The World without Religion

If you wish to affirm that many species are self-aware, I will grant that provisionally. My contention is that consciousness has to be a threshold and not a continuum. The reason is that it is not possible for a being to be aware of something else but not aware of itself. And once you are aware of yourself you are aware that there is an environment outside of the "me." You are able to separate the "me" from the not-me. Indeed, you might be confused about whether your paws, say, are part of your body or not, but that makes no difference. What you are aware of is your "self," not necessarily your body. You may not know what any of these things are outside the self--it makes no difference for full consciousness to be. So dogs could have self-awareness and still not recognize the figure in the mirror, but the reason is that they don't know what mirrors do, not that they don't have a sense of self.But what is it that this being of whatever species can do if he has self-awareness? All sorts of things. For example, he can remember (indeed, without memory there would be no sense of self). But not only that. If he can remember he has a sense of time and if he has a sense of time he can visualize the future and know that that is what he's doing. Self-awareness opens all mental doors. That is why consciousness is a threshold.But since we cannot look into a dog's mind to know for sure what is going in there, we can ask ourselves, looking from the outside, what is that animals lack that humans have that creates the vast differences in their abilities? The answer is language, by which I mean the ability create sentences you have never heard before. My contention here is that language is dependent on self-awareness.

Could it be that you, John, are engaging in a sentimentality about your pets (I share the feeling)? If they are self-aware, then what is missing from their brains? Why do they not do what people do? You know something that all little kids do? They draw pictures. Why don't dogs do this? You might say, they are not physically equipped, but they could do it in a doggy way. They could draw little pictures with their paws in the mud. Why don't they do this? What is missing from their make-up?I think what is missing is mentality. You tell me.Quetzal, if dogs are not self-aware and chimps are, does that not suggest a sudden break rather than a continuum? Do chimps draw pictures?Zipzip, is it a difference in kind or a difference in degree? You seem a little equivocal on the subject, unless i misunderstand you.[This message has been edited by robinrohan, 12-06-2002]

John, my example about drawing pictures was meant to indicate a crucial difference between dogs and humans. Drawing pictures is an indication of the ability to abstract--in other words, to think symbolically. The picture is a symbol of the reality. This is a characteristic of human thought. If you point your finger at something you want your dog to pay attention to, the dog will sniff your finger, not follow the symbolic line of the pointed finger. For a dog, a finger is a finger, not a pointer.The ability to think symbolically is an indication of the ability to abstract (in fact,it's the same thing). I would also maintain that the ability to abstract is an indication of consciousness.

I'm just wondering what partial self-awareness would consist of. It seems to me that you are either aware of yourself or you are not.

t.[/b][/QUOTE]Human babies aren't self aware, so at some point they cross a threshold & become self aware, surely? Zap, just like that!Mark[/B][/QUOTE]Yes, I think the develop of consciousness in babies is sudden. We don't remember anything that happened to us before age 3 or so and the reason is possibly that we are unconscious. Once consciousness sets in, so does memory. My earliest memory is of a fire--our house burned down. I was 3 years old. I have another memory, not too long thereafter, of sitting on a porch in somebody's lap with a heavily bandaged leg (the scar is there today). From my own experience, this leads me to suggest tentatively that perhaps it takes a traumatic event to spring us into consciousness. I think that would be a good "study" for someone to undertake. Of course, sometimes we are mistaken about our memories, but I'm pretty sure about these.

Apparently, John, you were either unconscious or intermittently conscious. Perhaps something happened that wiped those memories out.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by John:As it is, it is impossible to determine whether a person or thing is conscious.
[/B][/QUOTE]Except for ourselves of course.I suppose we could say that an insect might be conscious. I assume not. Are you saying there is no evidence for concluding that a bug is unconscious?

I am not trying to rule out everything but humans necessarily. If you want to say chimps are conscious, fine. I have no problem with that. I would be more convinced if they had language.My point is that consciousness is a threshold and that any consciousness at all is full consciousness.Is there no way to examine a bug's brain and see if they have the right make-up for consciousness? Is there some attribute of the brain that denotes consciousness?[This message has been edited by robinrohan, 12-12-2002]