Honey not vegan friendly?

[Gjallarhorn]

Yes, I'm sure. Sapience is difficult to define, but once you know what it is, it's easy to recognize a description.

I not sure "I'll know it when I see it" is an appropriate means of defining something...

 

[Koldo]

For instance the Gallup Mirror test as well as research done on cognitive development in humans.

I thought i had already estabilished that failing in a mirror test means close to nothing when trying to detect self-awareness.

See here: Emotional Development - Emotional Development In Infancy And Toddlerhood, Emotions And Early Relationships, Emotional Development During Adolescence, Summary - Emotional Development during Childhood
From the article: "Around eighteen months of age, toddlers develop a more sophisticated sense of self that is marked by self-recognition and the emergence of self-conscious emotions, such as shame, pride, and embarrassment."
This also fits well with the development stages originally proposed by psychologist Jean Piaget whose theories form much of the basis of our understanding of cognitive development.

I will highlight the most relevant part: "Around eighteen months of age, toddlers develop a more sophisticated sense of self that is marked by self-recognition and the emergence of self-conscious emotions, such as shame, pride, and embarrassment."

This means that toddlers before eighteen months of age already have a (less sophisticated) sense of self.

 

[Storm]

I not sure "I'll know it when I see it" is an appropriate means of defining something...

That's not what I was saying.

Sapience is the quality of consciousness which distinguishes "people" from far less complex entities. "Matching definitions," as jarofthoughts was saying, is a crapshoot because it's a tricky thing to define clearly. However, the traits he's talking about (selfhood, identity, higher cognitive functions) are all features of sapience which are lacking in sentience.

An earthworm is sentient. A human is sapient. Both are conscious.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I thought i had already estabilished that failing in a mirror test means close to nothing when trying to detect self-awareness.

And somehow you missed the second part of my sentence.

I will highlight the most relevant part: "Around eighteen months of age, toddlers develop a more sophisticated sense of self that is marked by self-recognition and the emergence of self-conscious emotions, such as shame, pride, and embarrassment."

This means that toddlers before eighteen months of age already have a (less sophisticated) sense of self.

And no-one said that this development was like an on/off switch. Of course the process is gradual, and of course you will find individual differences in the various cognitive stages.

 

[Valjean]

An earthworm is sentient?
Color me skeptical....

 

[Storm]

An earthworm is sentient?
Color me skeptical....

If you poke it, it responds. That's sentience. Minimal, but nonetheless.

ETA: As my father put it, "To be sentient is to be aware. To be sapient is to be aware that you are aware."

 

[Madhuri]

ETA: As my father put it, "To be sentient is to be aware. To be sapient is to be aware that you are aware."

I like that :yes:

 

[Gaura Priya]

I can understand dairy because of the dairy industry...

but does this mean I can't eat honey with my breakfast toast anymore?

:sad:

 

[Storm]

I can understand dairy because of the dairy industry...

but does this mean I can't eat honey with my breakfast toast anymore?

:sad:

Isn't that up to you?

 

[Gaura Priya]

Isn't that up to you?

I guess it is. :drool:

I was just lightly skimming these posts, because I was a vegan for a year from PETA propaganda in my high school days.

I guess the idea was that since honey is a by-product from an animal, and since the animal is being harmed in the making of honey, it is considered a no-no by vegans, especially vegan activists.

It's nice to know though that the idea of consciousness and that many creatures have more consciousness than we realise is a recent discovery. Such as plants having very limited perception, but still apparently having consciousness...

So much that I don't know out there!

 

[Storm]

I guess it is. :drool:

I was just lightly skimming these posts, because I was a vegan for a year from PETA propaganda in my high school days.

I guess the idea was that since honey is a by-product from an animal, and since the animal is being harmed in the making of honey, it is considered a no-no by vegans, especially vegan activists.

It's nice to know though that the idea of consciousness and that many creatures have more consciousness than we realise is a recent discovery. Such as plants having very limited perception, but still apparently having consciousness...

So much that I don't know out there!

Are they really being harmed, though?

 

[Koldo]

And somehow you missed the second part of my sentence.

I didn't miss it, but you didn't give any reference for the said research which is why i made no comments over it.

And no-one said that this development was like an on/off switch. Of course the process is gradual, and of course you will find individual differences in the various cognitive stages.

And what does this have to do with what i have said?
I have never argueed that insects possess a very sophisticated sense of self.

 

[Penumbra]

If you poke it, it responds. That's sentience. Minimal, but nonetheless.

I disagree with that if something responds to a poke, it's sentient.

A sentient being must experience qualia, which may be something impossible to determine for sure, unless you are that being.

I can build a basic robot, controlled by a simple microcontroller, that will respond usefully to things that interact with its sensors. But that doesn't make it sentient, because it is not programmed with any qualia (nor does anyone know yet how to program anything with qualia).

ETA: As my father put it, "To be sentient is to be aware. To be sapient is to be aware that you are aware."

I agree with that quote.

 

[Madhuri]

How is it that scientists are so confused about what consciousness is?
I don't understand why it is so difficult to define. I would imagine that the fact that we have it is a fantastic clue into having some understanding of what it means to be conscious.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I didn't miss it, but you didn't give any reference for the said research which is why i made no comments over it.

Well, then perhaps you should educate yourself a little.
I've provided more than enough sources and references to support my claims about cognitive development, and if you are not familiar with the work of, say, Piaget, then just say so.
So far I don't see you contributing much to this topic in any case, so perhaps you should throw in your two cents? :sarcastic

And what does this have to do with what i have said?
I have never argueed that insects possess a very sophisticated sense of self.

It goes to support the statement that infants are not initially capable of distinguishing between themselves and their environment, sometimes not until about 18 months of age.
Hereby supported and substantiated.

 

[Storm]

I disagree with that if something responds to a poke, it's sentient.

A sentient being must experience qualia, which may be something impossible to determine for sure, unless you are that being.

I can build a basic robot, controlled by a simple microcontroller, that will respond usefully to things that interact with its sensors. But that doesn't make it sentient, because it is not programmed with any qualia (nor does anyone know yet how to program anything with qualia).

I agree with that quote.

It has to be aware to respond, does it not? It must perceive being acted upon.

Machines make it tricky. Do sensors equal awareness? I'm not sure. We can agree that the robot is not sapient.

 

[jarofthoughts]

How is it that scientists are so confused about what consciousness is?
I don't understand why it is so difficult to define. I would imagine that the fact that we have it is a fantastic clue into having some understanding of what it means to be conscious.

Because it has to be testable, measurable and above all, observable.

 

[Madhuri]

Because it has to be testable, measurable and above all, observable.

I guess that makes science limited. Or is it expected that consciousness will be easier to understand in the future?

 

[jarofthoughts]

I guess that makes science limited. Or is it expected that consciousness will be easier to understand in the future?

Well, the young branch of science called neurology and neuropsychology seems promising in this respect.

 

[bobhikes]

So, in short, any living thing that responds to stimuli has a consciousness? :sarcastic
Am I reading you right here?
Because by that definition, bacteria have consciousness...

My thoughts exactly even plants respond to stimuli. Moving towards the sun. Moving away from the heat of fire. Roots move towards water. They are not random movements but directed. Does this make them conscious.