Descartes: Are Animals Essentially The Same?

830 Words2 Pages

Descartes argues that animals and machines are essentially the same because animals do not have reasoning, akin to a machine. He denies that animals can think or communicate, arguing that animals lack the capability to reason, so they cannot comprehend the full meaning behind a thing, only that a thing is. For example, an animal can know that the snapping of a twig means pain or death if they don’t run, but it won’t recognize that the snapping means hunter, bow and arrow, desire to kill. Descartes states that animals can make certain movements and sounds to appear as though they feel, but they were programmed to do so when certain stimuli were encountered. He argues that animals lack the irreplicable “part” that humans have which prevents animals from communicating in such complex ways as language, “for one sees that magpies and parrots can utter words just as we do, and yet they cannot speak as we do”. He also takes note that animals do not act on intelligence, as they can do something better than we can, but they do not excel in everything we can; therefore they act only as nature programmed, and not as cognitive beings. Descartes’s argument is false because animals are …show more content…

If animals are machines because they are not aware; then their movements are just a reaction to a programmed stimuli, which is false. Awareness is being the capability to perceive oneself and its surroundings. In a sense, a machine can pretend and may even be convincing, but the machine itself is unable to perceive the “pain” that it feels whereas animals are able to genuinely react. A machine could be given a convincing action to associate with the pinching of one’s hand, but it would not associate the pinching with actual

Open Document