Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Are animals conscious? New research

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 544 posts

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#311

Post by randomdata »

defrost wrote: post #310
randomdata wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And which philospher of science said that then? I did. Obviously. Why would I retell what another philosopher said? That would be rather silly. If they want something to be known, they can let you know themselves. > Which others disagree? Whichever ones disagree. Again, they can speak for themselves. > Some claim that Mathematics is the Queen of Sciences In other words, not science? > yet without which science is a…

> I did. Obviously. So it's an opinion from your philosophy and not a universal absolute as you presented. > I am not sure you have made a convincing case that science is more than nothing. I haven't, just presented positions held by others .. and with no convincing case I guess we must conclude that science is nothing. Or maybe assume there's something to it .

> So it's an opinion from your philosophy and not a universal absolute as you presented.

Wait. If it were a universal absolute, for what reason would I present it? A universal absolute offers no remaining opportunity for me to learn, and why would I enter into a discussion that provides no learning opportunity? That would be a pointless waste of time. Whichever philosopher gave you the idea that I would waste my time like that did not think things through and has severely misguided you.

> I guess we must conclude that science is nothing. Or maybe assume there's something to it .

Either way. As feeble humans (or LLM bots), we are not science. We can make assumptions that may or may not have any basis in reality.

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#312

Post by exe34 »

maxbond wrote: post #218
lolinder wrote: post #66

> Attributing consciousness to animals based on their responses was seen as a cardinal sin. The argument went that projecting human traits, feelings, and behaviours onto animals had no scientific basis and there was no way of testing what goes on in animals’ minds. What's always been funny to me about the scientific approach to animal consciousness/emotions/empathy is that in a perfectly rational world the default as…

I think there is also a misguided razor that people who self identify as rationalists often apply, which goes, "the most cynical or disenchanted answer is likely the correct one." An overcorrection to superstition, perhaps. I personally did this, and one of the symptoms was being overly skeptical of animal consciousness. People would tell me this dog was smart or that it was feeling a certain way, and I dismissed it,…

the cat probably discovered a new smell (did you take the book to the kitchen? put it on the dinner table? on your lap?).

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#313

Post by krzat »

lassoiat wrote: post #209
cupcakecommons wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever met a person who was blackout drunk? Easy example. They are very often not conscious but still emotional. You could easily imagine animals that exist in this state continuously without requiring chemical assistance. It makes sense on a neurological level as well. The more robust and evolutionarily older parts of the brain like the brain stem take much more ethanol to inhibit. The PFC is inhibited almost immediat…

This is why the concept of consciousness is largely nonsense. The person that is blacked out is not unconscious. They just are not storing memories in order to remember the experience after the fact. Can you see it? It is right in front of you that consciousness doesn't exist. It is right in your own example. It is a 21st century superstition and English language flaw. People cling to this idea the way people use to…

There is a condition called aphantasia, in which people are unable to visualise things, but are perfectly capable of doing visual tasks, such as art.

The question "is this animal conscious" is quite close to a question "does this person have aphantasia", and both seem to be perfectly valid and answerable.

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#314

Post by npteljes »

dahart wrote: post #308
npteljes wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The majority of scientists really thought that animals didn't feel or experience things? I can buy it. "As recently as 1999, it was widely believed by medical professionals that babies could not feel pain until they were a year old, but today it is believed newborns and likely even fetuses beyond a certain age can experience pain" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_in_babies

Was it widely believed? That statement seems bizarre to me, as pretty much all pediatricians have poked infants with needles and witnessed them start to cry, ever since needles were invented. Same goes for other medical procedures since long before needles, and for parents since forever.

Wouldn't be the wildest thing people, or medical professionals, believe. Even clearly displayed aversion to assumed-painful stimuli doesn't mean that people will believe that it's pain that the organism is feeling. Where this comes up pretty often is how crabs are often cooked, when cooks just chuck them alive into hot water.

The other thing that people have to do is drawing lines, life's issues are otherwise overwhelming. Now, where they draw the lines differ widely. It's common to take external markers and make the separation according to that - a safer bet, given that others can see those markers as well, and so, maybe more readily validate the discrimination. Skin color, gender, age, signs of sickness, mental conditions are easy targets for this. In most cases, they are coupled with vulnerability as well, so the history of their abuses is as old as humanity itself - hence I don't think it's that wild that people think such a thing. Unfortunately they think the wildest things, myself included. It's actually quite scary to me.

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#315

Post by aspyct »

rodcon wrote: post #294
aspyct wrote: post #115

Sorry, why is this even a research? It's uh... pretty obvious they are conscious.

The study of consciousness (or sentience or whatever the appropriate term is) is definitely a valid field of research and one of science and philosophies all-time greatest mysteries. What exactly is the underlying mechanism and theory of consciousness? For example, A sound scientific theory of consciousness should be able to definitively answer the questions (and defend that answer): - Is an ant sentient? Why ? Why n…

I agree that it's an interesting question worth exploring.

However I'm wondering why we are still at that stage of the game. Animals seem like a "duh, of course" answer to me. They have a brain, a nervous system, they're so close to us that the answer should be obvious.

Now an amoeba yes, that's (to me, at least) an open discussion. LLMs and AGIs too, they're too new and unknown.

But animals? Come on, we had thousands of years to figure that out.

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#316

Post by navane »

nprateem wrote: post #297
nikkwong wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's totally true and something I don't know the answer to. But it's interesting to ponder if the experience of consciousness is the same for each individual. We believe that consciousness is possibly an emergent phenomena of cognitive processing, but since there is a wide amount of heterogeneity in the makeup of the human mind, it isn't extraordinary to claim that this 'presence in the current moment' may have dif…

Do you ever watch a movie/event or listen to music and notice you're not internally narrating what's happening because you're so engrossed in the action? Voila, consciousness without the inner monologue.

In one way, that sounds like more consciously present, in the other way it sounds like less. You are more here and now as you lack distracting commentary, or are you more here if you sit and ponder it?

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#317

Post by circlefavshape »

slibhb wrote: post #120
lolinder wrote: post #66

> Attributing consciousness to animals based on their responses was seen as a cardinal sin. The argument went that projecting human traits, feelings, and behaviours onto animals had no scientific basis and there was no way of testing what goes on in animals’ minds. What's always been funny to me about the scientific approach to animal consciousness/emotions/empathy is that in a perfectly rational world the default as…

> The only reason why animal consciousness has been controversial historically is a religious one—the Bible has typically been read as placing humanity in a category of its own. And yet we see countless secular scientists clinging to that perspective when even a cursory glance at the evidence and a basic application of Occam's razor would suggest the opposite. It's not just the Bible. It's virtually every religion an…

> There's also no reason to assume that animals don't think the same way.

Indeed. I wonder do they see us as special at all? It'd be pretty funny if they didn't

> Animals didn't land on the moon or discover quantum mechanics

Humans existed for hundreds of thousands of years before they did either of these things

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#318

Post by namero999 »

rogerclark wrote: post #240
maxbond wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is also a misguided razor that people who self identify as rationalists often apply, which goes, "the most cynical or disenchanted answer is likely the correct one." An overcorrection to superstition, perhaps. I personally did this, and one of the symptoms was being overly skeptical of animal consciousness. People would tell me this dog was smart or that it was feeling a certain way, and I dismissed it,…

That first sentence is one of the best-distilled insights I've ever read on HN.

I concur, was about to express the same sentiment. I will steal this, sorry-not-sorry :)

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#319

Post by vixen99 »

Jensson wrote: post #106
albertopv wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Apparently only a small minority of bumble bees can figure out how to pull a string to access a reward, but then other bees adopt the behavior by mimicry." Replace bumble bees with human beigns and "pull a string" with an engineering task and you'll find we are not so different. /sarcasm, but not too much, average human being is quite dumb, tbh.

> average human being is quite dumb Compared to what? Average human beings are geniuses compared to animals.

And compared to what manner of assessment of that genius? Animals had the Earth to themselves for millennia. Humans for a very short period. You judge!

Re: Are animals conscious? New research

#320

Post by amanaplanacanal »

Jensson wrote: post #210
ivan_gammel wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Animal language is obviously on the same level as human laughter and cries and whimpers. Animals don't teach language to each other like humans do. Obviously? There’s no reason to assume that. It is known that cetaceans acquire their language and dialects through social learning. It was very recently discovered that some whales even have names for each other. Their language may be different from ours, but it is not…

That is one example, I am talking about the animals humans think about when they think animal language: dogs, horses, cats etc. Maybe some animals have language closer to humans, but it is far from the common definition for "animal language".

Are you saying that domestic animals don’t have language, but wild animals might?
Post reply on HN