(May 4, 2017 at 1:29 pm)SteveII Wrote:(May 4, 2017 at 12:54 pm)Grandizer Wrote: You quoted this from Wikipedia:
Couldn't non-human animals be on the lower end of the spectrum of such consciousness, while humans are further along the spectrum? It doesn't seem like there is a strictly categorical difference between human and non-human consciousness. After all, empirical evidence has shown that, even in some non-human animals, there is some basic recognition of the self. Heard of Alex the parrot? You should google it.
Sure there is a spectrum. But there very much is a significant difference between human and non-human consciousness. Awareness of self isn't the only thing (and I don't think there is empirical evidence that any animal comes close to the self-awareness we have). There are matters of introspection, the use of language, abstract objects/thoughts, reasoning/rationalizing/motivation, morality (difference between is and ought), investigation, invention, creativity, imagination, aesthetics, etc.
Assigning a baby (unborn or newborn--doesn't really matter) value by trying to find the right animal to compare its current state of development to seems ludicrous to me.
Just to note that I edited my previous response before your submission of this one to clarify a little that I was referring to mirror studies for the empirical evidence and to elaborate on what Alex the parrot was aware of.
Anyway, all these cognitive abilities you mentioned may just as simply be advanced versions of basic functions found in non-human animals. We don't know if these are indicators of categorical differences rather than differences in degrees.
As such, it is not clear there are inherent differences (in the sense that you intuit "inherent") between humans and other animals with regards to consciousness.
