Unit Six
Reading Selection Two:
Do Animals Think?
By Michael C. Mix, Paul Farber & Keith I. King
Scientists have investigated the human organism from a mechanistic viewpoint for over a century. Their underlying assumption has been that humans could be viewed as elegant chemical machines that follow predictable natural laws.* This approach has had stunning success. We know a great deal about the human body, we can design drugs to alleviate various ailments, and we can counter numerous conditions that cause suffering or death. Although science can tell us a great deal about Sorry, your browser doesn't support Java. our physical condition by treating the human body as a machine, no one doubts that humans, unlike machines, are conscious creatures. Our own consciousness is evident. What about animals?T
To those of us who have pets, such as dogs or cats, it is difficult to think of them as machines without self-awareness—as entities more akin to our washing machines, personal computers, and blow-dryers than to our family members and friends.* Can it be that our clever dog, Cassie, that "comforts" us when we are down, leaps with "joy" when we return from work, and has "outsmarted" the neighbor's  dog that used to "steal" her food, is simply a genetically programmed automaton? Or that ZiZi, our neighbor's cat, that would seemingly "favor" starvation to dry cat food, is, in her behavior, just reflecting an idiosyncratic program rather than expressing a conscious preference?* T
Until shortly after World War I, it seemed obvious to scientists that animals had feelings and that they could think. Charles Darwin believed that female birds showed aesthetic preferences in their choice of mates and that sexual selection was strongly influenced by it.T
Many writings done in the late nineteenth century on the animal mind, however, were uncritical and highly anthropomorphic.* Human desires, fears, and attitudes were attributed to animals, and numerous stories were accepted without any careful attempts at verification. It is not surprising, then, that when we read this literature today, much of it seems comical.T
Psychologists in the 1920s reacted strongly to this uncritical literature and took the position that it was not possible to verify whether or not animals could think. They concluded that the question of animals' thinking was not a meaningful topic for science because it could not be tested experimentally. Instead, psychologists focused on the observable behavior of animals. They argued that in establishing a scientific psychology, it was irrelevant whether animals thought. They intended to establish scientific laws about how animals learn and behave that could be verified by other scientists. To psychologists like James Watson or B. F. Skinner, the private mind of the animal, if it existed, was closed to human investigation.T
Ethologists who studied animal behavior, for the most part, were equally dismissive about probing the inner world of animals. A few workers were interested in how the world might "look" to animals, which have different sense organs than humans, but the primary thrust of ethology was in documenting repeatable patterns of behavior and in comparing these patterns, with the object of establishing evolutionary connections.* T
Modern animal behavior draws on knowledge derived from psychology, ethology, genetics, ecology, and other fields of science.  Until recently, all of these areas of research had been far removed from discussions of animal thought or animal awareness.T
A well-known investigator of animal behavior, Donald Griffin of Rockefeller University, argues that neglecting animal awareness and thinking is not only an overreaction to the na?ve acceptance of undocumented animal stories but also a blind spot that retards advances in the scientific understanding of animal behavior.* Griffin believes that mental experiences in animals could have an adaptive value—the better an animal understands its environment, the better it can adjust its behavior to survive and reproduce in it. He is also interested in animal communication, which he feels can sometimes be used to convey information about objects or events that are distant in time or space. This form of information may suggest awareness.T
In support of his ideas, Griffin cites various behaviors that seem to involve accurate evaluation in complex environments. For example, he refers to a classic study on the prey selection of wagtails, a type of bird found in southern England. These birds feed on fly eggs and on a number of small insects. Each day they must make several choices on where to hunt, when to move on to hunt in another area, and whether to join a flock or hunt alone. Scientists who study these wagtails have shown that they hunt with great proficiency. Although proficiency is not necessarily an indicator or awareness, Griffin argues that in cases where accurate evaluation of a changing and complex environment occurs, it is reasonable to consider that the animal is consciously thinking about what it is doing.* T
At present, Griffin and analysts who agree with him are in the minority in the scientific community. How can the question of animal thinking be resolved? One way is to attempt to design experiments that might give an indication one way or the other. Psychologists in the early twentieth century were very straightforward in their rejection of animal consciousness, claiming that testing for it was impossible. Griffin has proposed that some tests may be possible and that evidence can be gathered to support his position. He argues that once we have a better understanding of the electrical signals that are correlated with conscious thinking in humans, we could search for equivalents in animals.* If none were found, that would suggest that his hypothesis of animal awareness is false. The strongest supporting evidence of Griffin's hypothesis involves cases in which animal communication is active and specialized, information is exchanged, and the receiving animal responds interactively. To Griffin, such cases are compelling examples of conscious and intentional acts.T
It is too early to tell what researchers of animal behavior will conclude about animal awareness. Further research on interesting phenomena, such as animal communication, will ultimately provide the results necessary for formulating a scientific conclusion. Until then, we are confident that people will continue to discuss the world with their dogs and cats.T
|
