wyomingtrapper

Wasn't sure which forum to post on but...

I've been surprised with how often I hear hunters, trappers, and taxidermists comment on how it looks like an animal feels. Thought I'd present some thoughts for discussion.

Anthropomorphism (attributing human characteristics to animals)is a common phenomena that is documented back to at least 40,000 years, if you are willing to accept cave drawings as documentation. In more recent history, Native Americans often anthropomporphasized the animals they commonly used for daily survival. The beaver was held in uncommonly high esteem, considered a true brother to the people by some, yet was still utilized it for food and clothing by those that held it in such high esteem.

From a much more recent history to the present, we are seeing the phenomena taken to a higher level in post modern nations. While it has been found in some cultures that animals are held in as high–or higher–esteem than people, recently it has developed to a high level in western cultures. There are many theories of emotion, but most recognize that people experience both strong physiological (physical)and cognitive (thinking) components.

There is clear evidence that an animal’s "emotional" response on a physiological level, is very similar to that of a person. The question is as to whether the cognitive component is similar. Nuerobiology generally casts doubts that most animals can have a cognitive (the thinking side) emotional experience similar to humans. Yet we see the physical components, at times amazingly similar to what we ourselves experience, and make the leap to the belief that there is a similar level of cognitive emotional experience.

Fear for example has a powerful physiological component. Most of us can recognize the thoughts that precede, and result from, that experience. Animals in situations where we often would expect fear, likewise exhibit physiological responses. Increased respiration, heart rate, blood pressure, and shaking are examples. There may likewise be an increase in perspiration/salivation, widening of the eyes, voiding, and bowel movements. Yet realistically it is unlikely that there is a higher level thinking component.

Does an animal have a concept of life vs. death? Is there a philosophical base to give death meaning? Is escape driven by a "self" concept of "I am"ness and a desire to keep "myself" alive, or is it more driven by a genetic predisposition to remain and propagate? Obviously we can do little more than hypothesize on some of these questions.

While most of us with any significant interactions with animals generally accept that most animals have some level of intelligence, brain development in them indicates that more of their behaviors are determined by behavioral conditioning rather than higher reasoning. The cognitive component of emotion requires higher reasoning. Some animals no doubt have a higher cognitive development than others. Predator vs. prey for an example.

Anthropomorphism is a common traitthat most of us haveto some degree. It usually onlybecomes a problem when we genuinely begin to believe that animals have a subjective experience on a level similar to ours. There is no indication that any animal has a cognitive ability that even approaches that of a one year old human. I remember seeing a documentary on apes using sign language. One expert indicated that the apes could communicate at the level of a two year old. Having raised a few kids, and seeing what two year olds are capable of, it was clear that the guy may have been an expert on apes, but certainly was not one on kids.

Eventhe average one year old, while stilllimitted in the ability to effectively communicate (relative to abilities yet to develop), has a much, much, higher reasoning and problem solving ability than any animals. Contrary to old theory, we know that even preschoolers have some ability to excersise abstract thinking. I know of no studies, or even anecdotal evidence, that makes a good case that animals can abstract. What thinking they are capable of is concrete. The reasoning that is associated with cogntive emotion is abstract. Without it, the thinking component of emotion is missing.

younggun308

Heck, I heard people say on TV that the intelligence of a parrot rivals that of a 5 year-old! I mean, what kind of total CRAP is that?

Let's face it, the average animal rights activist , (and I do know a few) is a middle-aged veganwoman who has no chance of getting married, because she isn't pretty, or whatever, and, most of all,if they've never had kids, they're really cooky. That's true even with some married couples weknow, who don't have kids, and are beyond the point of being able to.

One of the things that occurs, is that they need to have a sense of maternity, and they will lust it, and if they don't get it, they'llpour out they're maternal instinct on other things to substitute children, and these are most commonly living things, such as plants, or animals.

One thing about maternal instinct is, that from what I have witnessed from my own mother, and other mothers, is that maternal instinct very easily cansurpass patriotism, and other such important responsibilities.

In certain situations, all that will matter, is the safety of her child, or substitute.

In order to feel that way, they must thouroughly believe that their child, has a soul, and is able to love, and be responsible.
For mothers, this is very well accepted, because we once were little kids, and we relied on this instinct to survive, and to feel purpose, so we never question maternal instinct, unless it's being used for a non-human, or an irrelevant thing to our existence.

So,bottom line, the people who are the source ofAnthropomorphism, are mainly females, who have substitutes for real children,and theirmaternal instinctmakes them believe that their substitutes have human value to them, because it gives them, and their sacrifice, purpose.

And being proud of their substitute, they spread their belief around.

Just my 2 cents,

Josiah

bigbulls

While animals may not think as in depth as humans do I believe 100% that animals do, in fact, think, feel, learn, teach, etc...constantly.

Of course an animals has a concept of life and death. If they didn't there wouldn't be any fight or flight instincts. All animals have a concept of life and death to some degree. Mamals probably having a higher concept than other animals. Ever witnessed a mother doe rush in to protect her fawn from a coyote? There is a strong concept of life and death there.

Animals learn from past experiences, they think about what they are doing, they comunicate these thoughts vocally to each other, and they teach other animals, especially their young.

Reefdonkey

Good post wt. I don't know to what level animals feel emotion, but I know for a fact that they do and I believe that most people who have spent a lot of time with a pet would agree.

For example when I take my lab hunting she trembles with excitement. You can't convince me that she is not feeling joy and anticipation at that point. Also, she has been with me since she was a pup (7+ years) and my wife (the only other person to have extended daily contact with her) for only 3 years. Kate is obviously has a deeper more developed relationship with me than with anyone else. Is that because she "cares" more for me or simple a result of a greater knowledge of my tendencies?

One thing that I do not do and never will, is compare her to people or more specifically children. I love my dog, but she is not a smart or as valuable as any human soul.

Good topic. I'm interested to see where this one goes.

Let the bashing commence.

WabashHunter

I really enjoyed these comments. This is something to seriously think about. I am studying some of these concepts in a psychology class right now. Animals definitely learn from one another about fear and death. One experiment that they have taught us in school is that when a lab reared monkey is placed in a cage with a snake, it will just look at the snake and even get close to it. When they place a wild monkey into the cage, it immediately climbs the side of the cage and gets to the exact opposite spot of the snake and makes a commotion. When the lab reared monkey is placed in a position to watch both the snake and the wild monkey react, when placed in the situation again, it will immediately perform exactly like the wild monkey had. He had to observe and think about this. It is very interesting and I am interested in hearing what others have to say.

Elkcrazy8

Wabash, is that learning or conditioning? Do we "teach" animals to preform tasks or tricks, or is it a conditioned repetative response.

Does a big buck "learn" the habit of the hunter, or does the buck have habits that he aquired that enabled him to live to an age where his horns could grow larger than normal? If a small buck became a recluse andstuck toheavy cover, he would most likely mature where a young buck who has a tendancy to inhabit open fields would most likely get shot.

Very interesting thoughts......

Elkcrazy8

Just to prove a theory, a young fawn hasn't learned anything yet, but knows to run away with the doe, this is a conditioned response, even though the fawn has no clue on why it is running.

WabashHunter

Excellent points, and it is a good question whether it is conditioning or teaching. The chapter in the book that this experiment is in, correlates it with human phobias in that we learn our phobias from others they are not natural but learned. I dont know though it is all very interesting and i look forward to seeing more information and thoughts from others on this.

bigbulls

No, that's instincts. Every animal, and human are born with instincts. Place a baby in a pool and it will swim, hold a baby and let its shins touch the edge of a table and it will try to climb on top of it. A new born baby, animal or human, will crawl up the mothers body until it finds a nipple. All of these are instincts.



Conditioning - b : to modify so that an act or response previously associated with one stimulus becomes associated with another.

Learn - a (1) : to gain knowledge or understanding of or skill in by study, instruction, or experience <learn a trade> (2) : MEMORIZE <learn the lines of a play> b : to come to be able <learn to dance> c : to come to realize <learned that honesty paid>


A deer learns at a young age that a gunshot means danger and it should run away.... This is learning.

This same deer 4 years later now associates a gunshot with a farmer puting out piles of feed for cattle. This deer has been conditioned so that now a gunshot means dinner instead of danger.

The monkey learned from the other monkey that a snake is possible danger. It wasn't conditioned becasue ther was no previous stimuli present. The snake just sat there and didn't present the monkey with anyreason to react in any way.It could have also learned to avoid the snakehad the snake bitten the monkey.

DANTHEHUNTER

Isnt that an instinct for the most part? Hell how do they now where to get milk from? I just dont think animals have the abilty to "reason". Look at your Lab pups they seem to know that they can swim and to retrieve without any teaching or conditioning.
But this is a great topic and alot of fun to debate.