On Aims and Methods of Cognitive Ethology Author(S): Dale Jamieson

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

On Aims and Methods of Cognitive Ethology Author(S): Dale Jamieson On Aims and Methods of Cognitive Ethology Author(s): Dale Jamieson and Marc Bekoff Source: PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. 1992, Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers (1992), pp. 110-124 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Philosophy of Science Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/192828 . Accessed: 26/01/2011 07:47 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press and Philosophy of Science Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. http://www.jstor.org On Aims and Methods of Cognitive Ethology1 Dale Jamieson and Marc Bekoff University of Colorado 1. Introduction In 1963 Niko Tinbergenpublished a paper, "On Aims and Methods of Ethology," dedicated to his friend Konrad Lorenz. This essay is a landmarkin the development of ethology. Here Tinbergen defines ethology as "the biological study of behavior" and seeks to demonstratethe "close affinity between Ethology and the rest of Biology" (p. 411). Building on Huxley (1942), Tinbergen identifies four major prob- lems of ethology: causation, survival value, evolution, and ontogeny. Concern with these problems, under different names (mechanism, adaptation,phylogeny, and devel- opment), has dominated the study of animal behavior during the last half century (Dawkins, et al. 1991; Dewsbury 1992). With his emphasis on the importance of innate structuresinternal to animals, Tinbergen was resolutely antibehaviorist. Yet he remained hostile to the idea that ethology should employ any form of teleological reasoning or make reference to "subjective phenomena" such as "hunger"or the emotions. He wrote that teleological reasoning was "seriously hampering the progress of ethology" and that "[b]ecause subjective phenomena cannot be observed objectively in animals, it is idle to either claim or to deny their existence" (1951, p. 4). Since the 1976 publication of Donald Griffin's landmarkbook, The Question of Animal Awareness, a growing band of researchershas been attempting to study the cognitive states of nonhuman animals (for samples of this work see Bekoff & Jamieson 1990, and Ristau 1991). Although vigorous debate surroundsthis research, cognitive ethology as a field has not yet been clearly delineated, adequately character- ized, or sufficiently explained. Our goal in this paper is to attempt for cognitive ethology what Tinbergen succeed- ed in doing for ethology: to clarify its aims and methods, to distinguish some of its va- rieties, and to defend the fruitfulness of the research strategies that it has spawned. This paper is divided into five main parts. In the first part we briefly sketch the history of ethology and explain the motivation behind the cognitive turn. Next we discuss the groundbreakingwork of Donald Griffin and the rise of cognitive ethology. PSA 1992, Volume 2, pp. 110-124 Copyright ? 1993 by the Philosophy of Science Association 111 In the third section we distinguish two varieties of cognitive ethology ("weak" and "strong")and provide some reasons for preferring the latter to the former. The fourth part of the paper is a discussion of one area of research in cognitive ethology: social play. Finally we make some concluding remarks. 2. The Story of Animal Behavior During the third quarterof the nineteenth century, Charles Darwin was the most importantcontributor to the foundations of animal behavior (Boakes 1984, Richards 1987). Darwin argued for mental continuity between humans and other animals, and claimed that "the lower animals, like man, manifestly feel pleasure and pain, happi- ness, and misery"(Darwin 1871, p. 448).3 According to Darwin monkeys are capable of elaborate deceit (1896), insects can solve problems, and many animals can deliber- ate about what to do (1871, 1896). Darwin's approach can be characterized as "anecdotal cognitivism." He attributed cognitive states to many animals on the basis of observation of particularcases rather than controlled experiments or manipulations. Darwin's follower, George Romanes, followed in the this tradition although he was more critical than Darwin of various cognitive attributionsto nonhuman animals. Even Lloyd Morgan, mainly remem- bered for his canon-"in no case may we interpretan action as the outcome of the ex- ercise of a higher psychical faculty, if it can be interpretedas the outcome of the exer- cise of one which stands lower in the psychological scale" (Morgan 1894, p. 53)-ac- cepted the Darwin-Romanes view of the continuity of mental states. Indeed, as Rollin (1989) points out, Morgan's canon is not only consistent with the view that animals have mental states, it actually presupposes it. Behaviorism arose in part as an attempt to overcome the anecdotal approach and to bring rigor to the study of behavior. Controlled experiments ratherthan field ob- servations provided the primary data, and basic concepts were supposed to be ground- ed in direct observation. Against this background, animal consciousness came to be seen as "... mystical, unscientific, unnecessary, obscure, and not amenable to study"(Rollin 1989, p. 68). Jacques Loeb, who was active from about 1890-1915, was an influential forerun- ner of behaviorism in biology. Although he believed that consciousness was an emer- gent propertyof higher organisms, he argued that all animal behavior could be ex- plained nonteleologically in terms of tropisms (Pauly 1987). Throughoutthe 1920s, with the work of Watson and others, behaviorism became increasingly influential. By 1930 the behaviorist revolution was complete and anecdotal cognitivism had virtually vanished from mainstream science. Classical ethology developed in Europe with the work of Lorenz and Tinbergen, and arrived in America in the post-World War II period (although as Dewsbury 1992 points out, there were contacts before the war). The roots of classical ethology were in the investigations of Darwin, Charles Otis Whitman, and Oskar Heinroth. Classical ethology signified a return to some of the ideas of Darwin and the early anecdotal cognitivists, especially in its appeals to evolutionary theory, the close asso- ciation with natural history, and the reliance on anecdote and anthropomorphismin motivating more rigorous study. Lorenz, who was trained as a physician, comparative anatomist, psychologist and philosopher, did little fieldwork but his knowledge of animal behavior was enormous. His method was to watch various animals, both domestic and wild, who lived near his 112 homes in Austria and Germany. He freely used anecdotes and did very little experi- mentation. Lorenz thought that empathy, intuition and emotion were importantin un- derstandinganimals and that science should not be pursued "in the belief that it is possible to be objective by ignoring one's feelings" (Lorenz 1988/1991, p. 7). He at- tributedto animals such states as love, jealousy, envy, and anger. Tinbergencomplemented Lorenz's naturalistic and anecdotal approaches by doing elegant, simple and usually relatively noninvasive field experiments. Tinbergen also worked with Lorenz on several classical problems, including egg-rolling in geese. Theoretically what was most importantabout Lorenz and Tinbergen was the em- phasis they placed on internal states such as "instincts," "drives," "motivationalim- pulses" and "outwardflowing nervous energy." On their view behavior is typically caused by internal states; external stimuli mainly release or block behavior. This em- phasis on internal states was in sharpcontrast with the behaviorist tradition. However by 1973 when Lorenz and Tinbergen were awarded the Nobel Prize (shared with Karl von Frisch), many thought that their grand theory was already in tatters (Kennedy 1992). As early as 1968 Patrick Bateson wrote that "[w]orship of the old gods and the intellectual baggage that went with it still survives quaintly in odd corers. But for the most part proponents of a Grand Theory have either been forced to close their eyes to awkward evidence or modify their ideas to the point of unfalsifiability" (p. 33). Marian Dawkins has written that "[m]ost contemporarytext- books on animal behaviour tend to dismiss 'instinct' altogether and attempt to consign it to honorable retirement"(Dawkins 1986, p. 67). In recent years no grand theory has arisen to replace the Lorenz-Tinbergentheory of instinct.
Recommended publications
  • Animal Welfare and the Paradox of Animal Consciousness
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Animal Welfare and the Paradox of Animal Consciousness Marian Dawkins1 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 1Corresponding author: e-mail address: [email protected] Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Animal Consciousness: The Heart of the Paradox 2 2.1 Behaviorism Applies to Other People Too 5 3. Human Emotions and Animals Emotions 7 3.1 Physiological Indicators of Emotion 7 3.2 Behavioral Components of Emotion 8 3.2.1 Vacuum Behavior 10 3.2.2 Rebound 10 3.2.3 “Abnormal” Behavior 10 3.2.4 The Animal’s Point of View 11 3.2.5 Cognitive Bias 15 3.2.6 Expressions of the Emotions 15 3.3 The Third Component of Emotion: Consciousness 16 4. Definitions of Animal Welfare 24 5. Conclusions 26 References 27 1. INTRODUCTION Consciousness has always been both central to and a stumbling block for animal welfare. On the one hand, the belief that nonhuman animals suffer and feel pain is what draws many people to want to study animal welfare in the first place. Animal welfare is seen as fundamentally different from plant “welfare” or the welfare of works of art precisely because of the widely held belief that animals have feelings and experience emotions in ways that plants or inanimate objectsdhowever valuableddo not (Midgley, 1983; Regan, 1984; Rollin, 1989; Singer, 1975). On the other hand, consciousness is also the most elusive and difficult to study of any biological phenomenon (Blackmore, 2012; Koch, 2004). Even with our own human consciousness, we are still baffled as to how Advances in the Study of Behavior, Volume 47 ISSN 0065-3454 © 2014 Elsevier Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neurobehavioral Nature of Fishes and the Question of Awareness and Pain
    Reprinted with permission from CRC Press. 2000 NW Corporate Blvd. Boca Raton, FL 33431, USA Tel: 1(800)272-7737 http://www.crcpress.com 2.1. Reviews in Fisheries Science, 10(1): 1–38 (2002) The Neurobehavioral Nature of Fishes and the Question of Awareness and Pain James D. Rose Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071 * Send correspondence to: Dr. James D. Rose, Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071. e-mail: [email protected] 1064-1262 /02/$.50 ©2002 by CRC Press LLC ABSTRACT: This review examines the neurobehavioral nature of fishes and addresses the question of whether fishes are capable of experiencing pain and suffering. The detrimental effects of anthropomorphic thinking and the importance of an evolutionary perspective for understanding the neurobehavioral differences between fishes and humans are discussed. The differences in central nervous system structure that underlie basic neurobehavioral differences between fishes and humans are described. The literature on the neural basis of consciousness and of pain is reviewed, showing that: (1) behavioral responses to noxious stimuli are separate from the psychological experience of pain, (2) awareness of pain in humans depends on functions of specific regions of cerebral cortex, and (3) fishes lack these essential brain regions or any functional equivalent, making it untenable that they can experience pain. Because the experience of fear, similar to pain, depends on cerebral cortical structures that are absent from fish brains, it is concluded that awareness of fear is impossible for fishes. Although it is implausible that fishes can experience pain or emotions, they display robust, nonconscious, neuroendocrine, and physiological stress responses to noxious stimuli.
    [Show full text]
  • Mental States in Animals: Cognitive Ethology Jacques Vauclair
    Mental states in animals: cognitive ethology Jacques Vauclair This artHe addresses the quegtion of mentaJ states in animak as viewed in ‘cognitive ethology”. In effect, thk field of research aims at studying naturally occurring behaviours such as food caching, individual recognition, imitation, tool use and communication in wild animals, in order to seek for evidence of mental experiences, self-aw&&reness and intentional@. Cognitive ethologists use some philosophical cencepts (e.g., the ‘intentional stance’) to carry out their programme of the investigation of natural behaviours. A comparison between cognitive ethology and other approaches to the investigation of cognitive processes in animals (e.g., experimental animal psychology) helps to point out the strengths and weaknesses of cognitive ethology. Moreover, laboratory attempts to analyse experimentally Mentional behaviours such as deception, the relationship between seeing and knowing, as well as the ability of animals to monitor their own states of knowing, suggest that cognitive ethology could benefit significantly from the conceptual frameworks and methods of animal cognitive psychology. Both disciplines could, in fact, co&ribute to the understanding of which cognitive abilities are evolutionary adaptations. T he term ‘cognirive ethology’ (CE) was comed by that it advances a purposive or Intentional interpretation Griffin in The Question ofAnimd Au~aarmess’ and later de- for activities which are a mixture of some fixed genetically veloped in other publications’ ‘_ Although Griffin‘s IS’6 transmitred elements with more hexible behaviour?. book was first a strong (and certainly salutary) reacrion (Cognitive ethologists USC conceptual frameworks against the inhibitions imposed by strict behaviourism in provided by philosophers (such as rhe ‘intentional stance’)“.
    [Show full text]
  • Intentional Systems in Cognitive Ethology: the "Panglossian Paradigm" Defended
    THE BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (1983) 6, 343-390 Printed in the United States of America Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: The "Panglossian paradigm" defended Daniel C. Dennett Department of Philosophy, Tufts University, Medford, Mass. 02155 Abstract: Ethologists and others studying animal behavior in a "cognitive" spirit are in need of a descriptive language and method that are neither anachronistically bound by behaviorist scruples nor prematurely committed to particular "information-processing models. "Just such an interim descriptive method can be found in intentional system theory. The use of intentional system theory is illustrated with the case of the apparently communicative behavior of vervet monkeys. A way of using the theory to generate data - including usable, testable "anecdotal" data - is sketched. The underlying assumptions of this approach can be seen to ally it directly with "adaptationist' theorizing in evolutionary biology, which has recently come under attack from Stephen Gould and Richard Lewontin, who castigate it as the "Panglossian paradigm." Their arguments, which are strongly analogous to B. F. Skinner's arguments against "mentalism," point to certain pitfalls that attend the careless exercise of such "Panglossian" thinking (and rival varieties of thinking as well), but do not constitute a fundamental objection to either adaptationist theorizing or its cousin, intentional system theory. Keywords: adaptation; animal cognition; behaviorism; cognitive ethology; communication; comparative psychology; consciousness;
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Ethology: Theory Or Poetry?
    Cognitive ethology: Theory or poetry? Jonathan Bennett from Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (1983), pp. 356–358. Comments on Daniel Dennett, ‘Intentional Systems in Cognitive Ethology: the “Panglossian Paradigm” defended’. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (1983), pp. 343–345. Dennett is perhaps the most interesting, fertile, and chal- I take it as uncontroversial that the intentional stance— lenging philosopher of mind on the contemporary scene, and considered as a program for theorizing about behavior—must I count myself among his grateful admirers. But this present be centered on the idea that beliefs are functions from desires paper of his, enjoyable as it is to read, and acceptable as to behavior, and that desires are functions from beliefs to its conclusions are, is likely to do more harm than good. behavior. Down in the foundations, then, we need some Some will object that the intentional stance is a dead end; theory about what behavior must be like to be reasonably but I think, as Dennett does, that it is premature to turn interpreted as manifesting beliefs and desires; and these our backs on explanations of animal behavior in terms of concepts must presumably tail off somehow, being strongly desires and beliefs, and I am in favor of continuing with applicable to men and apes, less strongly to monkeys, and this endeavor; but only if it gets some structure, only if it so on down to animals that do not have beliefs and desires is guided by some firm underlying theory. That is what but can be described in terms of weaker analogues of those the ethologists might get from philosophy, but Dennett has notions.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthrozoology and Sharks, Looking at How Human-Shark Interactions Have Shaped Human Life Over Time
    Anthrozoology and Public Perception: Humans and Great White Sharks (Carchardon carcharias) on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA Jessica O’Toole A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Marine Affairs University of Washington 2020 Committee: Marc L. Miller, Chair Vincent F. Gallucci Program Authorized to Offer Degree School of Marine and Environmental Affairs © Copywrite 2020 Jessica O’Toole 2 University of Washington Abstract Anthrozoology and Public Perception: Humans and Great White Sharks (Carchardon carcharias) on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA Jessica O’Toole Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Dr. Marc L. Miller School of Marine and Environmental Affairs Anthrozoology is a relatively new field of study in the world of academia. This discipline, which includes researchers ranging from social studies to natural sciences, examines human-animal interactions. Understanding what affect these interactions have on a person’s perception of a species could be used to create better conservation strategies and policies. This thesis uses a mixed qualitative methodology to examine the public perception of great white sharks on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. While the area has a history of shark interactions, a shark related death in 2018 forced many people to re-evaluate how they view sharks. Not only did people express both positive and negative perceptions of the animals but they also discussed how the attack caused them to change their behavior in and around the ocean. Residents also acknowledged that the sharks were not the only problem living in the ocean. They often blame seals for the shark attacks, while also claiming they are a threat to the fishing industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 10: Animal Theory of Mind and Deception
    PS452 Intelligent Behaviour Lecture 10: Animal Theory of Mind and Deception Maxwell J Roberts Department of Psychology University of Essex www.tubemapcentral.com version date: 19/11/2019 Part 3: Intelligent Behaviour in Animals • Lecture 7: Animal Intelligence Tests Measuring animal cognitive capacity • Learning and logic between species • The ubiquitous g factor • Lecture 8: Tools, Puzzles, Beliefs, and Intentions Complex interactions with objects • Natural tool use • Understanding the properties of objects 2 Part 3: Intelligent Behaviour in Animals • Lecture 9: Animal Communication Mindless signals or deliberate acts • Natural communication • Taught language in the laboratory • Lecture 10: Animal Theory of Mind and Deception In search of proto-modules • Animal (lack of) awareness of other minds • Social versus non-social origins of general intelligence 3 Lecture 10: Animal Theory of Mind & Deception • 10.1 Theory of Mind: A Tool for Deception • Theory of Mind and modularity • Evidence for Theory of Mind in animals • 10.2 The Special Case of Deception • Deception in the wild • Primate deception in the wild • Deception in the laboratory • Return of the crows • 10.3 Evaluation: Theory of Mind & Deception 4 Lecture 10: Animal Theory of Mind & Deception • 10.4 The Origins of General Intelligence? • 10.5 Animal, Human, and Machine Intelligence 5 10.1 Theory of Mind: A Tool for Deception • Theory of Mind: A popular concept in child psychology • The assumption that other beings are intentional systems and have mental states, including: Knowledge
    [Show full text]
  • The Cognitive Animal Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives on Animal Cognition
    This PDF includes a chapter from the following book: The Cognitive Animal Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives on Animal Cognition © 2002 Massachusetts Institute of Technology License Terms: Made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ OA Funding Provided By: The open access edition of this book was made possible by generous funding from Arcadia—a charitable fund of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin. The title-level DOI for this work is: doi:10.7551/mitpress/1885.001.0001 Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/books/edited-volume/chapter-pdf/677472/9780262268028_f000000.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 Introduction There are as many approaches to studying ani- and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and mal cognition as there are definitions of cogni- Animals (1872). Consequently, both disciplines tion itself. This diversity is reflected in the essays are almost inextricably linked to the concept of that follow, to a degree that we believe is un- instinct. Darwin viewed instinct primarily in be- paralleled in any other volume that has been havioral terms and considered his ability to ex- produced on this subject. This diversity is philo- plain instinct through natural selection to be one sophical and methodological, with contributors of the most critical tests of his theories. Thus he demonstrating various degrees of acceptance or compared closely related species of bees to ex- disdain for terms such as ‘‘consciousness’’ and plain the evolution of hive building and closely various degrees of concern for the rigors of lab- related species of ants to explain the origins of oratory experimentation versus the validity of slave making.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Introduction
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. 1 Introduction Whether signals are reliable or deceptive has been a central question in the study of animal communication in recent years. The crux of the issue is whether animal signals are honest, in the sense of conveying reliable informa­ tion from signaler to receiver, or deceitful, in the sense of conveying unreliable information, the falsity of which somehow benefits the signaler. This issue arises in a variety of contexts. When a male courts a female, do his signals honestly convey his quality relative to other males? Or does he exaggerate his quality in order to win over females that would otherwise choose some other male? When one animal signals aggressively in a contest over a resource, does the signaler honestly convey its likelihood of attack? Or does the signaler exaggerate that likelihood in order to intimidate competitors that would other­ wise defeat him? The question of reliability versus deceit arises even in interac­ tions that, on the face of things, seem to be predominantly cooperative. When an offspring begs for food from its parents, does it honestly convey its level of need? Or does the offspring exaggerate its need in order to get more food than the parents would otherwise provide? The issue of reliability and deceit in animal communication resonates with humanobservers for a variety of reasons. One is that the occurrence of deceit is fraught with moral implications.
    [Show full text]
  • Donald Griffin Was Able to Affect a Major Revolution in What Scien- Tists Do and Think About the Cognition of Nonhuman Ani- Mals
    NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES DONALD R. GRIFFIN 1915– 2003 A Biographical Memoir by CHARLES G. GROSS Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. Biographical Memoirs, VOLUME 86 PUBLISHED 2005 BY THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS WASHINGTON, D.C. DONALD R. GRIFFIN August 3, 1915–November 7, 2003 BY CHARLES G. GROSS OST SCIENTISTS SEEK—but never attain—two goals. The M first is to discover something so new as to have been previously inconceivable. The second is to radically change the way the natural world is viewed. Don Griffin did both. He discovered (with Robert Galambos) a new and unique sensory world, echolocation, in which bats can perceive their surroundings by listening to echoes of ultrasonic sounds that they produce. In addition, he brought the study of animal consciousness back from the limbo of forbidden topics to make it a central subject in the contemporary study of brain and behavior. EARLY YEARS Donald R. (Redfield) Griffin was born in Southampton, New York, but spent his early childhood in an eighteenth- century farmhouse in a rural area near Scarsdale, New York. His father, Henry Farrand Griffin, was a serious amateur historian and novelist, who worked as a reporter and in advertising before retiring early to pursue his literary inter- ests. His mother, Mary Whitney Redfield, read to him so much that his father feared for his ability to learn to read. His favorite books were Ernest Thompson Seton’s animal 3 4 BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIRS stories and the National Geographic Magazine’s Mammals of North America.
    [Show full text]
  • Bees, Brains and Behaviour: a Philosophical Essay in Theoretical Biology
    Bees, Brains and Behaviour: A Philosophical Essay In Theoretical Biology Phiilip A Veldhuis A thesis submiaed to the Fucully of Graduate Studies in parLial Fulflment of the requirementsfor the dcgree of Miasters of Arts Department of Phcüoophy Unntetssiry of Manit00 Wh@%, Manitoba National Library Bibliothèque nationale u*u of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliogmphic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellingtûn Street 395, rue Weilington Ottawa ON KiA ON4 OnawaON K1AW canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of ttus thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propnéte du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fkom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES ***** COPYRIGHT PERMISSION PAGE Bees, Bths and Bebaviow: A PMiosophicd Essay in Theoreoeil Biology PhUp A Veldhuis A Thtsio/Pncticum rubmitteà to the Ficulty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial MfWment of the requirements of the dcgm of Master of Arts Permission bu ben grrnted to the Libnry of Tk Univeriity of Manitoba to lend or aell copier of thb thcdilpncticum, to the National Lmriry of Canada to microfilm this thcris and to lend or cdl copies of the lilm, and to Disaertidons Abstractr International to pubürh an abstnct of this thaidpridcpm.
    [Show full text]
  • "DO DOGS APE?" OR "DO APES DOG?" and DOES Rr MATTER? BROADENING and DEEPENING COGNITIVE ETHOLOGY
    "DO DOGS APE?" OR "DO APES DOG?" AND DOES rr MATTER? BROADENING AND DEEPENING COGNITIVE ETHOLOGY By MA~c BEKOFF4' "Certainlyit seems like a dirty double-cross to enter into a relationshipof trust and affection with any creaturethat can enter into such a relationship, and then to be a party to'its premeditated and premature destruction."1 I. RAiN WrrHouT TmmDER, ANimAS Wrrour MINDS In Rain Without Thunder, Gary Francione raises numerous impor- tant issues and takes on many important people.2 The phrase "rain with- out thunder" made me think about the notion of animals without minds- animals without thoughts or feelings. This idea is troublesome for the nonhuman animals (hereafter animals) to whom it is attributed because it is much easier for humans to exploit animals when we believe that they don't have thoughts or feelings. I have been privileged to study various aspects of animal behavior for over 25 years, including animal cognition3 (cognitive ethology), and have attempted to learn more about how the study of animal cognition can aid discussions of animal protection. 4 As a * Professor of Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder;, A.B. and PILD., Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri; Guggenheim Fellow and Fellow of the Animal Behavior Soci- ety; Correspondence: Marc Bekoff, 296 Canyonside Drive, Boulder, Colorado 80302; Emaih [email protected] 1 LAWRENCE E. JoHNsoN, A MORALLY DEEP WoRLD: AN E.sxe*ON MORAL SIGNIFICANCE AND ENvmonwNAL ETmcs 122 (1991). 2 GARY L. FPNtcioNE, RAiN WmoUr TnuDER TIE IDEOLOGY OF mm.EAn,,AL RPiurrs MovmiErr (1996). 3 INTERPRrrATION AND EXPLANATION IN T-E STUDY OF Amm- Bcsxion (Marc Bekoff & Dale Jamieson eds., 1990); READINGS 1N AmAL COGNMON (Marc Bekoff & Dale Jamieson eds., 1996); Marc Bekoff & Colin Allen, Cognitive Ethology: Slayers, Skeptics, and Propo- nents, in ANmRoPoiORPmS.e ANscDoTE, ANzmms: TuE EMpERiO's NEW CLOTnts? 313 (Rob- ert W.
    [Show full text]