Non-Human Consciousness Exists Say Experts. Now What?

[Architect]

Earlier this month, some of the leading scientists from around the world congregated at the Hotel Du Vin in Cambridge to discuss the evidence that has amassed over the years. The experts reached a unanimous decision that animals – specifically mammals and birds – are in fact conscious beings. Through advancements in brain imaging techniques such as fMRI and EEG machines, the scientists concluded that animals show a sufficient degree of characteristics that indicate they are not as non-human as some had believed. The official decision was reached late into the night after the Francis Crick Memorial Conference on July 7th.

Non-human consciousness

 

[Absurdity]

The decision does not in any sense define what consciousness is, which will be a debate that continues to rage on.

"They are conscious, whatever that means."

 

[TriflinThomas]

I've always believed that dogs, dolphins, whales, chimps, etc. are conscious. Now if they could just learn how to communicate with us, or, rather, us with them...

 

[Architect]

"They are conscious, whatever that means."

Yes, we still can't characterize consciousness precisely. The best we have is The Turing test, which says that if it acts conscious, it is.

I've always believed that dogs, dolphins, whales, chimps, etc. are conscious.

Agreed.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

From watching that pseudoscience film "What The Bleep Do We Know" back in highshool, I was given the false impression that atoms / subatomic particles are conscious due to them behaving differently under observations. I didn't know that the instruments used to observe the microscopic phenomena were interfering with the particles themselves.

Even so, under quantum mechanics, which I know next to nothing about, I still think human consciousness and (sub)atomic behavior may be related to each other.

 

[SLushhYYY]

I still think human consciousness and (sub)atomic behavior may be related to each other.

lol wait, can you elaborate as to why you think that?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

lol wait, can you elaborate as to why you think that?

Nope. You left out the important part of that post:

quantum mechanics, which I know next to nothing about

It's just a guess / feeling.

 

[Cognisant]

In other words you're discomforted by determinism and the lack of free will it implies, a fear founded upon the notion (accepted or not) that there's an all powerful/seeing man in the sky because in absence of that notion determinism is moot, indeed it's the given assumption.

 

[crippli]

I'm somewhat confused. Has there been someone who have said that birds and mammals do not have consciousness?

 

[Latte]

I'm somewhat confused. Has there been someone who have said that birds and mammals do not have consciousness?

Yes. Most people think along the lines of "humans have consciousness, other species don't", while the matter is actually much much more complex than that.

Even within a species, say for example with humans, the self-awareness of individuals is qualitatively and quantitatively different to extreme degrees depending on an individual being's specific neurological circumstance. This is implied from current understanding in neurology. Yet conceptual artifacts of the past still persist. Even among people who have enough knowledge to see that the old conceptual framework is not congruent with observations.

Not that they needed to be disproved in the first place. There was never anywhere near sufficient evidence to make the type of distinction commonly made between human self-awareness and that of any other creatures. It was/is conceptually aesthetically convenient though. Especially in western culture. It is congruent with the metaphysical ideas common in mainstream Christianity.

 

[Da Blob]

a good site to begin with, if any should actually be interested in studying consciousness

http://consc.net/chalmers/

 

[AureliaSeverina]

I don't know much about consciousness, but I never understood why some people say "Oh, animals are just like automatons that are driven by simple rules (instincts)." I suppose they are driven by simple instincts, but then that makes it sound as if these instincts come from outside themselves and just push them about like a puppet or something. Now how would that work? Plus, humans may not be driven by simple instincts, but all humans have the same basic needs. LOL, for example even INTPs and INTJs have a need to belong. In a more advanced society, people want to feel autonomous, competent and they want to belong. Put them in a crisis situation (war, famine, economic crisis) and many of them concentrate on the needs further at the bottom of Maslow's pyramid, which are more animal-like needs.
Also, animals can learn to avoid danger. Yes, this can be explained by classic conditioning. But then, if the animal didn't have a will to live, conditioning wouldn't work. I'm not sure whether a will to live relates to consciousness, but to my mind this will to live makes the animal sort of an individual. I mean, it could just die because there are plenty of others of its species, but it doesn't.
Beh, I really don't know anything about this. Ideas?

 

[Jennywocky]

I'm somewhat confused. Has there been someone who have said that birds and mammals do not have consciousness?

Considering that if they had consciousness, then there should probably be a bunch of laws on the books to protect their rights as sentient beings but you can kill/abuse a bird or dog and at best get slapped with "cruelty to animals" (and considering mankind butchers birds and dogs and other numerous animals in order to devour them for energy -- meat is one of our main foodstuffs).... yes, actually, that seems to be the default rather than the anomaly.

The implications of the statement, that they have legitimate consciousness, seem to be staggering if taken seriously.

 

[Cognisant]

Indeed the sanctity of consciousness is contrived but that's a secret philosophers generally keep to themselves, it would be interesting to see how society would change if everyone started staring into the void, do you think we would become more considerate or callous?

 

[snafupants]

Indeed the sanctity of consciousness is contrived but that's a secret philosophers generally keep to themselves, it would be interesting to see how society would change if everyone started staring into the void, do you think we would become more considerate or callous?

@Cognisant

This isn't a secret which Schopenhauer forwards. Descartes probably perpetuated much of the perfidious solipsistic garbage around today, but Schopenhauer didn't carry the torch; within the latter's writings are frequent comparisons between humans and animals with attention paid to nearly every gradation and sophistication of consciousness. Anyway, perhaps the reason most folks dislike reading speculative fiction that deals with nanotechnology, experimental gerontology, or artificial intelligence is that these futuristic conjectures chaff and erode their personhood, religion, working ontology, and perceived dignity.

 

[intpz]

I've always thought that animals can think as they can learn and do things on command or certain circumstances, which is quite evident with the case of a dog, a chip, a cat, a rabbit, a pig (whoever keeps those as pets), etc..

That's mostly evident with a few "special" animals, most animals are stupid and so it's not that visible. Just like humans. A nice example is dogs that are really smart compared to most dogs - learning to do things based on the sentence structure or an event containing a pattern instead of specific command or a specific event.

I wonder if this will influence the reincarnation believers...

 

[rattymat]

Yeah, I feel in agreement with many of the responses: along the lines of this
Animals have consciousness. Uh, duh? Didn't need a 21st century neuroscientist to observe that.
I was hoping they were going to at least define consciousness explicitly to support their study somehow, but nope. Maybe it was bad journalism.
Consciousness is loosely defined as the ability to feel, sense, and experience. Now, aside from feeling, the latter two animals obviously possess. And I would argue animals do feel, though their feelings would be less advanced than humans. (Feelings can be boiled down to a chemical process, and even primitive feelings like craving count. And most certainly animals crave food and sex.)

 

[Cognisant]

Consciousness is loosely defined as the ability to feel, sense, and experience.

As can artificial neural nets comprised of either analogue circuitry or arguably of a digitally simulated equivalent, which can get weird if you think about it too much, y'know if you can decide what something wants to want then morality goes out the window.

 

[kamari rised]

would you say conscience is like a guide? Kind of like your perception on how you view people compared to how you interact with people. You build all these thoughts behind people that you know, and say what you both are comfortable of understanding. So basically do you think you build your own conscience and use it kind of like a guide? There's a huge conscience difference when I get approached by someone I know well compared to someone I never met. Everything's in the present and your awareness is higher than usual because your gathering as much information that you can to figure out enough to understand him/her and keep balance if you want to keep that relationship lasting. Also do you notice you catching yourself analyzing something that might have been embarrassing and you can either keep thinking about it and define yourself to not do that next time or you can just say idgaf, im me. and walk away with no emotional attachment to those thoughts. ("embrace without guilt") <key thing for reconstruction I believe. well one of them.<<
anyways im drifting convo.
When your taught how to read and learn in school do you think your teaching your conscience how to read and learn for yourself. Usually when your not doing it for your own personal benefits I believe your just using it as a guide rather than knowing it for yourself.
A guide to use when your approached rather than using it on your own for personal value.

This is probably the worst grammar and spaced out explanation ever, but I havent slept in forever and just thought I would put a thought on here before sleep.

 

[reddie]

I never looked up consciousness before. Perhaps because I never had to (thats the benefit of joining an INTP forum) However If the definition of conscious is " is the quality or state of being aware of an external object or something within oneself." And as I understand that losing conscious is an organic event then what were the evidence that animals (living beings like us) did not have it in the first place? I dont get it...

 

[IdeasNotTheProblem]

Just a nube on the subject, but I would think it would be much more difficult to prove that mammals especially primates do not have consciousness. Yes it is miniscule compared to the level of human consciousness but they proved primates had rational thoughts like humans decades ago. Does that not constitute consciousness?

 

[Hawkeye]

I thought this was obvious...

Just like fish feel pain, but this wasn't actually agreed on until 2003.

Animals dream, sulk, get excited and learn. Even when they have learnt new commands, they at times choose not to obey them.

 

[Vladimir]

Not conscious enough to control limiting factors or express themselves without actually being present like ourselves!!

 

[snafupants]

Non-human consciousness

Is that really news? Did this information come as revelation to anyone on the forum? All hail science.

 

[scorpiomover]

Invent a robotic AI. Give it control of all of the nukes in the USA. Call it Skynet. Let it become self-aware. Then try to switch it off. Make some popcorn, and watch the carnage.

Oh, wait. We're talking about animals.

If you thought your pet was like a person, feel smug.

If you insulted people for treating their pets like people, feel foolish for being prejudiced.

 

[PhoenixRising]

Sometimes when I read about scientific discoveries there is only one thing that comes to mind: NO DUH!

This is definitely one of those times.

 

[intpz]

If you insulted people for treating their pets like people, feel foolish for being prejudiced.

You mean spending hours talking them to death? I wouldn't be surprised if a there's a 40-year-old woman somewhere, who buys a new dog every week because it dies after a 16-hour talk session that went on every day for a whole week!

Or perhaps you mean dressing them in goofy clothes?

Or something else that those goofy assholes do to the pets?