Citation please. First step would be to prove self awareness.The life of the animal is consequential to it.
I know what it's called. I'm also highly empathetic.It's called empathy.
I have zero problems with eating cats and dogs. As long as it's not someone's pet.If anyone is a hypocrite it's a meat-eater who goes on about why we shouldn't be eating cats and dogs :erm:
Citation please. First step would be to prove self awareness.
I have zero problem with eating cats and dogs. As long as it's not someone's pet.
Uh, yes, but you're causing emotional distress on someone whose life is not.Why not? Its life is meaningless...
Citation please. First step would be to prove self awareness.
The absence of a neocortex does not appear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states. Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Non-human animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.
The two are unrelated. If I design a robot that cares for other robots, does that mean that it is self aware? It certainly does not.Not only self-awareness, but empathy has been observed in animals.
Derp.Then there's the Cambridge Declaration of Consciuosness.
The relevance? If self-awareness = the ability to experience pain or suffering then it might be a valid argument. Dogs fail the mirror test , but from living with them I'm quite certain they experience pain rather than pretend to exhibit pain. And they avoid it the next time round. They show signs of fear.Citation please. First step would be to prove self awareness.
The two are unrelated. If I design a robot that cares for other robots, does that mean that it is self aware? It certainly does not.
Derp.
Can't look at this thread and not think about this.
http://www.tvthrong.co.uk/files/u1670/nigellagillian.jpg
Pain and death are very different things. Right to not suffer and a right to life.snip
I'm sorry but, no. No other animals have been shown to hold a theory of mind.The rat is aware of the mental state of another rat and takes steps to alleviate distress in others. That's a step beyond just self-awareness.
Consciousness is a derp subject from a scientific perspective because it's far too philosophical. What we can do however, is try and test for things that is of importance to us. Self-awareness, theory of mind - etcetera.Care to elaborate? The notion that animals are simply automatons and that only humans are conscious beings is a pretty antiquated notion put forward by Descartes. Our shared evolutionary history and large degree of physiological similarity with many species (including the common "food" animals) renders the claim that animals have no consciousness more "extreme" than the claim that they do.
There's plenty of research out there to support the notion of animal sentience.
I'm sorry but, no. No other animals have been shown to hold a theory of mind.
tonight i'm eating raw liver, just because of you
bloodiest, reddest raw liver i can find, smothered in salt. mmmmmmmm
photos to follow.
you lied, typical meat eater
Not to it's owner. Similarly I wouldn't eat someone's pet cow.Why not? Its life is meaningless...
Let me know when an animal passes the Sally Anne test.It is by definition impossible to prove a ToM (even in humans), however, it is possible provide empirical evidence - there is tons of research on this that strongly suggests a ToM in animals (use "the Google"). Empirical studies, evolutionary continuity and common sense suggest that it would be irresponsible to assume otherwise.