.jpg)
Animal Consciousness and Their Role in Human Life
The
level of consciousness of an animal plays a significant part in determining its
role in human life. Generally, the more conscious an animal, the more rights it
possesses. But how do we define “consciousness?” What determines why we crush
roaches under our feet without a second thought, but kicking a dog is
punishable by law? Why is animal testing on vertebrates such as dogs, cats and
primates largely regulated, while testing on invertebrates such as spiders or worms
and has very little regulation?
In general, we think of “consciousness”
as synonymous with “awareness;” if you are aware are responsive to your surroundings,
you are conscious. It makes sense that we keep more conscious animals as pets. They
can respond to us, let us know their needs, and give us affection. In their own
way, they can communicate with us. Dogs will wag their tails when they are
happy, cats will hiss if they feel threatened, even guinea pigs emit clicking
and squeaking sounds to get attention. They respond to pain – dogs will yelp if
kicked, hamsters will squeal if squeezed too hard. We would get very little
reward or personal satisfaction out of keeping a roach or a fruit fly for a
pet; we can’t tell what they are thinking, we can’t get affection from them, we
can’t bond with them like we can with a more alert and sensitive animal such as
a cat or dog.
.jpg)
Which makes the better pet?
However, an animal is not guaranteed
a life of care and affection just because it has a high level of consciousness.
How does the consciousness of an animal play into animal testing? Some argue
that because certain animals, such as primates, are much more conscious and
receptive to pain than other animals, it is inhumane to use them for animal
testing. Others argue that because these animals are so conscious and aware, it
makes them prime candidates for testing: we can view and interpret results much
more easily than with bugs or mice. For example, if researchers wanted to test
a drug to make sure it didn't cause disorientation in humans, they could much more
easily examine the effects of the drug on chimpanzee than they could on a fish
or fruit fly.
However, just because the level of consciousness of an animal makes
it easier to obtain valuable research doesn't mean it is humane to use them for
test subjects. Many people are not as concerned with animal testing on mice,
flies, or worms because they assume that they are not as conscious of what is
happening to them as dog, rabbits or primates.
Would this ad be as effective if they replaced the cute pug with a naked mole rat?
However, can we assume that just because an animal cannot directly express pain, it cannot feel it? Can we think that lobsters are immune to pain just because they don’t scream when we drop it into boiling water?
Advances is science may one day be able to tell us just how
conscious certain animals are. Below are two links to stories on this topic; in
one, Robert Elwood and Barry Magee
at Queen’s University in Belfast tested crustacean’s response to electric shocks and found that,
when given the choice, the animals generally avoided the testing area where
they were shocked; this suggested that they associated that area with pain. In
another study, Joseph Garner at Purdue University tested goldfish’s response to
intense heat by injecting one group with saline and one group with morphine.
Garner found that the fish injected with the painkiller were able to withstand
higher amounts of heat, suggesting that the other fish without the painkiller were more aware of the
discomfort caused by the heat. In the future, more studies like this may
revolutionize the way we think about animal rights and consciousness.
LINKS
http://science.time.com/2013/01/18/do-crabs-feel-pain-maybe-and-maybe-we-should-rethink-eating-them/
No comments:
Post a Comment