Hi Russell,
Going back to your points about sentient beings and our perception of other life forms. As you say, there is debate about how intelligent certain species are, how to measure that intelligence, whether they can feel emotions, what this all means. Being human, although we may try to be objective in assessing the cognitive abilities of other species, we are still limited by our own perceptions and interpretations.
I guess you would have come across certain situations with all manner of different species that have amazed you and made you re-evaluate your idea of how these organisms perceive their world. Most people who have pets, domestic animals or who have worked with wild animals can tell you interestng stories of certain encounters, but of course interpreting this into something that will not be labelled anthropomorphising is very hard. Often I think that our shame of anthropomorphising animals means we miss a lot of interesting details.
With regards to whales, I am sure that George, Ann and Peter can related stories that would suggest cetaceans are sentient beings and can feel fear as well as other emotions, and there is literature out there on studies into cetacean 'intelligence' and perception. For myself, I have had a few encounters that suggest to me that cetaceans are most definately sentient beings . One was with a southern right whale female I was cautiously observing in the water. I was careful to maintain my distance from her, but she kept positioning herself right next to me. If I would swim away she would follow. When I got tired and was treading water at one stage, she came up underneath me so that I was supported on her back. When I returned to the small boat and placed my hand in the water to say 'goodbye', she apporached the boat and lifted it up so that she could touch my hand with her back. Another encounter was observing a mother and calf humpback The mother was snoozing on the reef, but all of a sudden the calf looked up at me, left her side, swam straight up and put me on his belly, before casually rolling over and returning back to mum.
Why did these two animals choose to interact with me the way they did? Was I just a weird looking cetacean, or was I something quite different but that could obviously provide some tactile stimuli as well as perhaps 'entertainment'? As I said, people who are close to pets and so on would have countless stories of special interactions with them.
Our preception of other species is also as you mentioned dependent upon cultural and religious beliefs. Whether we see ourselves as the pinnacle of all life and thus the ones to control it and dominant it depends often on these factors.
For me, I believe that as animals that can feel empathy, and have an awareness of themselves and others, we have a responsibility to ensure that our actions are not unnecessarily harming those others. Our relationships with animals should be humane and with careful thought for the past, present and future. Humans nowadays divorce themseves from the natural world, but in the end we are animals and part of that natural world, and could do well to remember that.
Cheers Libby.
--------------------------------
This note was originally posted as a comment here: https://climatelab.com.au/blog/archives/001806.html .
Thanks Libby and Pixie for your opinion!
Guess I can carry the elephant tail bracelet if I can convince myself that I carry on the elephants soul or something on the line...
Note that with this biologically correct way of reporting observed behaviours and accusations of anthrowhatsit bias, eventually results are confirmed and finally science can state quite clearly what the layperson knew all along. There was a recent research discovery where a scientist watching dogs at play recorded a change in behaviour of the dog that was initiating play depending on how the attention of the other dog was directed. In other words, in human terms, awareness of self! Consciousness! But it might have just been human bias. What the scientist interpreted as a dog might have actually been a rog.
Hi Ann,
Maybe you can convince yourself that the hair was caught on a thorny bush as the animal passed by and consequently no elephants were harmed in its making?!
Keeping it in a drawer is not of much use. Perhaps since you think it is so beautiful, others will think it is beautiful too if you wear it. Then you can tell them that it was a gift but that it is a beautifully sad gift. Then the elephant's memory lives on, which is kind of fitting for an elephant. Maybe that sounds a bit corny though.
Regarding the seal culls, I too thought it was more about the way way the animals are killed rather than the resulting colour scheme.
Ann some horsey types don't count walk as a gait (otherwise rog's horses would be very deficient). But if their brains are already so busy, how do they learn those elaborate dressage, tricks & other dancing school moves? And such amazing partnership & trust with human riders to jump obstacles they can't see themselves. Not necessarily intelligence in the standard human school exam or IQ test sense but then we get into a messy distinction again between types of intelligence. As Libby's posts remind us, and as so wonderfully parodied in that Onion article, we introduce a human bias in perceiving (& usually, rejecting) animal intelligence and depth of their inner landscape. The co-operative & caring tendencies of horses, where blind horses in the wild are guided by their herd members, apparently makes (minature) horses good guides for the blind. http://www.guidehorse.org/
Did the elephant give willingly of its tail hairs? You can't give them back. I'd wear it. It would probably match that fur coat magnificently.
Pixie and George were discussing elephants and sustainable use....
Off topic here.... but it is about elephants...
I got a gift once, a bracelet made from hair from an elephant tail, bought from the Masai's in Kenya. It is very beautiful, but I have never dared to use it because I have been a bit of an animal activist...
However, lately I think it is a pity to keep it in a drawer and wonder if it is ethically OK the use/ wear it.
What do ya think???
Rog:" Horses intelligence is predominantly occupied by cordinating 4 limbs into 3 paces "
But Rog....the Icelandic horse has 5 gaits.
Walking, trotting, galopping, pass and tölt!
They are extremely well tempered, easy for a beginner to ride...often used for tourists....horseback riding in Iceland must be at least as big an industry as whale watching
Here's the Norwegian link on this issue:
http://www.fiskeribladet.no/default.asp?lesmer=4750
Boxer:" Animals that have mammalian baby features - large round eyes, big heads - are a hot topic and that's not surprising. Killing baby seals wouldn't be an issue if they weren't cute to look at and the blood didn't contrast so strongly with the white snow. "
Konrad Lorenz, the etolog( etology= the study of animal behaviour), who received the Nobel Prize in the 70's, showed that big baby eyes make people as well as animal protecting. That is why babies have those big eyes. It's an inbuilt instinct in us to protect the big eye ones!!
Maybe a bit unfair....
On an other note...
The EU will probably ban all trade with Norwegian seal products in the near future, due to increased concern about animal welfare issues. The decision is based upon that many believe that the seals are flogged alive( however , I don't know if this is completely true).