Deep Ethology

1
Deep Ethology

• How to reconcile focus on behaviour and focus on
  mind
• Objective vs subjective perspectives on mind -
  mind as information-processor vs broader
  definition of subjective consciousness
• Mechanism vs anthropomorphism necessary
  dichotomy?

2
Where is mind?
Traditional dualistic view locates mind in the
head (reason is separate from the emotion, and
from the body). Thinking is thus abstract and
consists of representation of categories in the
world
Mind (unlike behaviour) is subjective and private
(inaccessible to everyday awareness). No ground
from which to reason about the mental lives of
others
3
Mind in relationship

• Mind leaks out during social interaction is
  mind intersubjective rather than subjective?
• Empathy important here taking up perspective of
  another (Shapiro (1997) - kinesthetic empathy)
• Thought and intention communicated through
  interaction (e.g. Laurier et al. (undated)
  working dogs regarded as subjects rather than
  objects Intention then is not transmitted from
  owner to dog, like a packet of information.
  Intention is grounded here in the action of
  pulling on the string, and is felt by both
  parties in the tension.)

4
Empathy and anthropomorphism

• Anthropomorphism can be seen as pragmatic
  endeavour to structure relationships (e.g.
  Burghardt, 1985)
• Anthropomorphic attitude makes interpretation of
  animal action possible as it highlights
  similarities in emotion and expression (e.g.
  Alger Alger (1999) - interpreting cat
  behaviour)

5
Connecting mind and behaviour

• What can we know about mental categories in other
  species?
• Problem of assuming similarity in
  conceptualisation (e.g. how similar are the human
  and cat concepts of mouse?)
• Problem lies with assuming that behaviour
  provides no clue to thought (Nagels point we
  can never really know what anothers thought is
  like)

6
Rejecting the mind-behaviour split

• Reliance on behaviourism omits mind. Alternative
  focus on subjective (and intersubjective) ignores
  contact with the world
• Need for approach that reconciles the objective
  and subjective
• Mind and behaviour not separate mind expressed
  in behaviour

7
The centrality of relationships

• Both anthropomorphism and behaviourism rooted in
  speculation about mind and awareness
• Relationships are the context within which mind
  and intention can be expressed and understood
• Both careful observation and richness of
  anecdotes needed (observation needs context
  anecdotes need grounding in actual behaviour)

8
Embodied, experiential nature of cognition

• Thought can never be wholly private as it arises
  out of the body (Lakoff, Johnson et al) abstract
  categories are structured by bodily experience
• Thinking and emotion are not separate (e.g.
  Kendrick conspecific recognition in sheep tied
  to emotional significance)
• Meaning is constructed out of the social
  interchange, rather than being something tied to
  private sensations in the head (e.g. theories of
  distributed cognition (Forster))
• Need for rejection of the subject/object, or
  mind/body split

9
References

• Alger, J.M. Alger, S.F. (1999). Cat culture,
  human culture an ethnographic study of a cat
  shelter. Society and Animals, 7, 3, 1-13.
• Burghardt, G. (1985). Animal awareness current
  perceptions and historical perspective. American
  Psychologist, 40, 8, 905-919
• Laurier, E., Maze, R. Lundin, J. (undated).
  Putting the dog back in the park animal and
  human mind-in-action.
• Sanders, C.R. (1993) Understanding dogs
  Caretakers attributions of mindedness in
  canine-human relationships. Journal of
  Contemporary Ethnography, 22, 2, 205-226.

10
References

• Shapiro, K.J. (1997). A phenomenological approach
  to the study of nonhuman animals. In (eds.) R.W.
  Mitchell, N.S. Thompson H.L. Miles,
  Anthropomorphism, Anecdotes, and Animals. NY
  State University of New York Press.