Reptile Emotions Debate

[fugawi]

Sam.....You seem to forget there is no conclusive evidence either way, so the debate continues.
A Shingle back will remain with a partner well after the partner is roadkill. Instinct would be to leave as soon as it recognises its partner is dead or even to eat the partner but they don't. They seem to show a connection. Love, I doubt it, but some sort of reptile emotional connection, possibly. Again, no evidence either way so any conclusions are speculative at best.

 

[ianinoz]

Longqi....Observations of wild reptiles would also be needed.

I have Davey, my Central Beardie, sitting on the warmest part of my laptop, watching the screen as I type this. If he acted purely on instinct, he should be flaring up and showing a flight or fight instinct but he doesn't. He has his head on my wrist, occasionally watching the screen, when he actually opens his eyes. He is showing no instinctual behaviour except warming his tummy. How can this be explained? I don't believe he is showing love, but he is showing a knowledge that he won't be hurt and feels comfortable enough to close his eyes while resting his head on my wrist. I say he is feeling comfortable because a feeling is an emotive response.

Wow!!

And I thought Lizzy was friendly.

Littleredjim is conducting exactly this experiment as we talk here
It has only be going for one day so far so results are interesting but by no means conclusive in any way
Go back about 3 or 4 pages and have a gander

I have both 'pet' and breeding stock
The reaction and interaction of both is very different in my opinion
Just as simple example I would never expect any of my pet reptiles to even hint at a threat display no matter who is handling them
But I definitely cannot say the same about the breeding stock that are seldom handled
So if their natural instinct is flee or fight and this has changed in the pet ones
Surely other things may have changed as well???

Fugawi
There is probably enough testing/reporting been done on wild reptiles
That is where most of the scientific results have come from
So we probably can just use those tests as a very valid comparison??

Uh Oh
mammals and reptiles again
If someone had tested the first wild dogs for emotional response I think the answers would be very different to testing a lap dog from nowdays???

Do my observations of Lizzy , who is wild and free to come and go as he pleases count as useful observations of a wild lizard (even if he has become accustomed to being around my wife and I) ?

 

[longqi]

Ian
Yes your observations are very valid to this debate
Some may say they are not definitive proof but your comments are welcomed

 

[fugawi]

Even circumstantial evidence is still evidence.

 

[redlittlejim]

Ok everyone, once again the test was performed. I made my wife wear my work uniform after i had been in it all day along with gloves. And i wore her robe and stretchy pants plus gloves.
I have made it a little more in depth now that this has turned into quite a good debate. We take turns grabbing the snake out and placing on the ground and we both walk awaay together and shuffle about and then split up to seperate areas. 1st test is about 2metres away, then 4, 5, 6. if the snake doesnt not act in a space of about 30-60seconds we take a step closer.

Morning trial: Coastal 1st- went to my wife and wrapped around her leg. (1st time ever in 6months) 2nd- came to me, 3rd- me, 4th- me. Although on the first day it went close to her it didnt actually go up onto her leg like it did this time.
Olive 1st- went to me, 2nd Neither 3rd me after 2 steps, 4th wife after 3steps.

Afternoon trial: Coastal 1st- me 2nd me 3rd me 4th me after 3steps.
olive 1st- wife, 2nd wife, 3, neither even after many steps. 4th wife.

Im trying to think of a way that would stop the coastal getting my "scent" or anything like that after the first test, all body parts except face where covered. i may try getting my wife "scent her clothes" by going for a slight jog in them first? as she wore my work clothes after a full night shift. I was honestly shocked by my coastal going up to her, however it seems after i went up and we replaced it back in the centre it "scented" or whatever is the correct term, me again?!
Nothing conclussive, just a fun little test

 

[longqi]

^^^^
Very cool
Ty for putting in this effort

 

[redlittlejim]

my pleasure. other than being tired in the morning when i get home from night shift its actually pretty cool seeing what they will do. the olive is always a lot more unpredictable but my coastal used to be a sure thing... so far, tho obviously not conclussive, i assume that my coastal is able to recognise me (smell or someway) and "feels" more comfortable or safer or however you wish to put it, near me than my wife. before the attempt to 'trick' with the clothes swapping the coastal was a 100% to me. so pretty cool

 

[D3pro]

Holycow this thread has lost me...
Sigh...

 

[souldoubt]

Don't twist my words mate... Where in any of my posts have I said anything close to this? I am talking about reptiles... A lot of other animals do have and show emotion; they can also be taught to do things on command (even defecate!). However there is always the possibility of any animals natural instinct to appear. Reptile on the other hand do not obey commands, come when called etc.

Here's a little experiment for you or anyone; go get a mate of yours that doesn't frequent your house and/or collection, put a snake in the middle of the room and go on opposite sides of the room. If the snake goes to you (seeing as they are most peoples 'companions') let me know, however film it and show us.



I'm curious... So what is the difference between a pet reptile and a lab owned one that they study and learn off?

I'm sure they have them set up in boxes (enclosures) and feed them as frequently as we do (depending on the study being done). So what is the difference? That they don't handle them or interact with them as much?

I have reptiles in my collection that I've had countless hours of interaction with, raised from hatchies and others with none at all (just feed, clean etc.) and neither of them act differently to each other in any way shape or form.

Does this mean I have dud reptiles? No, it simply means I am not trying to convince myself that they care about me as they are incapable of doing so...

I'm interested as to how you can confirm so conclusively that reptiles are incapable of emotion? Science has not proved one way or the other so you can say their is no proof that reptiles have emotion but there's also no proof that they dont.

I hate to bring up the mammal thing but cats don't generally obey commands and rarely come when called, does that mean they are incapable of having emotions?

I have noticed that it seems to be common for members of the "No" party to have a very narrow definition of emotion. There are more emotions than love, affection and concern for another.

 

[carterd]

Pets don't Love us, they depend on us.

But its ok to pretend, that they do have Emotion.

The proof is we humans have free will, animals don't.

What you witness is learned behaviour.

Emotion has nothing to do with Biology.

 

[marteed]

As humans I think we anthromorphisize a lot of animals. Animals I believe have emotions, but not in the way or extent we think they do! So, I think yes!

 

[longqi]

Pets don't Love us, they depend on us.

But its ok to pretend, that they do have Emotion.

The proof is we humans have free will, animals don't.

What you witness is learned behaviour.

Emotion has nothing to do with Biology.

I would think that any wild animal has free will??
It is only after we put them in boxes or farms etc that their free will is taken away??
So could we say 'Pets' dont have free will??

 

[ianinoz]

My little pal Lizzy certainly has free will.

He's free to come and go and has the run of the house, he chose to live with us, and chose to interact with us. (If anything, Lizzy was more a guest than a pet since Lizzy doesn't depend on us.)

 

[cement]

Maybe, but the problem with that is that the people looking after the reptile as a pet has no idea what they are looking for.... most likely from the lack of scientific backing

You don't have to have a scientific background to understand how things run. In fact, in my humble opinion, it's better if you don't.
All you need is your own personal experience over time.
There is such a thing (scientifically known thing), called "The wisdom of the averages".

This is based on an experiment ,but I don't have time to elaborate on that now. It basically found that there will be your fanatics at one end and the opposite at the other. Or, very good at one end and no good at the other. In a group of people with little to no experience on an issue, they can be tested and found that the balancing of the scale of knowledge averaged out at the right outcome.

 

[Inspiration]

It's illegal to own a crocodile in Queensland, but a guy about 20k from us owned one and the council caught up with him. The trouble is, it was an estuarine crocodile who had a swimming pool in the backyard and was allowed in and out of the house as it pleased, would come when it was called and used to hang out in the kitchen waiting for the owner to drop food. Yep, it blew me away and it angered me that the croc had to go to a wildlife park since it was a definate pet, and knew no other way of living. I felt really sad for the owner and the croc for being separated and wondered if they would both cope well with the changes. I know the owner is heartbroken because he could communicate that to the papers, but was the crocodile heartbroken? I don't know, he seems to have adapted ok, but is he as happy in the swamp as he was in the house? I think unless we can communicate with them effectively, or we become one for a day, we're not going to have a definate answer.

 

[ianinoz]

It's illegal to own a crocodile in Queensland, but a guy about 20k from us owned one and the council caught up with him. The trouble is, it was an estuarine crocodile who had a swimming pool in the backyard and was allowed in and out of the house as it pleased, would come when it was called and used to hang out in the kitchen waiting for the owner to drop food. Yep, it blew me away and it angered me that the croc had to go to a wildlife park since it was a definate pet, and knew no other way of living. I felt really sad for the owner and the croc for being separated and wondered if they would both cope well with the changes. I know the owner is heartbroken because he could communicate that to the papers, but was the crocodile heartbroken? I don't know, he seems to have adapted ok, but is he as happy in the swamp as he was in the house? I think unless we can communicate with them effectively, or we become one for a day, we're not going to have a definate answer.

I'm guessing the salty was a juvinile.

I can relate to how he is feeling, I'm sure Lizzy is bromating for winter and will be back in a few months, but I do miss Lizzy's daily visits and his antics.

 

[Recharge]

I would think that any wild animal has free will??
It is only after we put them in boxes or farms etc that their free will is taken away??
So could we say 'Pets' dont have free will??

look up the meaning of free will.
"“Free Will” is a philosophical term of art for a particular sort of capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from among various alternatives."
it requires you to have full cognitive ability of full self realisation.
in any and all forms of testing for this ability, almost no other animal has this, so no, you're incorrect.

 

[kawasakirider]

I hope this hasn't been brought up in the past few pages, if it has, forgive me. Waruikazi posted something in another that I found interesting. He has experience with crocodiles, so I say it's credible (I've also heard of crocs learning how to avoid traps).

It should be shot. There is little point in relocating them, they end up back where they started with the only difference being they are more wise to the traps and more dangerous.

Crocs and people don't mix. 'Cheeky' crocs either need to be sent to farms (where they end up shot or in a cage where they may aswell be dead anyway) or killed.

If this is correct, it indicates that reptiles are capable of cognitive thought.

Edit

I've just read back a few pages and the posts regarding "lizzy" the wild lizard reminded me of something. Movie World on the Gold Coast has (if it's still there) a wild frilled neck lizard, I swear it was a frilled neck, I'm not sure if the goldy is in their natural range, so it may have been a beardie. Still fairly sure it was a frilled neck....

Anyway, it lives(d) in the wild west part of the theme park, in a fenced off area with a fair bit of scrub in the middle of a walkway. I was eating lunch and I noticed it, so I threw a piece of hamburger patty to it, and it came right over to me. It was quite large, and I kept on feeding it. A bunch of asian tourists crowded around thinking I was a handler, and asked me if they could take pics.

I'm always up for winding people up, so I said yes and kinda gave them a big speech, haha. The lizard remained there eating the pieces that I gave to it whilst the tourists took photo's for almost ten minutes. After they left he stayed around for a while, but he realised he wasn't going to get anything else and bolted back to his patch of bush. He was very close to me, and surrounded by a bunch of people and kept eating. He wasn't fased one bit.

Food for thought....

 

[longqi]

look up the meaning of free will.
"“Free Will” is a philosophical term of art for a particular sort of capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from among various alternatives."
it requires you to have full cognitive ability of full self realisation.
in any and all forms of testing for this ability, almost no other animal has this, so no, you're incorrect.

Here were the definitions I found
free willn.1. The ability or discretion to choose; free choice: chose to remain behind of my own free will.
2. The power of making free choices that are unconstrained by external circumstances or by an agency such as fate or divine will.

[Middle English fre wil, translation of Late Latin l

berum arbitrium : Latin l

berum, neuter of l

ber, free + Latin arbitrium, will.]
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
free willn1. (Philosophy)a. the apparent human ability to make choices that are not externally determined
b. the doctrine that such human freedom of choice is not illusory Compare determinism
c. (as modifier) a free-will decision

2. the ability to make a choice without coercion he left of his own free will: I did not influence him

Although one of these does refer only to humans I think the others could also refer to animals??
Surely 'the power to make a choice without coercion' could equally apply to any animal that is free to come and go as it chooses to??

When a rat solves various mazes time after time isnt that 'choosing a course of action from among various alternatives??
If any animal decides to 'fight or flee' it is making a rational choice based on its observations at that particular moment??
When a hunting animal selects one victim from a group of prey doesnt that exactly fit this definition??
When a pack of wolves or pride of lions select one victim, ignoring all the others; maybe the same thing could be said??
When any animal chooses a place to rest it would usually have many alternatives but would choose the best and safest option from those??
If an eagle decides to drift in the thermals for hours ignoring prey on the ground below is that not free will?/

If a human does exact things and they are called 'free will'; why cant the same thing be said if an animal does them???

I am no philosopher but this seems very strange to me unless Im missing some point here??

 

[longirostris]

Here were the definitions I found
free willn.1. The ability or discretion to choose; free choice: chose to remain behind of my own free will.
2. The power of making free choices that are unconstrained by external circumstances or by an agency such as fate or divine will.

[Middle English fre wil, translation of Late Latin l

berum arbitrium : Latin l

berum, neuter of l

ber, free + Latin arbitrium, will.]
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
free willn1. (Philosophy)a. the apparent human ability to make choices that are not externally determined
b. the doctrine that such human freedom of choice is not illusory Compare determinism
c. (as modifier) a free-will decision

2. the ability to make a choice without coercion he left of his own free will: I did not influence him

Although one of these does refer only to humans I think the others could also refer to animals??
Surely 'the power to make a choice without coercion' could equally apply to any animal that is free to come and go as it chooses to??

When a rat solves various mazes time after time isnt that 'choosing a course of action from among various alternatives??
If any animal decides to 'fight or flee' it is making a rational choice based on its observations at that particular moment??
When a hunting animal selects one victim from a group of prey doesnt that exactly fit this definition??
When a pack of wolves or pride of lions select one victim, ignoring all the others; maybe the same thing could be said??
When any animal chooses a place to rest it would usually have many alternatives but would choose the best and safest option from those??
If an eagle decides to drift in the thermals for hours ignoring prey on the ground below is that not free will?/

If a human does exact things and they are called 'free will'; why cant the same thing be said if an animal does them???

I am no philosopher but this seems very strange to me unless Im missing some point here??

Ah longqi, clearly you are trying to wind people up. Surely you can see that everyone of these behaviours you have listed could be attributed to instinct or conditioned responses. I come back to what I have said earlier. There are 3 behaviourial responses to any given circumstance or environmental stimuli. The first is instinct. Instinct is a preprogrammed response, it happens without thought, all animals including humans display instinctive reactions to given stimuli. Instinct is clearly the first explanation for most behaviours by all animals including humans.The second is a learned response through observation, this is called conditioned learning. There are a growing number of animals that have demonstrated clearly the capacity to learn through observation and repitition. The third is to think about the response to the stimuli. This is called cognitive learning. Lets present a hypothetical situation so everyone here can grasp the concept.

There are 10 humans and 10 of whatever other animal you wish to choose in 2 seperate locations. There are 2 apple trees at each location with only 5 apples on each tree. Lets assume for arguements sake that the animals we have picked are apple eaters, you could pick any type of food you want to match the animals diet in the discussion. Everybody/animal needs to eat. The first problem that presents is how do we feed everyone when there is not enough food. Well the answer in humans is simple we think through the problem and divide the food up half an apple for each person. In the animals, it will be the strongest and fittest first. There will be some sharing particularly among mothers and siblings but otherwise instinct will prevail and the strongest will eat and the rest will go hungry.

Sorry longqi, unfortunately I acccidently posted so I will have to continue this post on a follow up, not enough time to do a complete edit and I had not finished with my discussion.