Comments on: Does Tweety have a secondary consciousness? Self-awareness in birds, mirror neurons, evolution and the mystery of consciousness

By: cynthia

cynthia — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:51:59 +0000

hey!!! tzupp!!

By: selma

selma — Wed, 27 May 2009 15:22:52 +0000

çok salakça ben english bilmiyorem…..:d:D:D

By: Jessica

Jessica — Fri, 15 May 2009 01:12:41 +0000

LOL i like alex

By: Shellie Floyd

Shellie Floyd — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:39:11 +0000

hi
tskageug71d21pll
good luck

By: tugba

tugba — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:45:42 +0000

Very good,

By: tugba

tugba — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:44:48 +0000

çok komik resimler

By: soy sause

soy sause — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 08:37:25 +0000

i believe that dogs are self aware i put my dog in front of the mirror and she doesn’t bark or worry about it at all she will occasionally lick the mirror if she gets close enough but she seems to recognize that it is herself there and not some other dog and it has been this way since she was a puppy i would put her in front of the mirror and she would look and lick her reflection but if another dog gets in front of her she barks and bites them what does that mean i would think she is self aware.

By: ROSE

ROSE — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:06:10 +0000

Very good

By: Encefalus

Encefalus — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 09:16:50 +0000

I agree that mankind makes extraordinary axiomatic claims about itself. I have written a few things on that at http://encefalus.com/philosophical/clinical-psychology-sucks/ . However, we have to take one way or the other, that is, either suppose that our condition is special or it is not. By our limited means, we have theorized that our condition is special and we are studying consciousness from this perspective. The only thing that we can do is to try to follow this path and see what comes out of it.

I also agree with you on the biological side of the thing. This research with magpies proves that our assumptions about the cortex making us special are false. However, we don’t have sufficient evidence for either case.

Anyway, my opinion is that the methodology I described above is a lot like physics in the 19th century. At that century they believed that deterministic models can explain everything. And they did, until they stumbled upon the anomalies of planetary orbits, that led to the integration of stochastic models of mathematics and a new paradigm shift. Perhaps the same will happen with the study of consciousness.

By: Keith Allpress

Keith Allpress — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 21:01:12 +0000

And by the way there of course is a massive reason to suggest that we might not be unique in the basic nature of experience, and it is called biology.

By: Keith Allpress

Keith Allpress — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:46:23 +0000

Hang on a minute, I think we do need to deconstruct this idea in order to try to be scientific. Let us not forget that this is a highly anthropocentric concept – it is attached to a species that is notoriously well known to claim a special statuses for itself (axiomatically) and to then enshrine them in language terms. Perhaps it simply isn’t popular/acceptable to consider alternatives?

By: Encefalus

Encefalus — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:33:07 +0000

A very interesting comment. I believe that you are right on your criticism concerning the Gallup test. However, it is the only means we have until now for identifying self-awareness in other species . However, taking as an axiom that all living things possess self-awareness is a mistake, since we have no reasons to do so. Not only that, but it would not provide any basis for the study of consciousness. By identifying our differences with other beings in the field of self-awareness we can study our brain and find what makes us unique. Maybe the problem will be solved, once we can incorporate more procedures in self-awareness tests, including other senses as well.

By: Keith Allpress

Keith Allpress — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:03:42 +0000

IMHO this seems to be a very poor and unreliable test. If a Dolphin places a human being in front of a sonic mirror, no doubt from our behaviour they would soon conclude that human beings were automatons with a poor sense of self. Likewise your behaviour around your own poop would soon convince a dog that you were as thick as a plank.
Any animal that is able to consciously direct itself to act in a certain way surely already has the ability to address itself. I know when I scratch myself, and I am sure a cat thinks it is scratching itself too. As far as that goes, I am equally certain that a fly that is acting to avoid being swatted is in fact experiencing an emotion of self preservation that is qualitatively identical to one that I feel when avoiding an attack, although it would most likely not be able to reflect on the incident as I would.

Keith Allpress

By: Encefalus

Encefalus — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 21:24:03 +0000

Thank you for your comment. I’ll surely check your blog, too, when I have the time (since right now I’m under pressure due to exams ) Attack on Pet’s Mart? LOL. I’d really like to see that

By: G.

G. — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:34:02 +0000

First off, super interesting blog you have here. I’m a fan of psych myself, and this is good stuff. I went ahead and linked this site to my blog, if that’s alright with you.

Self aware birds? I knew it. They are gonna organize and mount an attack on Pet’s Mart.