Sympathy for animals.

[Eiuol]

In other words, what would an Objectivist experiment to test the claim look like?

I don't like the phrase "Objectivist experiment" so much, since there isn't a special Objectivist scientific method. All you could point out is if your means of establishing a fact is consistent with epistemological principles. Anyway, conducting an experiment would probably involve tests similar to tests involving infant cognition. You'd also need an index of which behaviors would require concepts, which is difficult to establish with exact precision given current scientific knowledge. However, given scientific progress and all the other pieces of evidence dream_weaver mentioned, there is reason to believe dolphins aren't conceptual creatures. They may be just before an evolutionary tipping point in the development of a conceptual mind, and simply aren't there just yet.

[Leonid]

Conceptual thinking is not an end in itself. It is a tool to adjust the environment to the sapient being's needs. Animals, who possess only concrete-bound thinking adjust themselves to the environment. So the hall mark of the sapient being would be an active change of his environment, creation of tools etc...

[[email protected]]

@Leonid (#27): Dolphins do actively change their environment and create tools. You can research it yourself or I'm happy to give you supporting links if you can't find them.

@Eiuol (#26): "You'd also need an index of which behaviors would require concepts, which is difficult to establish with exact precision given current scientific knowledge." This has nothing to do with scientific knowledge and everything to do with philosophical clarity. If you tell me that the fact that humans use concepts is an important and relevant distinction between humans and dolphins, I want to know exactly what the distinction is and exactly why that particular distinction is important.

[[email protected]]

@dream_weaver: Dolphins don't have fireside discussions because they live underwater... Who says they don't have thermal vent-side discussions we haven't learned to interpret yet? Dictionaries and symbolic notation are extremely recent in the history of the human species, so I don't see how those can represent something unique in human nature. Some dolphins have arguably domesticated humans from their perspective (they live in symbiotic relationships with them, particularly hunting relationships). Again, the development of the automobile and space travel happened in the last 100 years, so I don't see how saying dolphins haven't done that proves they never could. http://en.wikipedia..../Falsifiability

Edited September 10, 2012 by [email protected]

[Nicky]

@dream_weaver: Dolphins don't have fireside discussions because they live underwater... Who says they don't have thermal vent-side discussions we haven't learned to interpret yet?

Scientists.

[dream_weaver]

@dream_weaver: Dolphins don't have fireside discussions because they live underwater... Who says they don't have thermal vent-side discussions we haven't learned to interpret yet? Dictionaries and symbolic notation are extremely recent in the history of the human species, so I don't see how those can represent something unique in human nature. Some dolphins have arguably domesticated humans from their perspective (they live in symbiotic relationships with them, particularly hunting relationships). Again, the development of the automobile and space travel happened in the last 100 years, so I don't see how saying dolphins haven't done that proves they never could. http://en.wikipedia..../Falsifiability

Missionaries have gone into primitive tribes over the centuries, learned their language and communicated their customs and learned theirs in return. It seems that a species capable of communication desire to have some with others who can do so. In the case of the primitive tribes, once some communication had been established, the tribe was instrumental in helping the missionaries learn and grasp more of their native tongues.

As to your wrap up statement, are you alluding that I suggested this "proves they never could"? I only presented you with evidence that is commensurate with what one can observe, consonant with conceptual beings.

[Eiuol]

If you tell me that the fact that humans use concepts is an important and relevant distinction between humans and dolphins, I want to know exactly what the distinction is and exactly why that particular distinction is important.

Are you asking for scientific evidence that could indicate dolphins or some other species use concepts? Or are you asking why concepts are important as a distinction?

I'm not even saying dolphins not having concepts is proven by their lack of writing system or inventions alone (although that is some evidence), but that their brain structure might not allow for concepts in the first place.

[[email protected]]

@Nicky (#30): link? I can't find any evidence supporting your point and have researched this issue extensively.

@dream_weaver (#31): Right, but I still haven't heard you state a definition of conceptual being that is falsifiable. Let's look to http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/concepts.html. How could one prove that dolphins are not conceptual thinkers according to these definitions? No research I have seen appears inconsistent with them being conceptual thinkers. Could you cite any I may have missed?

[[email protected]]

@Eiuol (#32): No. I am asking for proof that dolphins do not think conceptually or even the outlines of an experiment which might demonstrate whether or not a dolphin thinks conceptually. If you can't even present the latter, then I don't see how the word "concept" as you are using it can refer to anything in reality. Science only works when you have a falsifiable hypothesis (see my above link to the Wikipedia on falsifiability). I feel a bit like I am trying to have a discussion about UFOs with someone who says UFOs frequently visit earth but are impossible to detect because they have advanced stealth technology. For a UFO fanatic like that, any point I would raise could be justified away. The important question to ask such a person is "What evidence, if observed, could prove to you that undetectable UFOs haven't visited our planet?"

[Devil's Advocate]

This continuing discussion about dolphins reminded me about a book I read quite some time ago (I apologize for not recalling the title), about a guy who figures out how to communicate with dolphins in the wild. In the story, he goes to a research facility where captured dolphins undergo scientific study, and discovers those dolphins were driven insane by captivity and the endless process of repetitive testing.

I think any test of intelligence based on communication between species is inherently biased in favor of the species performing the test

[dream_weaver]

@dream_weaver (#31): Right, but I still haven't heard you state a definition of conceptual being that is falsifiable. Let's look to http://aynrandlexico...n/concepts.html. How could one prove that dolphins are not conceptual thinkers according to these definitions? No research I have seen appears inconsistent with them being conceptual thinkers. Could you cite any I may have missed?

Quite frankly, if someone wants me to believe that dolphins are conceptual beings, it would be incumbent upon them to demonstrate it to me. The onus of proof and validation rests on evidence and demonstration, whereas falsifiable seems highly over rated and fully encapsulated by non-contradictory integration.

[[email protected]]

@dream_weaver (#36): I have never tried to prove dolphins are conceptual beings. I am challenging the claims of those who say that they aren't and that therefore they are inferior to humans. It is incumbent upon someone concluding that dolphins are inferior because they are not conceptual beings to prove that they are not conceptual beings and that this makes them inferior. My point is that all the things cited as examples of why dolphins aren't conceptual beings (e.g. no dolphin has landed on the moon) have not been linked to any kind of relevant moral difference between dolphins as a species and humans as a species. There is a huge hole in the argument that dolphins are inferior.

[[email protected]]

@Devil's Advocate (#35): The other day I was watching a NOVA clip about dolphins who were beached and humans dragging them back into the water. It was hilarious to me that they were trying to contrive all these ridiculous explanations for why the dolphins might have all beached themselves. "They intentionally stranded themselves on a beach they knew was frequented by humans" seems like the most obvious explanation to me.

[dream_weaver]

@dream_weaver (#36): I have never tried to prove dolphins are conceptual beings. I am challenging the claims of those who say that they aren't and that therefore they are inferior to humans. It is incumbent upon someone concluding that dolphins are inferior because they are not conceptual beings to prove that they are not conceptual beings and that this makes them inferior. My point is that all the things cited as examples of why dolphins aren't conceptual beings (e.g. no dolphin has landed on the moon) have not been linked to any kind of relevant moral difference between dolphins as a species and humans as a species. There is a huge hole in the argument that dolphins are inferior.

From what I understand, it is illegal to eat humans, but I think I would rather have any of the following on my plate at dinner time.

GRILLED DOLPHIN

1 1/4 lb. thickly sliced dolphin

8 cloves fresh garlic, minced

1/2 c. olive oil

1/2 tsp. paprika

1/2 c. rice vinegar

Salt if desired

1/2 tsp. pepper, black lg. ground

Dinner for 4. Cut off any dark meat on dolphin. Marinate 4 even slices of dolphin in large bowl. All ingredients mixed for at least 6 hours. Grill 5-7 minutes on each side depending on thickness. Approximately 10 minutes total for 1 inch fillets. Baste with marinade mix while grilling.

DOLPHIN L'ORANGE

2 lbs. Dolphin filets (snapper or grouper may be substituted)

1 c. vinegar

1 c. sugar

1 tbsp. orange extract

2 sliced oranges

Place vinegar and sugar in saucepan. Boil until mix just starts to thicken. Add orange extract. Remove from heat. Place 1 layer orange slices on bottom of baking dish. Dip filets in thickened sauce and place 1 layer in baking dish. Pour on excess sauce and cover with remaining citrus slices. Bake in 350 degree preheated oven for 10 minutes per inch of filet thickness and serve.

DOLPHIN AU'GRATIN

Dolphin (or similar fish), towel dried and cut in 3 inch sqs.

Sliced tomatoes, onions, green peppers and mushrooms

Garlic salt, Everglades seasoning, lime juice, pepper, Italian seasoning

Parsley flakes

butter (squeezeable kind)

Processed cheese

In baking pan, which has 1/4 inch melted butter, place the fish, squeeze lime juice over fish, season liberally with spices to taste, cover with sliced onions, mushrooms, green peppers and tomatoes. Cover with foil, place on covered grill for 1/2 hour.

DOLPHIN PARMESAN

2 lbs. dolphin

Salt

Pepper

Lemon juice

Parmesan cheese

Sprinkle dolphin with salt, pepper, and lemon juice. Broil in oven for 10 minutes. Sprinkle with Parmesan cheese. Continue cooking until flaky (approximately 5 minutes).

Ingredients

ITALIAN DOLPHIN

8 Ounces dolphin fillets

1 x flour, all-purpose seasoned with salt and pepper

2 Ounces tomato sauce

1 x egg beaten with a little milk

1 x bread crumbs italian style

1 x olive oil

1 x mozzarella cheese

2 Ounces parmesan, parmigiano-reggiano cheese, grated

Directions

Rinse fillets; pat dry.

Dredge in flour, dip in beaten egq, then in bread crumbs to bread the fillets.

Place in pan with a little olive oil and pan sear until lightly browned.

Place fish a casserole dish or on a baking dish and top with tomato sauce and mozzarella and

parmesan.

Bake at 350°F until cheese is melted and dolphin is moist

Ingredients

DOLPHIN DIJON

8 ounces dolphin fillets

1 x salt and black pepper to taste

2 tablespoons butter melted

4 tablespoons dijon mustard

1/2 cup bread crumbs

1 ounce herbs chopped

2 tablespoons mustard seeds

Directions

Season dolphin with salt and pepper; rub with a little melted

butter; reserve remaining butter.

Over very hot grill (500F) cook dolphin only until grill marks

appear.

Remove from grill at once.

Rub Dijon mustard on filet; top with mixture of remaining butter,

bread crumbs, fresh herbs and mustard seeds.

Bake in oven at 350F until dolphin is brown on top and moist in

center.

If you're going to hijack a thread, you could at least try to blend it in with the sympathetic treatment of our animal prior to becoming delicacies.

Please be sure to kill your dolphin as mercifully as possible before including in any of these internet search based recipies.

PS.: I do consider eating an act of morality for a human being.

Edited September 10, 2012 by dream_weaver

[Devil's Advocate]

If you're going to hijack a thread, you could at least try to blend it in with the sympathetic treatment of our animal prior to becoming delicacies.

Please be sure to kill your dolphin as mercifully as possible before including in any of these internet search based recipes.

LOL dream_weaver - if you're going to hijack a recipe, you could at least try to use the proper ingredients... these are for dolphinfish, aka mahi-mahi; not Flipper. But they are quite delicious

Edited September 10, 2012 by Devil's Advocate

[Spiral Architect]

How has it been proven dolphins don't have concepts? I am failing to see how the hypothesis that a species possesses conceptual thinking is falsifiable.

If they could form complex concepts they would build a language, cities, farms (fish shepards?), and give lectures on nuclear physics. Dolphins are cute and cunning animals that can think well above something like a chicken but they are not conceptual creatures.

[[email protected]]

@Spiral Architect (#41): Dolphins do have a complex communication system with one another. As far as cities, farms, and lectures on nuclear physics: explain to me how those would be rational behaviors for dolphins if they were conceptual creatures and how the fact that we don't see them doing those things proves they don't employ conceptual thinking.

[[email protected]]

@dream_weaver (#39): Since my attempt to read and thoughtfully responding to your statements is affecting you negatively (apparently I am "hijacking" the thread), I will no longer do so from this point forward in any discussion.

[Nicky]

@Nicky (#30): link? I can't find any evidence supporting your point and have researched this issue extensively.

Sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin

[dream_weaver]

@dream_weaver (#39): Since my attempt to read and thoughtfully responding to your statements is affecting you negatively (apparently I am "hijacking" the thread), I will no longer do so from this point forward in any discussion.

The OP started with:

So, my question is, when is the suffering of animals justified? Let me suggest two propositions that should be at the ends of this continuum:

1. The Suffering of Lab Rats in Human Medical Research

2. The Suffering of Calves In Processing Veal.

The question of what distinguishes dolphins and quite frankly every other species of animal from man is our distinguishing characteristic, our rational faculty.

Somehow, providing some evidence of how proof of this rational faculty manifests itself in the world around you, it stated you couldn't see how this proves dophins never could or would. It doesn't, nor was it intended to.

Until you mentioned inferior, there were no attempts to rank the various species as inferior or superior to man in this thread that I detected.

I'm having difficulty understanding how this ties in with either the suffering of lab rats in human medical research, or more broadly the suffering of animals in research, or the suffering of animals in the processing of food.

I will offer my apologies that my response came across as affecting me negatively. It was an obtuse way of stating what is more directly stated in this post.

[Eiuol]

If they could form complex concepts they would build a language, cities, farms (fish shepards?), and give lectures on nuclear physics. Dolphins are cute and cunning animals that can think well above something like a chicken but they are not conceptual creatures.

You're missing out on early humans, though, before cities, farms, and nuclear physics. Would you say a caveman is not a conceptual thinker even though language is rudimentary? What you cite is evidence, but not QED. There has to be some better reasons, and I'll think of some examples that indicate conceptual thought which aren't dependent on thousands of years of intellectual development. Some possibilities are the ability to judge how many objects are in a box after seeing some removed, or solving puzzles of mathematical reasoning that don't depend on the ability to speak/read English. In any case, if we want to talk about animal cognition, a thread split is probably worth it.

[[email protected]]

@Nicky (#44): I don't see anything in that article discussing the issue of whether dolphins are conceptual thinkers or morally relevant beings.

@dream_weaver (#45): Apologies for my own shortness. I thought the moral issue of taking actions which cause the suffering of animals (such as hunting dolphins for sport) was directly related to whether animals were morally relevant beings, and I thought people on here were claiming that they weren't morally relevant beings since they don't think conceptually.

@Eiuol (#46): I think a thread split could be useful, although I have understood Objectivist thinking as inherently linking the issue of the level of moral consideration we give to causing another living being suffering with that living being's capacity to be a rational and conceptual thinker.

[Nicky]

@Nicky (#44): I don't see anything in that article discussing the issue of whether dolphins are conceptual thinkers or morally relevant beings.

That's the point, silly.

[dream_weaver]

Tanner,

You might find this thread on Does this put dogs in a new category? interesting.

[Plasmatic]

How has it been proven dolphins don't have concepts? I am failing to see how the hypothesis that a species possesses conceptual thinking is falsifiable.

First,Oism does not endorse the ridiculous theory of falsificationism and second you should look in to the Oist position on the differences between the science of philosophy and the special sciences.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Plasmatic