Live data from Hacker News

Are animals more conscious than we are?

erikhoel.substack.com

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#61
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way I can assign an internal monologue of human emotions to you is (i) pattern match your external behavior with my own behavior in an emotional state (ii) take you on your word when you describe that your feelings, (iii) assume that all humans are roughly going to be the same. Aha... With animals, I think (i) is a misleading option. Our own emotions are laden with self-reflection, with an internal monolog…

The point is that the standards that you are using is incapable of inferring presence of emotion in animals. Its merely human exceptionalism disguised as reasoning. I have as much observational evidence that you have emotions as much for a dolphin, monkey or a dog for instance. The external manifestations are in the same ball park. Same for physiological probes like FMRI. When same class of external observation leads…

> the standards that you are using is incapable of inferring presence of emotion in animals

I'm not talking about emotions in and of themselves, I'm talking about the conscious experience of emotions. In humans, we perhaps conflate the two, as we can have no concept of anger or joy without the ability to self-reflect on our experience, comparing our thought patterns and physiological sensations to past and possible future, and reasoning about why we're experiencing an emotion.

Now, what is it like to experience an emotion without being able to self-reflect and consciously know that we are experiencing an emotion? The external manifestations do not go away. We can still infer the presence of emotion, we just have no way to know what the conscious experience is like. It's not a question that can as yet be answered by science, so any conclusion one way or another cannot be scientific.

Just as we can infer emotional states in animals by their behavior, we can infer their lack of self-reflection by their lack of behavior we would deem "intelligent", at least compared to humans. And so we do not hold animals to the same intellectual standards. I am only suggesting that this lack of self-reflection and ability to reason would have profound effects on the conscious experience of emotions, even when external manifestations derived from them are similar.

(Perhaps a can-of-worms digression, but this is also related to animals having Free Will and moral culpability for their actions. We generally do not infer the presence of evil in animals, for instance, regardless of their behavior, nor discipline them beyond Pavlovian classical conditioning. It's not a scientific matter; all we can do at the moment is guess.)

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#62
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rationale that the uncontrollable feelings convey more consciousness doesn’t follow for me either. Our own ability to reason about the state of our being, threats to our safety and a command over what we do seems reasonable that humans are experiencing a consciousness that animals do not enjoy. Perhaps I overlook the author’s point here.

To me it seems that what separates us from other animals mentally is the ability for abstract thinking. A thought about a thought is itself a thought.

i'd suggest the difference is our ability to communicate to other what we perceive is at a much higher level. I have no reason to believe there's any difference in the actual experience.

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#63
post #60
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we observe complex behavior in you personally that we associate with our own ... I just doubt they are necessarily as intense as we experience. Lets start using the same standards of 'proof' If Helen Keller were never to learn to communicate with us through language that we understand are we to have believed that she has no consciousness -- just external manifestation that "complex behavior that we associate…

I think this text is very relevant: BEFORE THE SOUL DAWN by Helen Keller Before my teacher came to me, I did not know that I am. I lived in a world that was a no-world. I cannot hope to describe adequately that unconscious, yet conscious time of nothingness. I did not know that I knew aught, or that I lived or acted or desired. I had neither will nor intellect. I was carried along to objects and acts by a certain bli…

Thanks, that was a beautiful read in spite of the desolate circumstances.

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#64
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pain is strictly a physical sensation. Hard to tell that to those with lost limbs who suffer from ghost pain.

Do not be fooled by the term "ghost". The pain is still real, and experts now agree it is coming from both the brain and spinal cord [1]. Just like optical illusions, the mind can play many tricks on us. Just because the pain feels like it is coming from a non-existent limb does not mean that that is where it is actually coming from. 1. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/phantom-pain/...

> the pain feels like it is coming from a non-existent limb does not mean that that is where it is actually coming from.

So uhh, what exactly is pain? Is it the feeling? Is it the physical damage? Is it a warning about damage? Is it the fear of damage (as in broken hearts etc.)?

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#65
post #60
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we observe complex behavior in you personally that we associate with our own ... I just doubt they are necessarily as intense as we experience. Lets start using the same standards of 'proof' If Helen Keller were never to learn to communicate with us through language that we understand are we to have believed that she has no consciousness -- just external manifestation that "complex behavior that we associate…

I think this text is very relevant: BEFORE THE SOUL DAWN by Helen Keller Before my teacher came to me, I did not know that I am. I lived in a world that was a no-world. I cannot hope to describe adequately that unconscious, yet conscious time of nothingness. I did not know that I knew aught, or that I lived or acted or desired. I had neither will nor intellect. I was carried along to objects and acts by a certain bli…

That's how I would describe my earliest childhood as far as I can remember it.

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#66
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do not be fooled by the term "ghost". The pain is still real, and experts now agree it is coming from both the brain and spinal cord [1]. Just like optical illusions, the mind can play many tricks on us. Just because the pain feels like it is coming from a non-existent limb does not mean that that is where it is actually coming from. 1. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/phantom-pain/...

> the pain feels like it is coming from a non-existent limb does not mean that that is where it is actually coming from. So uhh, what exactly is pain? Is it the feeling? Is it the physical damage? Is it a warning about damage? Is it the fear of damage (as in broken hearts etc.)?

I'm not a biologist or anything, but I'd define it simply as a signal from your nervous system to your brain.

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#67
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pain is strictly a physical sensation. It may however be triggered by thoughts or emotions. The three are rarely ever experienced in isolation.

What does this even mean? If I can feel pain by thinking, what does it mean that pain is "strictly physical"? If it means "there is a physical set of physical matter involved in the sensation of pain, be it pain nerves or just me thinking using my physical thinking apparatus", well then given that I'm made out of physical matter, what isn't strictly physical?

> If I can feel pain by thinking, what does it mean that pain is "strictly physical"?

It may help to look at it from a cause and effect perspective.

injury -> pain

thinking -> pain

feeling -> pain

thinking -> feeling + pain

pain -> feeling + thinking

...etc

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#68

> Seen as biological robots, their cognition is essentially in service to this, and so must necessarily be algorithmic, and limited. All to say they are generally assumed to have lesser forms of consciousness. This seems to define consciousness as measurable by algorithmic determinism and limitation, which seems a complete non-sequitur. Seeing something as a biological robot need not necessarily imply anything at all…

I think much of this is just a language problem leading to endless communication problems and debate.

If you are going to say consciousness has degrees then what about degrees of unconsciousness?

It doesn't make sense to be more or less unconscious.

When we say conscious though we don't really mean the opposite of unconscious most of the time. Usually it is the opposite of unconscious + many other things. Then we debate what those other things are.

To me this is exactly a language philosophy problem and imprecision in our language causing philosophical problems.

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#69

> Seen as biological robots, their cognition is essentially in service to this, and so must necessarily be algorithmic, and limited. All to say they are generally assumed to have lesser forms of consciousness. This seems to define consciousness as measurable by algorithmic determinism and limitation, which seems a complete non-sequitur. Seeing something as a biological robot need not necessarily imply anything at all…

I think much of this is just a language problem leading to endless communication problems and debate. If you are going to say consciousness has degrees then what about degrees of unconsciousness? It doesn't make sense to be more or less unconscious. When we say conscious though we don't really mean the opposite of unconscious most of the time. Usually it is the opposite of unconscious + many other things. Then we deb…

> When we say conscious though we don't really mean the opposite of unconscious most of the time. Usually it is the opposite of unconscious + many other things. Then we debate what those other things are.

True. I'm thinking of it a bit like a one dimensional spectrum with "unconciousness" at one end, and "as alert as you can be" at another end (imprecisely defined as that is), and various states of alertness between (tired, under the influence, dreaming, etc). Lacking a measurable numeric metric, these are not necessarily in a specific order, just somewhere between unconscious and fully conscious.

> To me this is exactly a language philosophy problem and imprecision in our language causing philosophical problems.

Definitely; especially with trying to define "consciousness" we reach the limits of language, as we're trying to make concrete the source of language and meaning itself.

Re: Are animals more conscious than we are?

#70
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the pain feels like it is coming from a non-existent limb does not mean that that is where it is actually coming from. So uhh, what exactly is pain? Is it the feeling? Is it the physical damage? Is it a warning about damage? Is it the fear of damage (as in broken hearts etc.)?

I'm not a biologist or anything, but I'd define it simply as a signal from your nervous system to your brain.

So.. a thought? An emotion? Or a sensation?
Post reply on HN