Epistemology in many species

[Col]

I have long had an intuitive liking of John Locke's statement "I have a hand" as innate knowledge, and sufficient reason for common sense. It occurs to me that rats to all intents and purposes have hands and cognition and that then much of the proof of apriori and a posteriori knowledge can more or less be applied to animals, at least all of the animals that are farmed.

In my understanding of 'common sense' this implies a commonality of consciousness,
This is something people seem to often associate with their friendships!
It is for me an understanding of the similarity of cognition and spiritual life - even if different not necessarily less spiritual as many animals have heightened sensory abilities in areas such as smell.

 

[Rohan]

much of the proof of apriori and a posteriori knowledge can more or less be applied to animals, at least all of the animals that are farmed.

I agree Col and I think it can be applied to all animals with a reasonably well-developed central nervous system, regardless of whether farmed or otherwise.

this implies a commonality of consciousness, It is for me an understanding of the similarity of cognition and spiritual life

Here's a great quote from Luis Elizondo from one of his earlier podcasts ...

"Y'know ... you have a connection with your pet, not because it's a cat or a dog but because there's something deeper you are connecting with. Something far more intimate, far more sacred than, y'know, a furry little bag of skin and hair balls ... and by the way, that lifeform recognises you as well ... as a sentient being. There's this appreciation that, hey, we're on the same wave length. I may not look like you, I may not act like you, I may not talk like you but we're kind of the same thing. We're both conscious, sentient beings and we recognise that in each other. "

 

[silva]

I agree Col and I think it can be applied to all animals with a reasonably well-developed central nervous system, regardless of whether farmed or otherwise.

Here's a great quote from Luis Elizondo from one of his earlier podcasts ...

"Y'know ... you have a connection with your pet, not because it's a cat or a dog but because there's something deeper you are connecting with. Something far more intimate, far more sacred than, y'know, a furry little bag of skin and hair balls ... and by the way, that lifeform recognises you as well ... as a sentient being. There's this appreciation that, hey, we're on the same wave length. I may not look like you, I may not act like you, I may not talk like you but we're kind of the same thing. We're both conscious, sentient beings and we recognise that in each other. "

THE LAST PIG Documentary: A farmer's ethical crisis

This award-winning film chronicles the changing landscape of animal agriculture and one farmer’s ethical crisis: after years of raising pigs for meat, he can no longer bear the ultimate act of betrayal.

www.thelastpig.com

 

[Rohan]

It is my heartfelt belief that until the human race embraces empathy and compassion, extending this to all sentient beings we won't even begin to transcend our current base level, materialistic consciousness. I hope we're not too late!

 

[Lou]

Primatologist Frans de Waal, said something like, we are not intelligent enough to understand animal intelligence.

However, IMHO, the best rule is what Jeremy Bentham said in An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.
"The question is not, Can they reason?, nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer? Why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being?"

Pretty much any animal that responds to its environment may feel pain and suffer.

I remember a discussion about whether vegans can eat oysters. (or bugs). We don't know for sure what those animals are thinking so best/safest to leave them alone.

Are We Smart Enough to Understand How Smart Animals Are?

Primatologist Frans de Waal makes a case for animal intelligence.

www.sciencefriday.com

Amazon.com

 

[Lou]

A new study and article on a related subject.

You Don’t Need Words to Think​

“Brain studies show that language is not essential for the cognitive processes that underlie thought”​

we can solve differential equations or compose majestic symphonies. Is language needed in some form for these species-specific achievements? Do we require words or syntax as scaffolding to construct the things we think about? Or do the brain’s cognitive regions devise fully baked thoughts that we then convey using words as a medium of communication?​

​

Evelina Fedorenko, a neuroscientist who studies language at the McGovern Institute for Brain Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has spent many years trying to answer these questions.​

​

n Fedorenko’s view: language and thought are, in fact, distinct entities that the brain processes separately. The highest levels of cognition—from novel problem-solving to social reasoning—can proceed without an assist from words or linguistic structures.​

​

 

[FlandersOD]

Opposite of surprising, ((if anything words as such stand in the way))

 

[Lou]

Fedorenko’s view: language and thought are, in fact, distinct entities that the brain processes separately. The highest levels of cognition—from novel problem-solving to social reasoning—can proceed without an assist from words or linguistic structures.​

​

This is pretty much the opposite of what I had been taught in school. I wonder if these ideas will affect modern education and psychology. Not just how we think about animals but also how we teach literacy and develop curriculum.