fcmconference.org [PDF] · #neuroscience
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
- We declare the following: “The absence of a neocortex does not appear to preclude an organism from experiencing affective states. Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Non- human animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.”
–
I agree. But don't hold it against them a0. :) I recently audited a lecture on research ethics and bioethics, and we had a very good discussion on the use of animals in experimentation. I am someone that does this type of research. IMHO on some level one has to concede that it is in part violence and exploitation. IMHO we can also say the same about Capitalism. What we want, and how we get it: There is no purity in it. I believe that in the not-so-distant future, when synthetic meat will be widely adopted, it will be criminal to kill an animal for food. And when this comes to pass, many will look at places without the means to create synthetic meat with pity and disgust. I wonder if we are pointed in the 'right' direction. My best guess is that we are, but I also wonder about the path we are taking. We want to shorten the trip, but we want to do that at a cost that is worth what is avoided. At any rate, I think this is a good Statement.The neural substrates of emotions do not appear to be confined to cortical structures. In fact,
subcortical neural networks aroused during affective states in humans are also critically
important for generating emotional behaviors in animals. Artificial arousal of the same brain
regions generates corresponding behavior and feeling states in both humans and non-human
animals.
–
Obviously, consciousness is not the same as values. Just because a creature is conscious, we are not automatically precluded from killing it. A mouse is conscious; a person is conscious. Do we have qualitatively similar life experiences? I would guess that in some ways yes, and in other ways no. A mother mouse, for example, will under certain circumstances kill and eat its own offspring. We certainly don't share a similar view of life and death as certain other creatures. On the other hand, I would never dream of killing a dog, cat, whale, elephant, or many other large mammals. It is my opinion that (a) no all consciousnesses are equal, and (b) consciousness alone doesn't morally preclude one from killing. However, defining what makes it acceptable to kill one species and not another is something that I'm not sure I could do. I'm not sure logic even really applies here.