 Originally Posted by Carôusoul
More or less I would define self awareness in the same way you did. It is an understanding of the existence of a spatiotemporal world of which the self is one part of. I'd be slightly more hesitant to say that understanding the existence of other 'selves' is required, as that would seem to rule certain mentally disabled people as being 'not self aware' if they dont understand the existence of others. I think the key is the understanding that you are an agent in the world. I can't very well describe what it would be like to not be self aware, obviously. Whilst I wouldn't want to reduce it to the body, I think it's more inclined that way. To clarify I do not have a theory here, I'm wildly speculating about vague definitions. Generally people have an understanding of what they mean by self awareness, I think? Perhaps not.
I'm thinking now more and more about if say an extreme psychopath would not be considered self aware. I find it very hard to imagine.
Your definition of self awareness seems more geared towards the external, to other animals etc.
I was trying to contrast your "subjective experience theater" by introducing the acknowledgement of others. I think recognition of others (and yourself) as agents is sufficient, but not necessary, for self-awareness.
Self-awareness is tricky, and Kant and a shitton of other speciesists like to think it's very much only human. I think self-awareness is a gradient, it's not 'you have it or you don't.' You just, have less and less of it with lesser brains. I think self-awareness in the most basic sense, knowing that you are hungry, knowing that you need food, is prevalent across most animal boards. Self-awareness is heightened in social frameworks, and includes awareness of hierarchy within a group, social norms, and in species with monogamous life-long pairings, possibly a sense of unique identity. I think an improvement in self-awareness of these species co-evolved, feedback style, with the benefits of social living.
We need to look for self-awareness in species in new ways, and create more rigorous definitions. I don't know whether to look at the psychologists or the philosophers here for the best definition. It's also not good science to say that what "looks like" self awareness means there is a subjective experience of self awareness actually going on. It just seems most credible to me, that since we share common ancestors and time, our self awareness has been evolving on a gradient. There may be species that are only self-aware in certain situations, and completely instinctual in others. I think we need to look at the means animals problem solve rigorously, to separate false anthropomorphisms. As an example, we once thought ants were smart, because they built sand bridges to get to an island full of helpless larva. The experiment was repeated again, without larva on the island, and the ants built a bridge anyway. Turns out it's just instinct to cross waters by building bridges (probably for a variety of reasons, but the ants aren't 'aware' of these reasons). I think devising experiments that can distinguish instinct from problem solving is a crucial component to animal psychology. Fuck Skinner's black box.
Also, one thing on the problem of suicide:
So what if it's a poor side effect of evolution of self-awareness? So is aging and menopause, but that still exists! Also, I don't think animals are trapped in "the system," and would not feel the same "no way out" feel. No way out? Run, bite, eat later because eating feels nice. Do they have to conceive of death to be self-aware? Do they have to connect suicide to death? And what idiot but a human or an animal in extreme pain would choose suicide? Would they even know death is an end to pain?
|
|
Bookmarks