Animal Minds

Purpose of Website

To collect observations and anecdotes of possible intelligent behaviour by animals and present them for consideration.

To reason whether these behaviours are indicative of intelligence.

Phase 1

Until we have sufficient contributions, we'd be guessing at the best layout for this website.

Phase 1 is to get to 1,000 contributors and then decide. If only...

Rationale

Evolution determines structure and brains evolved. The tools limit how they can be used. Any subsequent changes in how the brain works in different species, will have arisen from the same building blocks. Not just the cells, or the chemical and electrical method of signalling through them, but the patterns of thought themselves. We may have some common ground with how animals think.

Ecology probably determines what brains are used for. Random changes may develop in different environments and processes in common with other species may fade if they are not needed, creating a different mind. There may be thoughts we do not have, just as we may have thoughts which animals do not have.

If there are aspects which species have inherited through evolution, this belief could be supported, if we could determine tests to recognise those thought processes. Then attach our results to the evolutionary tree and reason why and how they developed.

If each ecological niche drives the need for what a mind does, might the same needs be solved in different ways. Might a jaguar and a tiger, both solitary big cats which hunt in a jungle, have different solutions and therefore behaviours. If we can see such differences, what does that say about how the mind, all minds, change in reasonable steps?

Is a zebra closer to a wildebeest with whom it travels, or an elephant, which also has strong family bonds? Why? How?

What is the big difference with us? Once it was that animals cannot communicate. Even zebras have different calls for different things. We know there is a big difference, but be precise.

Approach

The expectation is that there will be a lot of learning to do, particularly amongst those who are most interested. Isn't that diplomatic!

To achieve evidence, which the world would believe, any behaviour would be a clearly demonstrable trait for that species. It might be that many animals do not have it, but many animals would.

The first problem is, intelligent behaviour is probably not random behaviour which is sometimes right. Neither is it acting on cues. Although it might be and there might be things in there which later, with hindsight, support an idea. The problem isn't the worthyness of an observation, but helping people understand science better.

The second problem is, to find gold we are looking for flashes in the pan. If it was easy it would have been done already. We need numbers to prove something, but somebody has to speak first. Many can look for the same behaviour, once they know what they are looking for and how.

The solution is to accept any anecdote. That doesn't mean it is science.

If a trait gets widespread support AND it cannot be explained away AND it makes sense, then it's still not science.

However it's a start. Greater minds could then take interest.

Your Contribution

If you are reading this page, you are probably an observer of animals. If you interact with animals, you will have anecdotes, either your own, or second hand. Please share, because when you put it into words, others will say, "My animal too!". Patterns will emerge which currently we are missing.

Answer the why questions. For example, when a dog is surrounded by people who are loving and cuddling it, why might it appear withdrawn, lonely and missing someone? Why months later does it look intensely into the distance and is then overjoyed by their return? Any observation deserves an explanation. What does it mean?

Consider the map idea. Instead of going from a behaviour which has to be first observed, to what might it mean, could we start with the adjectives with which we describe behaviour. Then devise scenarios to see if each behaviour is present or even just look harder, by knowing what to look for. If evolution or the environment shape the mind, those same behaviours should be present across species, but perhaps no longer necessary so rarely seen. Animals might have capabilities, but lack the stimulus to display or develop them. We could end up with collections of adjectives and behaviours, which describe how each species thinks and with which, we could track the development of the mind, our mind even, across evolution. We could know what it is to be human.

The scientific quest needs deep thought. Sound reasoning and repeatable observations, are not reliable as science. I do not eat because I arrive home, no matter how many times you see me rush to the cake tin. Cause and effect require an explanation which itself is testable. That's the route in which science could take our mere collection of anecdotes and ideas. That route is as open to your flash of inspiration as anybody's.

Finally, are we doing this right? What could we improve? A Kindle has been written to inspire support and empower laypeople who collectively have more access to animals than the few scientiests studying them. Therefore their insights and beliefs need to be captured and presented. Since we are looking for something rare, we need to share what we see. This is an opportunity for a large scale collaboration.

Key Message to Take Away

Reason not status. Science has always advanced through ideas, but been held back by status and deference. The Royal Society's nullius in verba, take no-one's word for it, once battled against religion. Today we battle against anthropomorphising. Science will shine through, once we ask the questions, without being condemned.