Observations from film watched in class

I found it interesting that one guy made a comment about language being closely tied to consciousness, as it gives us the ability to have thoughts of our thoughts? Would we not be able to examine our thoughts if we didn't have a language? I know that quite frequently I have a thought that I am able to comprehend without being able to put it into words. One might suggest I am not really able to comprehend it, or as well as I think, if I cannot put it into words, but I think this is bullshit. Our consciousness has the ability to take the objective world in and make sense of it without explaining to itself (in words) what it is that it is entertaining. We see this in animals. Surely those animals that are able to comprehend some of their surroundings (i.e. the ability to remember the need for a tool to crack a nut open) is done without the animal talking in the type of language that is implied (built on a foundation of words with attributed meanings). Its consciousness is communicating to itself, but in a way that is beyond words.

In one experiment it was suggested that the chimp being tested was able to know what was in a human's mind. The chimp knew that a key was needed to open a box, and it knew that the guy wanted to open the box, and therefore showed the guy where they key was put. I just needed to type (think) this out to understand what was meant by claiming the chimp knew what was in the human's mind. Though it is likely the chimp only knew this through repitition, because the whole experiment was around the box being opened. The chimp always knew that the second man that came into the room would open the box, because that is what the man always did. Therefore this knowledge was drilled in the chimp's mind through repitition. What useful information does this tell us about a chimp's mind? Such experiments seem to be a waste of energy and resources.

As was mentioned in the film, I think it is most fascinating to know that nonhuman animal minds are different and unique from each other and from humans, andit is unnecessary to think of them as or prove them to be deficient human minds. Experimenting with them may do nothing but allow us to marvel when they might show they are capable of something we were unsure they were capable of and at the difference from humans. We should already treat all living beings with respect and fulfill obligations to them when able, and not have to understand their consciousness more before we do so.

Significance of Nonhuman Animal Consciousness

It is undeniable that many animals have some cognitive abilities, and are conscious to some extent of their surroundings and actions, but what significance does this knowledge have in terms of human treatment towards animals? It may seem amazing that an animal can crack open a nut through the same means over and over, or draw termites out of a tree with a stick, and then eat them off of the stick, but does it only seem amazing because they already appear so inferior than humans that any cognitive ability we observe from them makes us amazed? Is it really more amazing than the fact that they actually exist? I'm not sure any of these cognitive abilities we observe in them warrents any change humans treatment towards them. Of course I am assuming that they receive the general concern and care that they deserve by being living beings, and there is certainly a lot of unwarrented cruelty towards animals. I am referring mostly to consumption of animals for food as warrented human treatment. Come to think of it, this may be the only issue that I'm not sure should change given any recognized cognitive abilities. Whether it is known they have consciousness or cognitive abilities or not, I do not think animals should be subject to experiments, hunting for sport, or stolen from their environment for the entertainment of humans, apparent in zoos and circuses. I consider these acts of cruelty that no living being should be subject to, given the possibility that they may be consciously harmed from such actions. However, if a pig is known to have fairly highly advanced cognitive abilities relative to other nonhuman animals, I see nothing wrong in killing it for food if it will provide sustenance to humans.