3 ms·
1. You both agree that animals can think. The question is in what manner? Dr. Egnor recommends experiments in his other writing on that site. 2. I agree with
by yters 7y ago
1. You both agree that animals can think. The question is in what manner? Dr. Egnor recommends experiments in his other writing on that site.
2. I agree with you here. I don't think Dr. Egnor should handwave away the need to test for a soul.
- gus_massa 7y agoIf you redefine "Reason" with a narrow enough definition, you can make that only humans satisfy the definition. Can a submarine swim? https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/edsger_dijkstra_201166 https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/edsger_dijkstra_201166
- yters 7y agoAnd likewise, if we define "Reason" broadly enough, then anything can satisfy the definition, even nothing :D The real question is what is the correct definition of "Reason"?
- gus_massa 7y agoI agree. There was a recent article that said that electrons were conscious, but it used a definition of conscious so wide that I think it included rocks and probably empty space. Anyway, a good definition of "Reason" should probably include chimpanzees, elephants, dolphins, and probably octopus and parrots.
- yters 7y agoYes, for some sense of thinking it is clear animals deliberate between options, which should be at least a necessary component of "reasoning". However, the big question in the linked article is whether this sort of thing is sufficient for the kind of abstract reasoning that humans regularly engage in. I would argue choosing between "run" or "fight" is different than choosing between "saving" and "spending". The latter requires an understanding of abstract principles and some mathematics, whereas the first decision can be based purely on weighing one's feelings.