I’m not completely sure animals have consciousness, although I think it’s likely they do, and, if they don’t, we don’t need to worry about them. So it seems like we should try to look into that before we look into helping them directly.
I think it’s worth pointing out that requiring absolute certainty before we care about animal welfare sets an unreasonably high bar. This standard implies that animals should be treated as non-conscious until definitively proven otherwise, which is a highly questionable position given the current scientific consensus.
We humans are animals, and given the evolutionary continuity and the similarities in brain structure and function between humans and many non-human species, it would actually be quite surprising if other animals weren’t conscious. The burden of proof should rest on those claiming that animals lack consciousness, not the other way around.
“The weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Non-human animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.”
The New York Declaration reaffirms and extends this, concluding that:
“First, there is strong scientific support for attributions of conscious experience to other mammals and to birds.
Second, the empirical evidence indicates at least a realistic possibility of conscious experience in all vertebrates (including reptiles, amphibians, and fishes) and many invertebrates (including, at minimum, cephalopod mollusks, decapod crustaceans, and insects).”
Given all this, delaying action until we reach 100% certainty is both morally and scientifically unjustified.
I’m not looking for absolute certainty regarding animal consciousness, but currently I feel like I still really don’t know if some animals have consciousness or not. Part of the issue is that I have a fairly specific perspective on the nature of consciousness. My perspective suggests that animals could easily lack consciousness while still reacting negatively to physical pain, and showing signs of emotions like happiness and sadness. I think consciousness is something more specific than all of that. I think it means something that a lot of scientists think animals have consciousness, but I’d need a lot more specific information about human brains and animal brains in order to decide that I think it is likely that animals have consciousness. However, if you happen to know of any books, or anything else that I could read or watch, that might give me more information on the subject of animal consciousness, and how the human brain experiences consciousness, I would be interested in that.
I also think you and I might be asking somewhat different questions regarding this.
My main question is if we should include animals in our altruistic goals. And, I think, if we were to do that, we would be responsible for all of them. And, since there are so many more of them than us, I think it would be extremely costly, possibly almost to the point of effectively enslaving humanity to the cause. In order for me to support humanity doing that, I would definitely want to see a lot more proof that animals have consciousness.
On the other hand, if the majority of the society that I live in were to decide to ban farming of animals, because they thought humans shouldn’t harm animals, because they might have consciousness, I would have no problem with going along with that, because it doesn’t seem very costly to me. It might even help the environment and improve nutrition.
If the question were if an altruist should donate money to an animal welfare charity, rather than a charity that helps humans, I would encourage that person to donate to the charity for humans instead, because I don’t think there is clear enough evidence that animals have consciousness. And also because I think we’ll likely get better information in the future that will help us decide that, and also let us more effectively help the animals, if needed.
Do you have any opinions on the other parts of my post?
Do you think if we wanted to include animals, we should consider ourselves responsible for all of them, or do you think maybe we should focus on just not harming them?
Do you think it would be as costly as I think it would be to include the animals in our altruistic goals?
Do you think in order to help them most effectively, it would be useful to figure out which species have consciousness, and how happy or unhappy they tend to be, or not really?
Do you think it might be reasonable to try to change the numbers of animals of different species so that there are more of longer-living, happier species? Or do you think that’s not a good way to improve the welfare of animals?
I think it’s worth pointing out that requiring absolute certainty before we care about animal welfare sets an unreasonably high bar. This standard implies that animals should be treated as non-conscious until definitively proven otherwise, which is a highly questionable position given the current scientific consensus.
We humans are animals, and given the evolutionary continuity and the similarities in brain structure and function between humans and many non-human species, it would actually be quite surprising if other animals weren’t conscious. The burden of proof should rest on those claiming that animals lack consciousness, not the other way around.
Both the Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness (2012) and the New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness (2024) reflect this view. The Cambridge Declaration states unequivocally:
The New York Declaration reaffirms and extends this, concluding that:
Given all this, delaying action until we reach 100% certainty is both morally and scientifically unjustified.
Thank you for the response.
I’m not looking for absolute certainty regarding animal consciousness, but currently I feel like I still really don’t know if some animals have consciousness or not. Part of the issue is that I have a fairly specific perspective on the nature of consciousness. My perspective suggests that animals could easily lack consciousness while still reacting negatively to physical pain, and showing signs of emotions like happiness and sadness. I think consciousness is something more specific than all of that. I think it means something that a lot of scientists think animals have consciousness, but I’d need a lot more specific information about human brains and animal brains in order to decide that I think it is likely that animals have consciousness. However, if you happen to know of any books, or anything else that I could read or watch, that might give me more information on the subject of animal consciousness, and how the human brain experiences consciousness, I would be interested in that.
I also think you and I might be asking somewhat different questions regarding this.
My main question is if we should include animals in our altruistic goals. And, I think, if we were to do that, we would be responsible for all of them. And, since there are so many more of them than us, I think it would be extremely costly, possibly almost to the point of effectively enslaving humanity to the cause. In order for me to support humanity doing that, I would definitely want to see a lot more proof that animals have consciousness.
On the other hand, if the majority of the society that I live in were to decide to ban farming of animals, because they thought humans shouldn’t harm animals, because they might have consciousness, I would have no problem with going along with that, because it doesn’t seem very costly to me. It might even help the environment and improve nutrition.
If the question were if an altruist should donate money to an animal welfare charity, rather than a charity that helps humans, I would encourage that person to donate to the charity for humans instead, because I don’t think there is clear enough evidence that animals have consciousness. And also because I think we’ll likely get better information in the future that will help us decide that, and also let us more effectively help the animals, if needed.
Do you have any opinions on the other parts of my post?
Do you think if we wanted to include animals, we should consider ourselves responsible for all of them, or do you think maybe we should focus on just not harming them?
Do you think it would be as costly as I think it would be to include the animals in our altruistic goals?
Do you think in order to help them most effectively, it would be useful to figure out which species have consciousness, and how happy or unhappy they tend to be, or not really?
Do you think it might be reasonable to try to change the numbers of animals of different species so that there are more of longer-living, happier species? Or do you think that’s not a good way to improve the welfare of animals?