Are There Sentient Animals?

[Amaris]

Are there any animals that have sentience? For example, I know dolphins and pigs are considered intelligent animals, but are they sentient? Cows can fashion their own tools. Chimps can communicate with humans via sign language. Elephants mourn the dead and create graves for them. Surely there has to be some form of sentience in animals. Is it human arrogance/ignorance that says only we possess this trait, or is it a matter of fact?

 

[diankra]

Define sentience. I'm sure my dog understood a lot more than dogs are assumed to understand, but I can't prove it...

 

[clint g]

but I can't prove it...

I think this is a big part of it. I think many many animals understand more than humans realize. For example, when I call out my cat's name, he responds. If I make a meowing sound, he meows back. If he wants food, he goes over to his bowl and kicks it. He then runs back at me and rubs my leg. In essence, my cat and I have developed a method of communication. While I'm not an expert I would imagine developing methods of communication is one of the important factors in regards to sentience.

Of course, none of it can be proved.

 

[Amaris]

Define sentience. I'm sure my dog understood a lot more than dogs are assumed to understand, but I can't prove it...

Well, aside from the basic general term used in animal ethics, are there animals that possess the basic requirements of sentience? Are they aware of their surroundings? Are they aware of themselves and their actions? Can they feel and perceive objectively?

 

[Skellington]

Are there any animals that have sentience? For example, I know dolphins and pigs are considered intelligent animals, but are they sentient? Cows can fashion their own tools. Chimps can communicate with humans via sign language. Elephants mourn the dead and create graves for them. Surely there has to be some form of sentience in animals. Is it human arrogance/ignorance that says only we possess this trait, or is it a matter of fact?

It's not ignorance. It's arrogance, or (more likely) an unwillingness to face the truth.
Chimps have been known to recognise themselves in mirrors; therefore it seems that they are self-aware. Personally, I don't think that sentience is a binary value. I think that it's in principle quantifiable; that something can have a greater or lesser degree of sentience than something else.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Just like any other things in nature, there are degrees of sentience. First of all, you have to define sentience, which is not an easy task in itself. Then you have to develop methods to measure it, and that would extremely difficult. But going on common sense ad gut feelings, I would say that there are species that approaches sentiences, even if they skim the line. Some mammalians show telling signs of sentiences. Perhaps more surprisingly, there are some birds that shows high intelligence, but one should be aware not to mix intelligence with sentience.

Personally, I would support the notion of Great Apes personhood. Simplifying things, it would grants partial "human rights" to Chimpanzee, Gorillas, Orangutans and Bonobo. They are our closest relatives, and i guess we should be shy of treating them like "animals".

 

[Skellington]

but I can't prove it...

I think this is a big part of it. I think many many animals understand more than humans realize. For example, when I call out my cat's name, he responds. If I make a meowing sound, he meows back. If he wants food, he goes over to his bowl and kicks it.

Dogs have owners while cats have staff. Just saying.

 

[Amaris]

It's not ignorance. It's arrogance, or (more likely) an unwillingness to face the truth.
Chimps have been known to recognise themselves in mirrors; therefore it seems that they are self-aware. Personally, I don't think that sentience is a binary value. I think that it's in principle quantifiable; that something can have a greater or lesser degree of sentience than something else.

I agree, there seem to be degrees involved. I guess what I'm asking is whether there are other animals that approach a human level of sentience.

Just like any other things in nature, there are degrees of sentience. First of all, you have to define sentience, which is not an easy task in itself. Then you have to develop methods to measure it, and that would extremely difficult. But going on common sense ad gut feelings, I would say that there are species that approaches sentiences, even if they skim the line. Some mammalians show telling signs of sentiences. Perhaps more surprisingly, there are some birds that shows high intelligence, but one should be aware not to mix intelligence with sentience.

Personally, I would support the notion of Great Apes personhood. Simplifying things, it would grants partial "human rights" to Chimpanzee, Gorillas, Orangutans and Bonobo. They are our closest relatives, and i guess we should be shy of treating them like "animals".

I would also support Great Apes as having enough sentience for personhood. I find the level of intelligence and apparent self awareness to be fascinating, and it's one of the reasons why I posted this topic.

If we find out that some animals approach a high level of sentience, what can or should we do about it? Let's be honest, when most people think of animals, they think either "food" or "pet" (some think both).

 

[scotpens]

Are there any animals that have sentience? For example, I know dolphins and pigs are considered intelligent animals, but are they sentient? Cows can fashion their own tools. . .

“Cows can fashion their own tools”???

I can only assume you're referring to Gary Larson's enigmatic and surreal 1982 cartoon captioned “Cow Tools.” It WAS meant as a joke, you know.

http://agonist.org/jimbo92107/20080321/cow_tools_revisiting_a_comic_masterpiece

Unless you meant chimps. It's well known that wild chimps will strip a twig of leaves, then use it to fish for termites. A crude tool, but a tool nonetheless -- a natural object deliberately modified for a specific purpose.

Mmmmm . . . termites!

 

[Zachary Smith]

I've read that dolphins are considered "sentient" because they demonstrate they are capable of having an abstract concept of "self". This has been documented in a series of experiments where a human paints a sign or symbol onto the body of a dolphin but out of view from its eyes. A mirror placed in the tank allows the dolphin to see its reflection and they have been observed to twist and turn so they can view the marks made on their own bodies in the mirror that they cannot see first-hand with their eyes. Researchers state that this demonstrates that the dolphin understands that the image in the mirror is NOT another dolphin but is the viewing dolphin itself. Most animals fail this test in that their either totally ignore a mirror or treat the reflection like an intruder. Cetaceans and apes seem generally capable of recognizing the reflection a mirror is "self"

 

[Amaris]

Are there any animals that have sentience? For example, I know dolphins and pigs are considered intelligent animals, but are they sentient? Cows can fashion their own tools. . .

“Cows can fashion their own tools”???

I can only assume you're referring to Gary Larson's enigmatic and surreal 1982 cartoon captioned “Cow Tools.” It WAS meant as a joke, you know.

http://agonist.org/jimbo92107/20080321/cow_tools_revisiting_a_comic_masterpiece

Unless you meant chimps. It's well known that wild chimps will strip a twig of leaves, then use it to fish for termites. A crude tool, but a tool nonetheless -- a natural object deliberately modified for a specific purpose.

Mmmmm . . . termites!

Sorry, that should read "Crows".
Although, now that you mention it, cows apparently do use tools:
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1618050.htm

I've read that dolphins are considered "sentient" because they demonstrate they are capable of having an abstract concept of "self". This has been documented in a series of experiments where a human paints a sign or symbol onto the body of a dolphin but out of view from its eyes. A mirror placed in the tank allows the dolphin to see its reflection and they have been observed to twist and turn so they can view the marks made on their own bodies in the mirror that they cannot see first-hand with their eyes. Researchers state that this demonstrates that the dolphin understands that the image in the mirror is NOT another dolphin but is the viewing dolphin itself. Most animals fail this test in that their either totally ignore a mirror or treat the reflection like an intruder. Cetaceans and apes seem generally capable of recognizing the reflection a mirror is "self"

That is interesting. Animal psychology fascinates me because the more I read about it, the more I wonder just what is automata and what is evolved behavior and sentience.

 

[RoJoHen]

I've read that dolphins are considered "sentient" because they demonstrate they are capable of having an abstract concept of "self". This has been documented in a series of experiments where a human paints a sign or symbol onto the body of a dolphin but out of view from its eyes. A mirror placed in the tank allows the dolphin to see its reflection and they have been observed to twist and turn so they can view the marks made on their own bodies in the mirror that they cannot see first-hand with their eyes. Researchers state that this demonstrates that the dolphin understands that the image in the mirror is NOT another dolphin but is the viewing dolphin itself. Most animals fail this test in that their either totally ignore a mirror or treat the reflection like an intruder. Cetaceans and apes seem generally capable of recognizing the reflection a mirror is "self"

Ooh, that is kind of neat.

 

[rramarr]

Even those who believe in the sentient animal still won't give up those baby back ribs.

 

[Amaris]

Even those who believe in the sentient animal still won't give up those baby back ribs.

Some might. I know people who did quit eating meat when they saw how much of it was processed. They're still vegans. It does happen.

As for myself, I still eat meat, but I am slowly weaning myself from it.

 

[RoJoHen]

Even those who believe in the sentient animal still won't give up those baby back ribs.

If some other animal wants to start farming and butchering humans, I will let them. It's only fair.

 

[Deckerd]

Sentience is too vague. You should confine this argument to self-awareness. Zoologists are more or less convinced that chimps and gorillas have self-awareness, which is why some are attempting to have them re-classified as homo. Dolphins, I think they might have more of a problem getting that classification.

 

[Colonel Midnight]

Heck, I'm still scratching my head as to whether or not humans have 'sentience' anymore...

Cheers,
-CM-

 

[Jadzia]

I've never got what this sentience requirement is all about. Sentience is an ill-defined term used colloquially to exalt something that you feel should be exalted, rather like the word "sanctity".

"Abstract concept of self" and "recognising a reflection" may be neat cognitive tricks, but to me they don't affect whether something has a right to life.

I do believe that animals have minds, that they have an awareness, ie, they feel information, and have wants, (such as wanting food, wanting social contact, or being curious). So to me, that animal is more than just a mechanical growth; and the presence of mind has has always been enough for me to grant something a right to life.

For the sake of satisfying my hunger for a few hours... I'd prefer to allow that [animal] to continue peacefully wandering around in the field, as it seems to want to do. I feel it is unethical to destroy one life in order to extend anothers. No life is so exalted for that act to ever be ethical, even if it may be commonplace.

In contrast, I consider a vegetable as being life that doesn't have a mind. It doesn't feel information. It is a purely mechanical growth. And while a vegetable (like a tree) can beautiful, and have subjective value for that reason, it's not morally considerable because it doesn't have a mind.

All that was something I reasoned for myself at around 5 years old, choosing to become vegetarian not long after, despite the objections of my parents, who even 20 years on still cannot understand my motives. There was no influence or persuasion by anyone else in me making that decision; it was derived from my own animal empathy.

Whether my attitude is correct or not, I'd prefer to err on the side of compassion. That is one of my virtues.

 

[Amaris]

Sentience is too vague. You should confine this argument to self-awareness. Zoologists are more or less convinced that chimps and gorillas have self-awareness, which is why some are attempting to have them re-classified as homo. Dolphins, I think they might have more of a problem getting that classification.

I made the slight correction a little further down the first page. One of the reasons I started out so broadly was so that it could be further defined as necessary.

I've never got what this sentience requirement is all about. Sentience is an ill-defined term used colloquially to exalt something that you feel should be exalted, rather like the word "sanctity".

I don't use it in that vein. I'm simply trying to find a set definition to work from, and sentience came the closest to that definition.

"Abstract concept of self" and "recognising a reflection" may be neat cognitive tricks, but to me they don't affect whether something has a right to life.

I do believe that animals have minds, that they have an awareness, ie, they feel information, and have wants, (such as wanting food, wanting social contact, or being curious). So to me, that animal is more than just a mechanical growth; and the presence of mind has has always been enough for me to grant something a right to life.

For the sake of satisfying my hunger for a few hours... I'd prefer to allow that [animal] to continue peacefully wandering around in the field, as it seems to want to do. I feel it is unethical to destroy one life in order to extend anothers. No life is so exalted for that act to ever be ethical, even if it may be commonplace.

In contrast, I consider a vegetable as being life that doesn't have a mind. It doesn't feel information. It is a purely mechanical growth. And while a vegetable (like a tree) can beautiful, and have subjective value for that reason, it's not morally considerable because it doesn't have a mind.

All that was something I reasoned for myself at around 5 years old, choosing to become vegetarian not long after, despite the objections of my parents, who even 20 years on still cannot understand my motives. There was no influence or persuasion by anyone else in me making that decision; it was derived from my own animal empathy.

Whether my attitude is correct or not, I'd prefer to err on the side of compassion. That is one of my virtues.

True, which is one of the (several) reasons I'm going back to a Vegan lifestyle.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Axiom,

Well, aside from the basic general term used in animal ethics, are there animals that possess the basic requirements of sentience? Are they aware of their surroundings? Are they aware of themselves and their actions? Can they feel and perceive objectively?

How do you define feel and perceive objectively? It might sound dumb, but it's a rational question.


Iguana Tonante,

Just like any other things in nature, there are degrees of sentience. First of all, you have to define sentience, which is not an easy task in itself. Then you have to develop methods to measure it, and that would extremely difficult. But going on common sense ad gut feelings, I would say that there are species that approaches sentiences, even if they skim the line.

The question is once an animal reaches a certain level of sentience, should it matter from an moral and ethical perspective if they possess a greater degree?

For example, if a creature possessed a greater degree of sentience than a human being, let's say even an artificially intelligent being (it doesn't matter for the sake of the argument whether the being is natural or artificial) -- should they be considered superior from a legal, moral and ethical standpoint?

Because if they were given a label superior to humans, it could lead to such a being/machine adopting an attitude similar to one we adopt when we treat animals as beneath us.


Rramarr,

Even those who believe in the sentient animal still won't give up those baby back ribs.

That is quite sad. Especially if they realize the creature is sentient, has feelings, desires, wants and needs, to still have them raised in captivity solely for the purpose of being killed to be made into food.

It's one thing if the animal doesn't meet the criteria for sentience at all (I don't think insects, bugs, crustaceans qualify -- but I could be wrong) but it's entirely different if the creature is though I think we should have a greater respect for all life in general


CuttingEdge100