Chapter 1: The Awakening Awareness of Animal Sentience

What proof exists that animals possess consciousness and intelligence, and how should this knowledge shape our interactions with them?

In an era when vivisection was commonplace, it was challenging to accept that the animals involved recognized their circumstances. At that time, our understanding of the human brain was rudimentary, let alone the cognitive processes of dogs or primates. Today, however, we are generally cognizant that animals experience pain and pleasure, can recall specific individuals, learn from experiences, and solve problems. Yet, we still often attribute their actions solely to instinct, and it’s hard to argue otherwise, given their inability to communicate their thoughts.

Experimentation remains the primary avenue through which we decipher animal cognition. However, acknowledging that animals are sentient brings forth the complex issue of animal rights. This dilemma is just one of many pressing concerns of our time. Does it truly matter if a cow has thoughts or deserves autonomy?

Humans have various needs for animals: for food, labor, companionship, and even for research. Yet, we recognize that one individual's needs do not justify the exploitation of another. This makes it difficult to accept that animals are intelligent beings, as intelligence often implies personhood. While few would claim that animals lack consciousness, we must consider what consciousness and intelligence truly entail.

1. Consciousness involves the capacity to act intentionally — to perceive one’s environment and make choices.
2. Intelligence is the ability to learn and apply knowledge for personal benefit.

Since animals do not possess language, we must infer the meanings behind their vocalizations and movements, often falling back on the argument that their behavior is merely instinctual, as if they are "hardwired" to act that way. This is a tenuous justification we cling to in order to maintain our sense of rationality while dismissing theirs.

Instinct is supposedly what humanity has moved beyond. Our capacity for reasoning grants us the privilege of living independently rather than being subject to the will of others. This is why individuals with mental disabilities or developmental challenges often have restricted freedom of movement and choice.

Some argue that an animal's inability to reason relegates them to property status, which is indeed the fundamental premise of domestication. However, when it comes to human expectations, no amount of instinct adequately prepares an animal. This is why we selectively breed docile animals for consumption, train intelligent species for entertainment or work, and nurture friendly animals as companions.

Dogs, for instance, cannot instinctively differentiate between friend and foe; we must train them to recognize safe from threatening human gestures. Chickens do not automatically seek safe roosts but can be conditioned to do so. Similarly, cows can learn to navigate their environment independently, and monkeys can excel in memory tasks using computers. Moreover, animals can transmit learned behaviors to their offspring, even if they were not directly taught.

You might argue that conditioning is not the same as teaching, yet our pets condition us to respond to their needs just as we train them. Any species, be it mammal, bird, reptile, or fish, can demonstrate learning through their responses to our commands. However, they cannot articulate why they choose to follow our instructions or seek our assistance when in distress.

Conditioning, often viewed as a negative term, is simply a form of learning. It diminishes the perceived value of the process, but it shouldn't. Just as children practice to excel in races, animals adapt and learn through play. Even instinctual behaviors, such as a cat's ability to land on its feet, are ultimately learned through experience.

The argument that animals cannot exhibit complex behaviors is flawed. According to Marino and Allen (2017), play relates to curiosity and innovation, forming the foundation for intricate social skills and object manipulation.

What do we designate as complex social behaviors? These are learned actions, akin to the skills children develop. While some animals may not manipulate tools as adeptly as humans, they still require human guidance for any exceptional reasoning as we define it.

What constitutes reasoning? Ayn Rand posits that reason synthesizes a person's perceptions to form abstractions, elevating human knowledge beyond that shared with animals. Yet, having worked with animals, I can attest that they are capable of reasoning, at least to the extent we can measure.

Rand also mentions that logic is the method of reason, which is a minimal requirement for most animals. They can identify members of their species, distinguish between objects, and recall sequences of actions that lead to desired outcomes.

Animals can even incorporate novel objects and interactions into their lives, establishing relationships with different species through play. They can engage gently with fragile human infants and correctly assess the value of human tools, collaborating with others to achieve goals.

Often, we do not allow animals the opportunity to choose or learn. However, in a nurturing environment, various species can communicate their preferences and learn from interactions. While it may not be accurate to say that Koko the gorilla communicated through sign language, animals do convey information about their surroundings, albeit in a manner that does not include higher concepts without human influence.

Chapter 2: The Ethical Implications of Animal Rights

The way we engage with rational animals starkly contrasts with how we treat those deemed "less intelligent." Species like horses, dogs, marine mammals, corvids, parrots, and elephants are often afforded a degree of respect. However, it is misleading to suggest that rational humans treat animals well merely because they view them as property.

This discussion aims to reevaluate our understanding of animal consciousness and intelligence, an aspect often overlooked in my own philosophy. Objectivism, for instance, frequently dismisses animal rights as illogical, assuming animals cannot value concepts or possess virtues necessary for maintaining those values. Yet, what are learned behaviors if not evidence of some form of cognition?

It is my responsibility to bridge the gap between mysticism and reason. If you believe that the human mind is anything more than a highly evolved primate brain, you may be mistaken. My intention is not to belittle humanity but to encourage growth beyond our misconceptions regarding instinct and intellect.

Contention 1:

No, humanity would not lead a life of mere subsistence without relying on animals. In fact, our evolution beyond animal labor has granted us greater freedom and efficiency, trading in horses for machines. Similarly, moving beyond animal testing has led us to more accurate and efficient methods.

Contention 2:

One individual argued that advocating for animal rights somehow infringes upon human freedom. I disagree; in most situations, humans can overpower animals and impose consequences as needed. Conversely, animals depend on human intervention for protection and cannot advocate for themselves against harm.