I read an article in the Times which was, I think, overly long but is available in their achieves at the tinyurl below:
New York Times March 20, 2007
Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior
By NICHOLAS WADE
http://tinyurl.com/27hbvx
My problem with the article has been one of my pet peeves for many years. It seems to me that humans in their fanatic desire (insecurity) to prove that they're superior to all beasties on this planet aren't willing to give the critters any credit for having thinking brains or even emotions similar to those we experience. This, of course, allows us to hunt and joyously kill them as we wish without remorse....
The article presents a clash between academic philosophers aided and abetted by some bookworm psychologists against academic biologists who work with non-human primates and have been surprisingly surprised that they exhibit some ‘human' qualities. Wow! Where is the Pulitzer committee?
Obviously the difference between philosophers and biologists is the fact that biologists have an infinitely better knowledge of animals while philosophers love to sit in their recliners by a cosy fire, late at night with a glass of wine and... ruminate about "the meaning of life"! Been there and done that but although very pleasant, not very productive.
Academics do provide some sense of organization to the study of man and to a limited extent, the rest of the animal kingdom such as in the article: "These four kinds of behavior — empathy, the ability to learn and follow social rules, reciprocity and peacemaking — are the basis of sociality."
I think anyone who actually ‘knows' animals rather than knows about them and has had many as personal ‘friends' is well aware that even cats and horses (pretty much the boundary of my own personal experience) posses at least simplistically, those four kinds of behavior. I'd even add a fifth behavior which is more subtle, complex, and not universal - but obvious when found, - a sense of humor, which often is not found even in many humans. But humor is often observable in cats and horses and maybe even Meercats! Perhaps, as with wives, one has to own one to love and understand them.
I agree with Dr. de Waal's (the biologist) assessment of religion being an exclusive human invention. He implied rather than stated (but I state) that religion is a means of social control (power) of individuals by the group to the group's advantage - pure and simple. Of course the philosophical community considers religion to be one of humanity's highest evolutionary attributes - especially since apes are apparently atheists!
Sometimes the best proof of something is through observations made when that something is missing. This is painfully true in the case of empathy. I understand that about one percent of the human population is incapable of such feelings. It has also been established that the lack of empathy is a physiological (brain) disorder and not resulting from societal training as in the military or the lack of proper parental indoctrination in childhood.
It appears that an absence of empathy is evident by the noted absence of remorse by psychopathic serial killers. These people are incapable of translating how others might feel to their own feelings. They know the difference between right and wrong intellectually, but not emotionally. They enjoy pulling the legs off bugs or murdering people - it doesn't make any difference to them.
All too often while play fighting with my kitties, they get excited and scratch me causing me to suddenly pull back and voice my pain. When they realize that they hurt me, they immediately change their behavior to being solicitous and often try to lap the wound or otherwise indicate that it was not their intent to cause me injury.
Granted, the intellectual abilities of animals other than humans is quite limited, but I submit that animals are as emotional as humans - not through facial expression but certainly in body language. Emotions are, of course, the most primitive function of a ‘thinking' brain and have been necessary in all animals to be able to make decisions concerning fight and flight, pecking orders and love.
After all, philosophers and mathematicians don't need to be human - they have their intellects and a box of wine to keep them warm!
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment