Sentience

[cooran]

Hello all,

This is a deep question, and would involve study of the explanatory texts in the Ahidhamma. If you have the time, it would be worth investigating the term "jivitindriya" Life Faculty.

A note elsewhere from Ajahn Dhammanando on dsg:
"For people believe, O Bhikkhus, that life dwells in a tree."

This is the key point. The belief that plants and the earth possess one
faculty (either kaayindriya or jiivitindriya) was held by the
Niga.n.thas (Jains) and acelakas (non-affiliated naked ascetics); since
these were the largest and oldest sama.na groups at that time, their
beliefs had passed into common lore and so any sama.na worth his salt
was expected to conform to them (by keeping the rains retreat so as not
to tread on growing crops, by not digging the earth or damaging plants,
and by taking various precautions when building a hut). But nowhere
does the Buddha actually concede that these beliefs were correct and in
the Vinaya commentaries they are dismissed as "mere imagining".
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastu ... sage/69259" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

wiith metta
Chris

[Riverbend]

You asked if animals feel pain, yes, of course.

I don't think I asked that. I just wondered if ants consciously decide to avoid pain or if they just respond to it automatically. It's the whole assumption of consciousness part that I think is shaky. You could build a robotic ant to respond in exactly the same way. However, I accept that doesn't really matter. I don't want to complicate matters unnecessarily. I do however enjoy a natural curiosity, and use of the word 'sentient' got me thinking about what it means exactly. It seemed important at the time as it is the difference between life and death, literally.

[Riverbend]

This is a deep question, and would involve study of the explanatory texts in the Ahidhamma. If you have the time, it would be worth investigating the term "jivitindriya" Life Faculty.

Thank you, Chris. I'll do that.

[Annapurna]

I doubt if any invertebrate possesses your number 4, brennenmang.

Of course it does.

Google octopus.

An Octopus has no back bone, it is an invertebrate. It is highly intelligent.

[Annapurna]

You asked if animals feel pain, yes, of course.

I don't think I asked that. I just wondered if ants consciously decide to avoid pain or if they just respond to it automatically. It's the whole assumption of consciousness part that I think is shaky. You could build a robotic ant to respond in exactly the same way. However, I accept that doesn't really matter. I don't want to complicate matters unnecessarily. I do however enjoy a natural curiosity, and use of the word 'sentient' got me thinking about what it means exactly. It seemed important at the time as it is the difference between life and death, literally.

Sorry, I meant ant. Ants can feel pain, have you never seen an injured one writhing, just like us?

We tend to associate a lack of voice with a lack of sensation, since we conclude from ourselves who scream when in great pain.

I just wondered if ants consciously decide to avoid pain or if they just respond to it automatically.

Do you consciously decide to avoid pain or does it happen automatically?

and use of the word 'sentient' got me thinking about what it means exactly.

We all asked that before...

[Annapurna]

For your reading convenience, Sanghamitta:

Intelligence
Main article: Cephalopod intelligence

Octopuses are highly intelligent, likely more so than any other order of invertebrates. The exact extent of their intelligence and learning capability is much debated among biologists,[5][6][7][8] but maze and problem-solving experiments have shown that they do have both short- and long-term memory. Their short lifespans limit the amount they can ultimately learn. There has been much speculation to the effect that almost all octopus behaviors are independently learned rather than instinct-based, although this remains largely unproven. They learn almost no behaviors from their parents, with whom young octopuses have very little contact.
An octopus opening a container with a screw cap

An octopus has a highly complex nervous system, only part of which is localized in its brain. Two-thirds of an octopus's neurons are found in the nerve cords of its arms, which have a remarkable amount of autonomy. Octopus arms show a wide variety of complex reflex actions arising on at least three different levels of the nervous system. Unlike vertebrates, the complex motor skills of octopuses in their higher brain are not organized using an internal somatotopic map of its body.[9] Some octopuses, such as the mimic octopus, will move their arms in ways that emulate the movements of other sea creatures.

In laboratory experiments, octopuses can be readily trained to distinguish between different shapes and patterns. They have been reported to practice observational learning,[10] although the validity of these findings is widely contested on a number of grounds.[5][6] Octopuses have also been observed in what some have described as play: repeatedly releasing bottles or toys into a circular current in their aquariums and then catching them.[11] Octopuses often break out of their aquariums and sometimes into others in search of food. They have even boarded fishing boats and opened holds to eat crabs.[7]

In some countries, octopuses are on the list of experimental animals on which surgery may not be performed without anesthesia. In the UK, cephalopods such as octopuses are regarded as honorary vertebrates under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and other cruelty to animals legislation, extending to them protections not normally afforded to invertebrates.[12]

The octopus is the only invertebrate which has been conclusively shown to use tools. At least four specimens of the Veined Octopus (Amphioctopus marginatus) have been witnessed retrieving discarded coconut shells, manipulating them, and then reassembling them to use as shelter. This discovery was documented in the journal Current Biology and has also been caught on video.[13][14]

[Riverbend]

Anna, I am not assuming ants do not feel pain. I am only saying I cannot assume that they have a subjective self-awareness or consciousness. Feeling pain does not qualify one for subjective self-awareness. When I feel pain I react, but that is not the issue. The issue is that I am aware of an 'I' who feels pain. I can ask who or what that 'I' is. And I am led to an understanding of no permanent, unchanging self.

The octopus in your example is no doubt intelligent. But that is not what I am questioning.

Again I hasten to add I am not trying to justify harming any living thing. I am terrified of spiders, as I said, but I still capture them alive and let them out even though I know they'll just come back in; and I am pretty sure they have no subjective self-awareness.

[Wind]

Hi Riverbend.

You should watch a documentary on the lives of ants. Not only do ants have individual awareness but they also have compassion for their colony. A recent studies shows ants who contracted a terminal disease would choose to leave their colony so not to spread it to others and they die alone.

http://atheism.about.com/b/2008/10/09/e ... colony.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Annapurna]

Anna, I am not assuming ants do not feel pain. I am only saying I cannot assume that they have a subjective self-awareness or consciousness. Feeling pain does not qualify one for subjective self-awareness. When I feel pain I react, but that is not the issue. The issue is that I am aware of an 'I' who feels pain. I can ask who or what that 'I' is. And I am led to an understanding of no permanent, unchanging self.

The octopus in your example is no doubt intelligent. But that is not what I am questioning.

Again I hasten to add I am not trying to justify harming any living thing. I am terrified of spiders, as I said, but I still capture them alive and let them out even though I know they'll just come back in; and I am pretty sure they have no subjective self-awareness.

Yeah, spiders ARE scary, especially when they run fast and you can't even look that fast where to, making you jump just SOMEWHERE. I prefer them over winged beasts though.

Did you know mosquitos are fortune tellers?

They'll always fly to where you can't get them.

They must be very clever as well, at least when it comes to judging human reach.

[Sanghamitta]

I doubt if any invertebrate possesses your number 4, brennenmang.

Of course it does.

Google octopus.

An Octopus has no back bone, it is an invertebrate. It is highly intelligent.

Thank you for that Annapurna. This is very interesting to me as part of my first degree was in Neurology.
Octopuses are clearly more intelligent than I realised. On reading further I see that there is still doubt about whether their intelligence (which we will return to ) equates to problem solving skills that are not instinctive or whether they are entirely instinctive.
What is clear is that no invertebrate has the neurological equipment for thought processes which was a key part of brennanmangs list of five qualities. " Intelligence "as used by the scientific community does not exclusively imply a "mind" or cognition's. It has to do with learning. Which even in human beings includes behavioural aspects with no cognitive activity. For example a learned salivation response occurs in the absence of cognitive activity.
According to Paulson, who has carried out extensive research on the cephalopod nervous system, cephalopods including octopuses do not have the particular neurological structures which indicate and necessitate cognitive behaviour. Cognitive behaviour is characterised by activity called oscillations which are entirely absent in invertebrates, and indeed are absent in most vertebrates.

Ergo they do not have "thoughts " as such , nor "mental activity" as commonly understood.
Ergo we cannot include cognitive or mental functions in our model of sentience. That would exclude whole Phyla that are universally regarded as sentient.
So breenanmangs theoretical model is not acceptable. Which does not indicate that as a working model it is without merit.

[Annapurna]

Sanghamitta, thank you.

Would you say that intention, intentional activities and memory require 'thoughts'?

[Riverbend]

A recent studies shows ants who contracted a terminal disease would choose to leave their colony so not to spread it to others and they die alone.

I'll watch the documentary if I have time to, but your example above is not evidence of awareness but perhaps of a biologically programmed response chosen by natural selection. The sick ant could act in exactly the same way if it had no awareness at all and you'd never know the difference.

[Sanghamitta]

I think we have to be careful about our terms of reference here. The khandas do not equate in a simple way to western psychological models. Within the khandas there is a clear demarcation between sanna and sankhara*. Some mental activities fall into the first catagory and some into the second. Volitional activity and cognitive activity can be in association or not.

Just as a reminder this was my response.
* To which I would add vinnana.

I think its also worth recapitulating the basic discussion which is to do the nature of sentience. Which Buddhadhamma doesnot define in a clear cut way. There is some agreement about that which is not sentient. But sentience itself is a modern westernised concept which only partially corresponds to ancient Indian thought.
If your basic question Riverbend is if you become a Buddhist should you allow yourself to killed, by a lion or anything else, then my own answer would be absolutely not. You should take action at the lowest level necessary to preserve your life. That lowest level necessary might be quite a high level of response in fact.

[Sanghamitta]

A recent studies shows ants who contracted a terminal disease would choose to leave their colony so not to spread it to others and they die alone.

I'll watch the documentary if I have time to, but your example above is not evidence of awareness but of a biologically programmed response chosen by natural selection. The sick ant could act in exactly the same way if it had no awareness at all and you'd never know the difference.

Quite. To ascribe altruism to an invertebrate is a particularly extreme variety of anthropomorphism. Dr Dawkins would spit out his Darjeeling.

[Annapurna]

Sanghamitta, if you speak to beginners like Riverbend, terms like sanna and sankhara will make no sense. Could you add an explanation or link to those?

And ...

Would you say that intention, intentional activities and memory require 'thoughts'?