Do animals dream?

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by grazzhoppa, Nov 13, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. A Canadian Why talk? When you can listen? Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,126
    What was the original Topic again?! ... I got lost in all the kitty litter..
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. EvilPoet I am what I am Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,007
    What was the original Topic again?!

    Do animals dream?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. spookz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,390
    Donald Griffin was at the Central Park Zoo last month watching the polar bears nuzzle a synthetic log smeared with Skippy. "They really like that peanut butter," Dr. Griffin observed as Gus, 800 pounds, tried to fit his nose into an enticingly sticky knothole.
    To the untutored eye it looked like just another feeding time at the zoo, but at Central Park the exercise with the log and snack goes by the grander name of "animal enrichment" and is intended to stimulate the bears' minds as well as their appetites. It's a concept for which the bears have Griffin, 85, in large part to thank. Twenty-five years ago he published a short book suggesting that humans didn't have the monopoly on thoughts and feelings. Animals, he argued, most likely had them, too.
    Scientists were appalled. According to the behaviorist doctrine that held sway at the time, animals were little more than "stimulus response automata," robots with a central nervous system. The idea that an ant or an elephant might have thoughts, images, experiences or beliefs was not just laughable; it was seditious. After Griffin published a second brief on behalf of animal consciousness in the 1980's, one behaviorist labeled it " 'The Satanic Verses' of animal behavior."
    Were it not for the fact that he had a tenured position at Rockefeller University as well as an international reputation, Griffin might have found himself out of a job. (As a graduate student at Harvard in the 1940's, he helped solve the mystery of how bats navigate in the dark and coined the term echolocation to describe it.)
    "He insisted that people look at animal consciousness when it was considered anthropomorphic and flaky," said Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, an emeritus professor of anthropology at the University of California at Davis. "Anyone else would have been hooted out."
    But the field Griffin christened cognitive ethology ultimately took off. Over the last decade alone a flood of new data have emerged that would seem to have turned the tide definitively in his favor. In Arizona an African Gray parrot named Alex can identify colors and shapes as well as any preschooler. In Georgia a bonobo ape named Kanzi converses with his trainer via computer keyboard and watches Tarzan movies on television. Last week researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology published evidence suggesting that rats dream. Animal enrichment programs featuring mental puzzles disguised as toys and treats have become a standard part of daily life at zoos. And this spring the University of Chicago Press will issue an updated edition of Griffin's 1992 book, "Animal Minds."
    If Griffin, a tall, thin decorous man with a predilection for animal-print ties, views these developments as vindication, he is too modest to say so. "We know so very little," he said. "Scientists, including me, have come to be very cautious. Early work on primate gestures and facial expressions was grossly misinterpreted."
    In fact the recent findings appear to have only intensified the debate over animal consciousness. Lately, experts on the human mind - philosophers and psychologist - have been weighing in alongside the scientists. For if it turns out that animals can think, then the idea that consciousness is unique to humans - a basic assumption in Western thought since Descartes - becomes impossible to maintain.
    Clearly Gus, Alex and Kanzi aren't Cartesian automatons, but just how conscious are they? Do they experience pain, desire and other sensations the way humans do? (Philosophers call this phenomenal consciousness.) Are they capable of thinking about their experiences? (Philosophers call this self-consciousness.) Do they have beliefs? What about remembering the past? Do earthworms have some form of consciousness? What about salamanders? Is it even possible to study an animal's inner life?
    The range of opinion on these questions is nearly as great as the number of possible answers. Surveying the scholarship in the journal Philosophia in 1988, the University of Houston professor Justin Leiber found a field riven by discordant claims. Two philosophers agreed in "denying consciousness to sponges." One drew the line "somewhere between the shrimp and the oyster." Another proved willing to "speculate about the subjective experience of tapeworms," while yet another had referred to the "inner life of cockroaches." More recently the Tufts University philosopher Daniel C. Dennett declared the state of thinking on animal consciousness a "mess."
    On the one hand there are the pro-consciousness philosophers like Colin McGinn, a professor at Rutgers University, and Peter Singer, a professor of bioethics at Princeton and a leading animal rights advocate. These scholars believe that most if not all animals have phenomenal consciousness. "I think it's plain common sense that animals have conscious states," McGinn said. "Animals way down to insects have phenomenal consciousness. It's a primitive feature of the biological world."
    On the other hand there are the skeptics like Dennett and Herbert Terrace, a psychologist at Columbia University. What "are you seeing when you see sentience in a creature?" Dennett asked in a 1995 essay. "It is in fact ridiculously easy to induce powerful intuitions of not just sentience but full-blown consciousness (ripe with malevolence or curiosity or friendship) by exposing people to quite simple robots made to move in familiar mammalian ways at mammalian speeds."
    Terrace, who has studied apes and monkeys in his lab, concedes that animals think, but draws the line at consciousness. "Language is necessary for consciousness," he said. "There is something going on in animals' heads, but it's not linguistic."
    Griffin appears mildly amused by the debate his work has helped unleash. During his visit to the Central Park Zoo he gave a talk to donors and trustees. "Daniel Dennett calls the pursuit of animal consciousness a 'wild goose chase,'" he told the audience with a chuckle. "But there are no neurons or synapses in the human brain that aren't also in animals. It's as difficult to disprove animal consciousness as it is to prove it."
    Although officially retired, Griffin is still active in the field. He is currently investigating a colony of beavers near his home in Lexington, Mass. "They're obviously animals that might be thinking of what they're doing," he said.
    (01/03/2001) New York Times)


    --------------------------------------------------------------------

    christianity


    The Church of England occupies a special position in the (unwritten) Constitution of the United Kingdom whereby it considers itself the moral arbiter of the nation - entitled to speak with authority on any moral theme. It unofficially shares this position with the Catholic Church, which is often perceived as being less wishy-washy in its views and so more reliable if a single definitive opinion is required. The Catholic Church, though not integrated into the Constitution also has the advantage of a more dedicated following than the C of E. The other sources of moral rightness accessible to the media and to government are the Moslem religion and the Jewish one. These both have the disadvantage of being more diverse and less centralised than either of the above. It is, of course, a great pity that the non-religious sources of moral guidance are less easily identifiable since they are made up of an even wider and more diverse group of thinking individuals - nor do they have the political privilege and financial muscle of the major religions.

    Both government and the media often appear to assume that religion is the only legitimate source of moral guidance - the purpose of this article is to demonstrate the shallowness of this supposition in the case of Christianity.

    The word animal is derived from the Latin anima = soul but despite this Christianity has traditionally taught that animals have more in common with stones than with human beings (interestingly, in medieval Europe animals were often seen to be satellites of Satan - the devil had horns, cloven feet and a pointy tail).

    The writer was taught at his (Catholic) school that everything on Earth, including all the animals, was put here to satisfy the needs of mankind, and that there was no fundamental difference between animate and inanimate things - only we were different. Joseph Rickaby SJ, an influential Jesuit theologian said, as did Descartes, that animals had no souls, no rights and no feelings and were no more than automata - like clocks - and if they squeaked or made noises when damaged this was equivalent to the mechanical sounds a clock would make if it fell to the floor and was similarly damaged. This attitude was reflected in the behaviour of Pope Pius lX when he sought to prevent the setting up of the Italian Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on the grounds that animals have no souls. (Click here for more on Pius 1X.) Thomas Aquinas is also regarded as an authority as denying that animals have souls but contradicted himself elsewhere writing: 'we 'must use animals in accordance with the Divine Purpose lest at the Day of Judgment they give evidence against us before the throne' (source currently unavailable - please write in if you know it).

    The unwritten assumption was also that we could continue to exploit these things on the basis that 'God would provide' and that there would be no lasting damage to the basic system that ensures our survival - the ecosystem. A similar logic applies to birth control - God does not want us to use it (rhythm method excluded) so that means if we do not do so there will be no fearful consequences since God could not possibly require of us something which is intrinsically harmful. Alternatively, of course this could be the way God wishes to bring about the end of the world since it is difficult to think of anything more devastating to the planet than the continued growth of the human population.


    animal souls

    Animals and Ethics
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. EvilPoet I am what I am Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,007
  8. Porfiry Nomad Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,127
    My cat also used to hiss in her sleep occasionally, along with some twitching. I also once woke her up and was immediately hissed at me (entirely abnormal for her). As fast as she started hissing she stopped, calmed down, and looked around, as if reorienting herself in her new surroundings. It's exactly the kind of reaction you'd expect if you shook a human out of a bad dream.
     
  9. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    My dog also dreams.
    In his sleep he sometimes starts to move his as if he ran legs and yelps.

    sometimes he has a bad dream and the all of a sudden he rushes up and runs barking to the door

    I don't know why we ask- do animals dream?
    aren't we animals?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2002
  10. grazzhoppa yawwn Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,277
    Is it wrong to say we're above the "beasts?" We have more advanced communcation in the sense that we can share our thoughts and logic with each other, we have trickery...lies. And we use it all for more than survival. Or is that my exposure to religous propaganda talking?

    How do you think domesticated animals perceive us in their dreams?

    One of my dogs is deaf, going blind in one eye, has arthiritis (sp?), and only gets up to go to the bathroom and eat. She doesn't do much when she sleeps. My other dog just snores.
    My cats are very alert when they're sleeping though. One creak in the floorboards will wake them up. And no, they're not on the Nip.

    Here's one of my cats getting up from a hard-days sleep under the couch cover. It's a picture of a picture, so it may be a little dark.
     
  11. Jerece Hunters Dumlupinar Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    77
    Its possible to animals are dreaming because the life shows us a dreamcaptured world

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. spookz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,390
    Re: Ask Koko!


    elaborate please
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page