed gate through instinct.

Instinct cannot explain everything,though. For example, in the 1960s, Lou-is Herman began a series of investiga-tions about the cognitive activities of bottlenose dolphins. A cognitive psy-chologist, he wanted to compare theeffect the dolphins social structure hadon their ability to learn and to apply

Bottlenose dolphin

Louis Herman with dolphin


3/4

Another case would be Alex Kalceniks studyof the New Caledonian crows, which showedthat the birds ability to make tools andutilize them was innate, and that it couldexpand in response to circumstance. One of Kalceniks crows, Betty, was able to inventa tool and use it to solve a problem present-ed when the variables were altered; if shewas required to extract a basket (with a

piece of meat) from a test tube byusing a hooked piece of wire, whichwas stolen by another crow, shewould get a straight piece of wireand bend it into a hook, after whichshe would get the prize she clearlydeserved. "It means she had a men-

tal representation of what it was shewanted to make. Now that," Ka-celnik said, "is a major kind of cog-nitive sophistication."

Making tools and recognizing signalsare not the only signs of cognitivesophistication, however. Animalcognition is a complex subject, anda comparative one; it is comparedbetween species. Some tend to showmore ability than others; the cogni-tive mechanisms involved in their

memory, learning, perception anddecision-making are more developedand therefore more apparent.

New Caledonian Crow, courtesy of the BehaviouralEcology Research Group, University of Oxford

Theyre apparent when a dolphin rec-ognizes a human in danger and strivesto save him/her; when, after years of separation, a primate is able to recog-nize and accept his former two-leggedfriend; when, against all odds, twoguide dogs are able to lead their re-

spective blind masters out of a buildingunder attack. Some may say that itsall speculation, but the facts speak forthemselves.

Exceptional manifestations of animal consciousness

On Sept. 11, 2001, a Labrador retrievernamed Salty led his owner Omar Riveradown 71 flights of stairs and out of theWorld Trade Center, into safety. Anoth-er Labrador retriever named Roselle didthe same thing for her owner MichaelHingson. They did it despite the confu-sion, the chaos, and the fear that struckthe hearts of every living creaturethere. They did it, not without fear, butwith determination, courage, and therecollection that there was someonethere that needed their help more thanthey needed themselves.

On April 29, 2007, a Jack Russell terriernamed George saved five children froma pit bull attack. He leapt to their de-fense when the two pit bulls threatenedthe kids. Rushing and barking at them,George had risked his life and, laterthat day, lost it. And why? For what?Surely he must have known that was onefight he couldnt possibly win, but hefought anyway. What sends an animal on

a seemingly (or, in this case, real) sui-cidal mission on behalf of another spe-cies?

And what about the case of the Belugawhale who saved a free diver fromdrowning? Yang Yun, a diver competingat a free-diving contest at Polar Land inHarbin, became paralyzed by crampsseven meters under water. Chocking andsinking even lower, she thought she wasgoing to die, until a driving force lead

her up to the surface. This turned out tobe a beluga whale named Mila, whonoticed the divers distress and went toher aid.

Can we offer any explanation for thatwhales behavior? Any explanation ex-pressed by mathematical formulas andscientific terms? Maybe not. But whatwe can do is realize that not everythingneeds to be explained that way. Thatmaybe it goes a little deeper than that.

George, the Jack Russell before the attack

Mila pushing the diver to the surface


4/4

restrictions placed upon them by in-stinct. Humans share that characteris-tic, and it does not impede their con-sciousness or their ability to reason.Why should it for other species?

Can animals create something new?

Probably not. Can they alter their envi-ronment to the point where it becomesunrecognizable? No, fortunately. Butthat doesnt mean that they dont havethe capacity to make decisions or altertheir habitat just a little, in order to fittheir needs. We must remember thathumans have had years of evolution incognitive thinking; circumstance hadmade it necessary, and chance hadmade it exponential. Animals might wellbe on the same path. After all, they might have holy moments of under-

standing deep in the seat of their en-tity.

An animal doesnt have to savesomeones life in order to hint at theexistence of its feelings and thoughts,though. There are other ways.

Kwibi the gorilla, for example, was ableto recognize and, whats more, embrace

Damian Aspinall, the man who raisedhim from infancy. After five years of separation, Kwibi recognized his voiceand, in response, gave off a gurglethat told Aspinall that everythingwould be okay. This is a clear exampleof the cognitive mechanism for memoryand perception; it shows that not every-thing was forgotten; that, in fact, theessence of past thoughts and emotionsstill remained in Kwibis subconscious.

In a similar case, a lion named Christian

recognized his two previous owners,John Rendall and Ace Berg, after a peri-

od of sporadic sightings and infrequentmeetings. Raised in a London house,Christian grew surrounded by peopleand commodities not found in the pridelands. When he grew too big to be keptin the city, the owners decided to re-lease him into the wild, with the help of George Adamson, the Lion Man. Mr.Adamson was a British conservationistwho successfully introduced quite alarge number of lions into their naturalhabitat, including Christian.

Facial and voice recognition are one of the most heavily relied on forms of memory for humans. For animals, ittends to vary; dogs rely on their senseof smell, bats on their hearing, andearthworms on their tactile mecha-nisms. The fact that Christian behavedas if no time had passed at all, as if nothing had changed, indicates thatsometimes an animals thoughts over-shadow its instincts.

Numerous accounts exist to show thatanimal minds are more complex that we

ever realized. We cannot keep viewinganimals as automatons, incapable of new and versatile actions due to the

Kwibi the gorilla with Damian and friends Christian the lion cub with his two owners

Documents

An Animal State of Mind Page 2