Emotion in animals 5160010 225725391 2008-07-15T02:39:58Z Smitty 2773571 clean up using [[Project:AutoWikiBrowser|AWB]] '''Emotion in animals''' considers the question of whether certain species of non-human [[animal]]s feel emotions, in the sense that humans understand it. The debate concerns primarily [[mammals]], and among these [[primates]] to a particularly high degree, although emotions have also been postulated for non-mammalian [[vertebrate]]s. Different answers have been suggested throughout human history, by [[animal love]]rs, [[science|scientists]], [[philosophy|philosophers]], and others who interact with animals, but the core question has proven hard to answer since we can neither obtain spoken answers, nor assume [[anthropomorphism]]. As a result, on the one hand society recognizes animals can feel pain, by criminalizing [[animal cruelty]], and yet on the other hand it is far from clear whether we truly believe animals "feel" in a meaningful sense. Often expressions of apparent pleasure are ambiguous as to whether this is emotion, or simply innate response, perhaps to approval or other hard-wired cues. The ambiguity is a source of much controversy in that there is no certainty which views, if any, are "right". That said, extreme behaviorists would also say that human "feeling" is a meaningless, hard-wired response to external stimuli. In recent years, research has become available which expands prior understandings of [[animal communication|animal language]], [[animal cognition|cognition]] and [[tool]] use, and even [[animal sexuality|sexuality]]. Emotions arise in the [[mammalian brain]], or the [[limbic system]], which [[human being]]s share in common with other mammals as well as many other species. This presents both a scientific dilemma &mdash; ''how can we tell?'' &mdash; and a potential ethical one &mdash; ''if true, what does it mean?'' ==Evidence== While different sections of humanity have had very different views on animal emotion, the examination of animals with a scientific, rather than [[anthropomorphic]] eye, has led to very cautious steps towards any form of recognition beyond the capacity for pain and fear, and such demonstrations as are needed and engendered, for survival. Historically, prior to the rise of sciences such as [[ethology]], interpretation of animal behavior tended to favor a kind of minimalism known as [[behaviorism]], in this context the refusal to ascribe to an animal a capability beyond the least demanding that would explain a behavior. Put crudely, the behaviorist argument is, why should humans postulate consciousness and all its near-human implications in animals to explain some behavior, if mere [[stimulus-response]] is a sufficient explanation to produce the same effects? The cautious wording of Beth Dixon's 2001 paper on animal emotion<ref>Ethics & the Environment, Volume 6, Number 2, Autumn 2001, pp. 22-30, Indiana University Press [http://muse.jhu.edu/cgi-bin/access.cgi?uri=/journals/ethics_and_the_environment/v006/6.2dixon.html]</ref> exemplifies this viewpoint: <blockquote>Recent work in the area of ethics and animals suggests that it is philosophically legitimate to ascribe emotions to nonhuman animals. Furthermore, it is sometimes argued that emotionality is a morally relevant psychological state shared by humans and nonhumans. What is missing from the philosophical literature that makes reference to emotions in nonhuman animals is an attempt to clarify and defend some particular account of the nature of emotion, and the role that emotions play in a characterization of human nature. I argue in this paper that some analyses of emotion are more credible than others. Because this is so, the thesis that humans and nonhumans share emotions may well be a more difficult case to make than has been recognized thus far. </blockquote> In a similar tone, according to [[Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson]]:<ref name="Moussaieff">Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson, Susan McCarthy: ''When Elephants Weep: The Emotional Lives of Animals'' ISBN 0-385-31428-0</ref> <blockquote>While the study of emotion is a respectable field, those who work in it are usually academic psychologists who confine their studies to human emotions. The standard reference work, The Oxford Companion to Animal Behavior, advises animal behaviorists that "One is well advised to study the behaviour, rather than attempting to get at any underlying emotion". </blockquote> There is considerable uncertainty and difficulty related to the [[interpretation]] and [[ambiguity]] of emotion: an animal may make certain movements and sounds, and show certain brain and chemical signals when its body is damaged in a particular way. But does this mean an animal feels—is [[awareness|''aware'']] of—pain as we are, or does it merely mean it is programmed to act a certain way with certain stimuli? Similar questions can be asked of any activity an animal (including a human) might undertake, in principle. Because of the [[philosophy|philosophical]] questions of [[consciousness]] and [[mind]] involved, many scientists have stayed away from examining animal emotion, and have studied instead, measurable brain functions, through [[neuroscience]]. ===Primates=== {{see|Primate cognition|Great ape personhood|Great ape language|Origin of religion}} [[Primates]] in particular are candidates for highly developed capabilities for [[empathy]] and [[theory of mind|theories of mind]]. Evidence for "[[chimpanzee]] spirituality" includes display of [[mourning]], "incipient [[romantic love]]", "[[rain dance]]", appreciation of natural beauty such as a sunset over a lake, curiosity and respect towards wildlife (such as the python, which is neither a threat nor a food source to chimpanzees), empathy toward other species (such as feeding turtles) and even "[[animism]]" or "pretend play" in chimps cradling and grooming rocks or sticks, but also include the [[religious violence|violent aspects of religion]] such as [[cannibalism]], [[mass murder]] or formal rank hierarchies using punishment discipline.<ref>[http://www.originsnet.org/chimpspiritdatabase.pdf Appendices for chimpanzee spirituality by James Harrod]</ref> James Harrod and Vincent W. Fallio propose that [[spirituality]] arose in Pre-Paleolithic [[Hominidae]] or Early [[Lower Paleolithic]] ([[Oldowan]]) societies, based on the observation of "chimpanzee spirituality"<ref>[http://www.originsnet.org/mindold.html Oldowan Art, Religion, Symbols, Mind by James Harrod]</ref><ref name="V.Fallio">{{cite book | author=Vincent W. Fallio |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=-kJHI9MdxNwC&pg=PA108&dq=Paleolithic+religions&lr=&sig=X1sptLBNugPV4n72XEUx-tmJ1Js#PPA109,M1 | title=New Developments in Consciousness Research| location=New York, United States | publisher=[[Nova Publishers]]| year=2006 | id=ISBN 1600212476}} [http://books.google.com/books?id=-kJHI9MdxNwC&pg=PA108&dq=Paleolithic+religions&lr=&sig=X1sptLBNugPV4n72XEUx-tmJ1Js#PPA98,M1] Pages 98 to 109]</ref> According to Vincent W. Fallio the common ancestor of chimpanzees and humans experienced altered states of consciousness and partook in [[ritual]], and ritual was used in their societies to strengthen social bonding and group cohesion, which is also the main [[Anthropology of religion|anthropological]] and [[Sociology of religion|social function of religion]].<ref name="V.Fallio">{{cite book | author=Vincent W. Fallio |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=-kJHI9MdxNwC&pg=PA108&dq=Paleolithic+religions&lr=&sig=X1sptLBNugPV4n72XEUx-tmJ1Js#PPA109,M1 | title=New Developments in Consciousness Research| location=New York, United States | publisher=[[Nova Publishers]]| year=2006 | id=ISBN 1600212476}} [http://books.google.com/books?id=-kJHI9MdxNwC&pg=PA108&dq=Paleolithic+religions&lr=&sig=X1sptLBNugPV4n72XEUx-tmJ1Js#PPA98,M1 Pages 98 to 109]</ref> ===Canines=== Research suggests that [[Canidae|canines]] can experience negative emotions in a similar manner to people, including the equivalent of certain chronic and acute psychological conditions. The classic experiment for this was [[Martin Seligman]]'s foundational experiments and theory of [[learned helplessness]] at the [[University of Pennsylvania]] in 1965, as an extension of his interest in depression: : A dog that had earlier been repeatedly conditioned to associate a sound with electric shocks did not try to escape the electric shocks after the warning was presented, even though all the dog would have had to do is jump over a low divider within ten seconds, more than enough time to respond. The dog didn't even try to avoid the "aversive stimulus"; it had previously "learned" that nothing it did mattered. A follow-up experiment involved three dogs affixed in harnesses, including one that received shocks of identical intensity and duration to the others, but the lever which would otherwise have allowed the dog a degree of control was left disconnected and didn't do anything. The first two dogs quickly recovered from the experience, but the third dog suffered chronic symptoms of [[clinical depression]] as a result of this perceived helplessness. A further series of experiments showed that (similar to humans) under conditions of long term intense psychological stress, around 1/3 of dogs do not develop learned helplessness or long term depression. Instead these animals somehow managed to find a way to handle the unpleasant situation in spite of their past experience. The corresponding characteristic in humans has been found to correlate highly with an [[explanatory style]] and [[optimism|optimistic]] [[attitude]] and lower levels of emotional rigidity regarding expectations, that views the situation as ''other than'' personal, pervasive, or permanent. Such studies highlighted similar distinctions between people who adapt and those who break down, under long term psychological pressure, which were conducted in the 1950s in the realm of [[brainwashing]]. Since this time, symptoms analogous to clinical depression, [[neurosis]] and other psychological conditions have been in general accepted as being within the scope of canine emotion as well. ===Non-mammalian vertebrates=== A 2007 study in Canada found that [[fish]] have their own separate personalities. [http://www.canada.com/topics/technology/story.html?id=a7d908ee-8379-4de5-8be4-bb64ef0f741e&k=24915] ==References== {{reflist}} ==See also== * [[Animal cognition]] * [[Animal communication]] * [[Dear enemy recognition]] * [[Thomas Nagel]] (seminal paper, "What is it like to be a bat?") * [[Neuroethology]] * [[Great Ape personhood]] * [[Pet]] * [[Zoology]] * [[Ethology]] * [[Affectional bond]] [[Category:Emotion]] [[Category:Pets]] [[Category:Animal cognition]] [[Category:Ethology]] [[Category:Animal welfare]] [[Category:Behavioural sciences]] [[Category:Zoology]] [[Category:Human-animal relationships]] [[Category:Love]]