Thread: Animal Suicide

I don't really think a dolphin can just stop breathing. Humans are not really capable of that either. Seeing as they live in the water, their breathing should be even better controlled by automatic functions to prevent accidently drowning. Basically they would have to be able to consciously just flip off their subconcious controls that would try to force them to move to the surface and breath. Which there really isn't any evolutionary reason for them to do.

With scorpions, it sounds more like a twitch or automatic reaction. The fire likely doing something which causes the tail to strike forward own its own.

Horse can be really well trained as well, and I believe they can be trained to do suicidal things, which makes sense since they are often trained for war and charging into a guy with a spear pointed at you is pretty stupid.

You also have to take into account an animal can be mentally retarded or have actual genetic problems or a disease that impares brain functions. Which may cause it to do something insanely stupid, or act oddly but doesn't really prove sucide.

Animals cannot commit suicide. They have no free will. They act on Instincts.

Humans are animals; humans act on instincts.

When dolphins jump into the air or a dog rolls over on its back to be scratched, do you really think this is solely for some kind of evolutionary advantage?

Originally Posted by Alric

I don't really think a dolphin can just stop breathing. Humans are not really capable of that either. Seeing as they live in the water, their breathing should be even better controlled by automatic functions to prevent accidently drowning. Basically they would have to be able to consciously just flip off their subconcious controls that would try to force them to move to the surface and breath. Which there really isn't any evolutionary reason for them to do.

Dolphins actually have to breath consciously..

"On land, human beings and other mammals breathe involuntarily: If we don't make a decision to breathe or not to breathe, our body will take in air automatically. Because of their undersea environment, whales and dolphins must be conscious breathers: They have to actively decide when to breathe. Consequently, in order to breathe, they have to be conscious. This presents a problem, since mammalian brains need to enter an unconscious state from time to time in order to function correctly (see How Sleep Works to find out why this might be).There's plenty of time for a dolphin to catch a catnap between trips to the ocean surface, of course, but this isn't a viable option. When you're a conscious breather, it's just not feasible to be completely unconscious -- what if you don't wake up in time? The solution for whales and dolphins is to let one half of the brain sleep at a time. In this way, the animal is never completely unconscious, but it still gets the rest it needs."

http://animals.howstuffworks.com/mam...uestion643.htm

As dolphins are just below humans in general intelligence, I don't see why they cannot commit suicide. They can make the decision to simply not breath.

Originally Posted by Lucidness

Animals cannot commit suicide. They have no free will. They act on Instincts.

All sentient beings have free will, only the decision space is either smaller or bigger. What many humans call instincts, is simply a smaller decision space. Whether which animal have the average decision space to do what is hard to say, but I think several of the species with higher intelligence can commit suicide, but it would be much rarer than with humans, because our intellect and ego work so well together, theirs do not.

This topic made me want to google beached whales.

I think all animals have the natural instinct of self preservation, so I believe they understand what it is to live and die. I'm not sure about the conscious decision to kill themselves though. Maybe in terms of sacrifice for the greater cause like most bees, ants, and other insects.

Originally Posted by Lucidness

Animals cannot commit suicide. They have no free will. They act on Instincts.

Too bad I don't have free will then.

I would have a harder time believing that humans were the only animals capable of suicide, than that it was something widespread, throughout the animal kingdom - especially among "higher lifeforms" (though I hate that label).

As far as the scorpions, wouldn't it be more reasonable to assume that the scorpions intentionally sting themselves, rather than that the fire somehow makes the tail involuntarily sting its host (rather than sting in front of its host, which is the tail's natural arc)?

I kind of lean toward what SS was saying near the end of his post.

It's interesting because humans can kind of override natural instinct. Humans can give into things like wonder, awe, and curiosity. If you were standing, watching a forest fire, you would likely see all the animals living in that forest running away. But a human could choose to walk into that blaze. I mean most people wouldn't, but the point is you could. You could override your natural instinct, if you wanted.

Originally Posted by SpecialInterests

I kind of lean toward what SS was saying near the end of his post.

It's interesting because humans can kind of override natural instinct. Humans can give into things like wonder, awe, and curiosity. If you were standing, watching a forest fire, you would likely see all the animals living in that forest running away. But a human could choose to walk into that blaze. I mean most people wouldn't, but the point is you could. You could override your natural instinct, if you wanted.

But the question remains: "Is the human's walking toward the blaze an act of choice, or instinct?" After all, where exactly is that line between something that is completely done on our own accord (independently of ALL INFLUENCE - including genetic) and something that its as instinctual as a dog running off to retrieve a tennis ball?

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

But the question remains: "Is the human's walking toward the blaze an act of choice, or instinct?" After all, where exactly is that line between something that is completely done on our own accord (independently of ALL INFLUENCE - including genetic) and something that its as instinctual as a dog running off to retrieve a tennis ball?

But if you threw the tennis ball into a forest fire it probably wouldn't go for it. If you had one of our primitive ancestors beside you and threw a steak into the fire he probably wouldn't go after it either, and I kind of doubt he would voluntarily walk into it for no apparent reason.
It's definitely not wrong to say different instincts can evolve, and maybe a human walking toward that blaze is instinct. It's interesting to think about. But like you said, there's no way to draw a line.

Originally Posted by SpecialInterests

But if you threw the tennis ball into a forest fire it probably wouldn't go for it. If you had one of our primitive ancestors beside you and threw a steak into the fire he probably wouldn't go after it either, and I kind of doubt he would voluntarily walk into it for no apparent reason.

The key word, though, is probably. The choice is still there. A dog isn't likely to go into the fire, neither are our ancestors, but neither is a human of today. Being modern man, we can empathize with the idea that there are any number of "reasons" (logical or not) that modern man would do such a thing, but we can't really say the same thing about animals. I think this has much less to do with their being "lower life-forms", but simply that they do not have the types of experiences that we do. They don't live a lifestyle where concepts like "wonder and awe" are really as applicable as they are to us. But were they to experience some of the things that we do, and be taught some of the lessons we learn, and given the options we have in life, who knows what their reactions to those types of events would be?

For instance, if a dog loses a long-time companion, it's not uncommon for them to slip into depression - depression so deep that the dog will often stop eating, to the point of starvation. Is this an instinctual response? Or is the dog saying "you know what? Fuck this. I'm not hungry. Leave me alone"?

EDIT: It was totally in the article, never mind.

Animals can very much have a sense of free will... Elephants have been known as one of the only animals to actually remove its own teeth to kill themselves in captivity.

Please read this ridiculous article, and the brilliant comments.

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/sh...t-suicide.html

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

As far as the scorpions, wouldn't it be more reasonable to assume that the scorpions intentionally sting themselves, rather than that the fire somehow makes the tail involuntarily sting its host (rather than sting in front of its host, which is the tail's natural arc)?

Its is possible, though its also possible that since they are cold blooded the sudden increase in body and blood tempture causes them to twitch and stuff. I looked it up though, and there seems to be some doubt, on if a scorpion would even die from multiple sting wounds to itself.

As for animals enjoying attention and being petted, if you are looking for an evolutionary reason for it, it is probably due to the parent child bond, or group families as a way to bond. Both dolphines and dogs often travel in groups, and a lot of animals play to learn new things, and to improve survival instincts.

Let me tell you an example of what i mean.

Theres a frog near a river.
A scropion walks up to it and says "Can i please have a lift across the river".
The frog says "What if you sting me?"
The scorpion says "I promise i wont."
The frog gives the scorpion a lift over the river and half way across the scorpion stings the frog.
The frog says "Why did you sting me"
The scorpion says "Because i'm a scorpion."

As for animals enjoying attention and being petted, if you are looking for an evolutionary reason for it, it is probably due to the parent child bond, or group families as a way to bond. Both dolphines and dogs often travel in groups, and a lot of animals play to learn new things, and to improve survival instincts.

My point is: is it not possible to describe everything a human does, in such an "instinctual" manner? I mean, we can assign evolutionary meaning to almost anything an animal does, even if we don't know why they're actually doing it. Contrarily, we can can attribute anything a human does to "free will." A mature human is miles more complex than most animals (mostly due to life experiences), so it is convenient to attribute some actions to "choice." But is that "choice" a product of free will? Or is the choice made simply a conditioned response?

Without a definite answer to that question, how can we see ourselves as any different from other animals? As was said, there's really no way to draw that line. Whether we want to believe it or not, we are all products of our environments - man and animal, alike.

Another quote from the Matrix: Reloaded (seems like I've been using them a lot, lately. They are just so damn relevant, though. Haha)
Oracle: "Candy?"
Neo: "Do you already know if I'm going to take it?"
Oracle: "Wouldn't be much of an Oracle, if I didn't."
Neo: "But if you already know, how can I make a choice?"
Oracle: "Because you didn't come here to make the choice, you've already made it. You're here to try to understand why you made it. (Neo takes candy) I thought you'd have figured that out by now."

Are the choices we make nothing but ourselves analyzing our own instinctual responses? Can we ever actually do the OPPOSITE of what we "choose" to do? (Ooh. I just blew my own mind. Lol.)

Originally Posted by Lucidness

Let me tell you an example of what i mean.

Theres a frog near a river.
A scropion walks up to it and says "Can i please have a lift across the river".
The frog says "What if you sting me?"
The scorpion says "I promise i wont."
The frog gives the scorpion a lift over the river and half way across the scorpion stings the frog.
The frog says "Why did you sting me"
The scorpion says "Because i'm a scorpion."

I understand the example, but it's more rhetoric than anything else. Such a scenario would never happen, so it can't be used as a model for reality.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

My point is: is it not possible to describe everything a human does, in such an "instinctual" manner? I mean, we can assign evolutionary meaning to almost anything an animal does, even if we don't know why they're actually doing it. Contrarily, we can can attribute anything a human does to "free will." A mature human is miles more complex than most animals (mostly due to life experiences), so it is convenient to attribute some actions to "choice." But is that "choice" a product of free will? Or is the choice made simply a conditioned response?

Without a definite answer to that question, how can we see ourselves as any different from other animals? As was said, there's really no way to draw that line. Whether we want to believe it or not, we are all products of our environments - man and animal, alike.

Another quote from the Matrix: Reloaded (seems like I've been using them a lot, lately. They are just so damn relevant, though. Haha)
Oracle: "Candy?"
Neo: "Do you already know if I'm going to take it?"
Oracle: "Wouldn't be much of an Oracle, if I didn't."
Neo: "But if you already know, how can I make a choice?"
Oracle: "Because you didn't come here to make the choice, you've already made it. You're here to try to understand why you made it. (Neo takes candy) I thought you'd have figured that out by now."

Are the choices we make nothing but ourselves analyzing our own instinctual responses? Can we ever actually do the OPPOSITE of what we "choose" to do? (Ooh. I just blew my own mind. Lol.)



I understand the example, but it's more rhetoric than anything else. Such a scenario would never happen, so it can't be used as a model for reality.

Its not to be taken literally though!

I feel the need to tell you of Lemmings.

Lemmings are a small rodent. Here is a Lemming;

They are typically found near the Arctic.
At certain time periods (not sure when :\), these animals will start to migrate.
They walk thousands of thousands of miles. They go until they hit the ocean. They then find a cliff or some sort of drop and simply launch themselves off into the ocean.
One might think that they are going to swim somewhere or something. Actually, they are not now, nor have their anscestors ever been natural or even capable swimmers. They cannot swim.
So, huge groups of them walk miles to jump in the ocean and drown.
To this day, nobody actually knows why they do this.

I find it baffling. Some Atlantis enthusiasts say that they are trying to migrate there like they "once did".

Don't know if anyone has reference to cracked.com yet, but there is one part of an article that kind of deals with this subject...

Located near Scotland's charming little village of Milton in the peaceful burgh of Dumbarton, the Overtoun Bridge is a local arch construction where no human beings have ever died in any suspicious circumstances whatsoever over the last few decades.

However, during that span, for reasons we can't begin to possibly understand, hundreds and hundreds of dogs have killed themselves there. It appears that dogs have been plunging off of Overtoun since the early 60s, at a rate of one animal a month... bringing the total number today to around 600 mutts, who for some reason, decided to end it all.

And we're not talking about a series of unfortunate accidents that could have been avoided with a simple guard rail. People who actually witnessed the reported dogs willingly climbing the parapet wall and leaping to their doom with dumbass doggy grins on their faces. Whether they were crying blood remains to be confirmed.

Theories on why is this happening have been all over the place, from particularly aromatic rodents to a simple stream of bizarre coincidences. We call bullshit on both seeing as--to paraphrase Ian Fleming--"Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action and over 600 is clearly the work of an ancient Sumerian demon or some shit."

To further drive the point home, it has been observed that certain dogs that jumped off the bridge and survived, fucking climbed back up and THREW THEMSELVES TO THEIR DEATHS ALL OVER AGAIN.

Because the great Overtoun demon's hunger will not be appeased with tries. He demands fresh canine blood, and lots of it.

Original URL is here
http://www.cracked.com/article/181_t...-places-earth/

JoS-Apparently I didn't do my research. I thought it was Lemmings all followed one Lemming because they are so dumb, so they mock a "leaders" actions. So if the leader jumps off, they all jump off. But that may not be true.(probably isn't)

I'll have to check out that dog article in a second.
Also, even if that's true, it happens every fucking time‼ why would the leader jump off anyway?? I have no explanation. I always seem to have an explanation of everything, but not this. I can't even come up with an illogical one.

Lemming. Suicide. Is. A. Myth.

http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/lemmings.asp

Every time somebody repeats that myth, God kills a lemming.

Originally Posted by LRT

Lemming. Suicide. Is. A. Myth.

http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/lemmings.asp

Every time somebody repeats that myth, God kills a lemming.

You actually trust everything Snopes says??
You make me laugh.
You're just like those foolish imbeciles in the library playing flash games on the computers.
you're all alike.
Trusting any website you come across....
I've seen it in a million places, including some very trusted documents and sources.
To see one website claiming it to be false will not change my beliefs.

And God doesn't exist

Funny that while looking at the cracked article, I googled this phrase:

Originally Posted by Smuds

Ian Fleming--"Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action and over 600 is clearly the work of an ancient Sumerian demon or some shit."

And got this, which is how I stumbled upon this thread, quite a coincidence, since the quote is about coincidences.

Originally Posted by Jesus of Suburbia

You actually trust everything Snopes says??
You make me laugh.
You're just like those foolish imbeciles in the library playing flash games on the computers.
you're all alike.
Trusting any website you come across....
I've seen it in a million places, including some very trusted documents and sources.
To see one website claiming it to be false will not change my beliefs.

And God doesn't exist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemming