5 ms·

>by following the same behaviours that they would if they felt pain This is taking the claim I made too far. My point was that reacting to noxious stimuli does

>by following the same behaviours that they would if they felt pain This is taking the claim I made too far. My point was that reacting to noxious stimuli does not a priori require the conscious experience of pain (which includes a suffering component). When it comes to analyzing sets of possible behaviors, that provides more evidence with which to decide between nociception and pain. I do think that most "animals" (excluding insects) probably experience pain due to, as you said, the varieties of possible behaviors being too large to be merely reflex based. But it's not obvious to me that this holds for insects.

Retric 7y ago
They would have to experience some negative stimulus to avoid it. Disagreement with the term pain does not remove the resume that learned avoidance requires detection of a negative stimulus. Further, while we separate negative stimulus into say thirst and pain, the fact you can torture people with either means the difference is ethically more semantic than meaningful.
- hackinthebochs 7y ago
  There is a distinction in biology between sensory perception of noxious stimuli (nociception) and the experience of suffering in response to noxious stimuli. The distinction is in higher order brain processing. An organism does not need to experience suffering to react to noxious stimuli: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex
  - Retric 7y ago
    Withdraw reflex does not mean learning. You can see this in cases where the withdrawal reflex is repeatedly triggered without learning.
    - hackinthebochs 7y ago
      Withdraw reflex also doesn't preclude learning. We see learning in all sorts of reflex arcs that get over-triggered and thus become downregulated. So the fact that the fly "learned" to be more sensitive to noxious stimuli does not rule out a reflex mechanism at play in its behavior.
      - Retric 7y ago
        Down regulated withdrawal reflex is the opposite of avoidance behavior. It’s effectively increasing an organism’s tolerance for putting it’s limb in fire. So, no what you’re describing does not mean learning to avoid stimulus. Learned avoidance behavior really requires a negative perception not just a neutral reflexive one.
        hackinthebochs 7y ago
        I'm not sure why you're giving my comments such an obtuse reading. My example was to show how learning can happen in a reflex network, thus undermining your claim that learning indicates conscious experience. The issue here is regarding the capabilities of a reflex network. I have established that learning can happen in such networks, as shown by common examples. You have not established that learning avoidance behaviors requires conscious networks.
        Retric 7y ago
        Because you don’t seem to understand the difference between learning avoidance and reducing sensitivity. (If you notice my first comment I specifically referred to learned avoidance not simply any kind of learning.) Reflexive behavior is a predefined response to a stimulus over some predefined limit and thus on it’s own it’s reactive not predictive. In a purely neutral context there is no reason to increase the response based on the external stimulus. Avoidance requires the ability to predict before a negative response occurs. Without the negative association there is no impetus to increase avoidance. Aka, don’t put your hand in fire is inherently different than how quickly you remove your hand from fire. PS: Reducing sensitivity with exposure is a rather different thing as it helps deal with edge cases. At a meta level, strong constant uncontrollable spasms is extremely unlikely to be an ideal response to a given stimulus.
YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago
>> My point was that reacting to noxious stimuli does not a priori require the conscious experience of pain (which includes a suffering component). Like Retric says, this leaves open the question of how noxious stimuli (thanks) lead to avoidance behaviours, if they are not unpleasant. My explanation is that the unpleasant sensation of pain makes the animal try and avoid the stimulus that causes the pain. What is the alternative? Edit: also, why most animals but not insects? What is different about insects?
- hackinthebochs 7y ago
  >this leaves open the question of how noxious stimuli (thanks) lead to avoidance behaviours, if they are not unpleasant. It triggers networks that are designed to cause avoidance behaviors, for example the withdraw reflex[1]. Reflex networks do not require any conscious experience of the stimuli that triggers the specific action. >why most animals but not insects? What is different about insects? The size of the set of possible unique behaviors, complexity of brain, existence of higher order brain processes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex

Retric 7y ago

They would have to experience some negative stimulus to avoid it. Disagreement with the term pain does not remove the resume that learned avoidance requires detection of a negative stimulus. Further, while we separate negative stimulus into say thirst and pain, the fact you can torture people with either means the difference is ethically more semantic than meaningful.

hackinthebochs 7y ago
There is a distinction in biology between sensory perception of noxious stimuli (nociception) and the experience of suffering in response to noxious stimuli. The distinction is in higher order brain processing. An organism does not need to experience suffering to react to noxious stimuli: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex
- Retric 7y ago
  Withdraw reflex does not mean learning. You can see this in cases where the withdrawal reflex is repeatedly triggered without learning.
  - hackinthebochs 7y ago
    Withdraw reflex also doesn't preclude learning. We see learning in all sorts of reflex arcs that get over-triggered and thus become downregulated. So the fact that the fly "learned" to be more sensitive to noxious stimuli does not rule out a reflex mechanism at play in its behavior.
    - Retric 7y ago
      Down regulated withdrawal reflex is the opposite of avoidance behavior. It’s effectively increasing an organism’s tolerance for putting it’s limb in fire. So, no what you’re describing does not mean learning to avoid stimulus. Learned avoidance behavior really requires a negative perception not just a neutral reflexive one.
      - hackinthebochs 7y ago
        I'm not sure why you're giving my comments such an obtuse reading. My example was to show how learning can happen in a reflex network, thus undermining your claim that learning indicates conscious experience. The issue here is regarding the capabilities of a reflex network. I have established that learning can happen in such networks, as shown by common examples. You have not established that learning avoidance behaviors requires conscious networks.
        Retric 7y ago
        Because you don’t seem to understand the difference between learning avoidance and reducing sensitivity. (If you notice my first comment I specifically referred to learned avoidance not simply any kind of learning.) Reflexive behavior is a predefined response to a stimulus over some predefined limit and thus on it’s own it’s reactive not predictive. In a purely neutral context there is no reason to increase the response based on the external stimulus. Avoidance requires the ability to predict before a negative response occurs. Without the negative association there is no impetus to increase avoidance. Aka, don’t put your hand in fire is inherently different than how quickly you remove your hand from fire. PS: Reducing sensitivity with exposure is a rather different thing as it helps deal with edge cases. At a meta level, strong constant uncontrollable spasms is extremely unlikely to be an ideal response to a given stimulus.

YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago

>> My point was that reacting to noxious stimuli does not a priori require the conscious experience of pain (which includes a suffering component). Like Retric says, this leaves open the question of how noxious stimuli (thanks) lead to avoidance behaviours, if they are not unpleasant. My explanation is that the unpleasant sensation of pain makes the animal try and avoid the stimulus that causes the pain. What is the alternative? Edit: also, why most animals but not insects? What is different about insects?

hackinthebochs 7y ago
>this leaves open the question of how noxious stimuli (thanks) lead to avoidance behaviours, if they are not unpleasant. It triggers networks that are designed to cause avoidance behaviors, for example the withdraw reflex[1]. Reflex networks do not require any conscious experience of the stimuli that triggers the specific action. >why most animals but not insects? What is different about insects? The size of the set of possible unique behaviors, complexity of brain, existence of higher order brain processes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_reflex