Ray Coppinger loves to start controversies, and he did a great job of it at the SPARCS Conference in June. He began his talk by stating that dogs are have no consciousness and are merely “acting out motor patterns.” It’s always hard to know what Ray believes and what he is saying to generate a conversation, but needless to say, he was highly successful at the latter.
The number of attendees who believed that dogs are not conscious or self aware was small indeed, no surprise there. I’ll say right off the bat that I’m one of those who believe that dogs are indeed conscious and aware, but I also think it is an important conversation to have. First, because the more we learn about comparative mental states between people and non-human animals the better. Second, because the minds of other animals might teach us something about our own cognition, and third, because there are important welfare implications of the mental lives of other animals.
Before leaping up and arguing that “of course dogs are conscious,” it is valuable to define what we’re talking about. Ah, there’s the rub, because we’re not even sure what consciousness is in humans. Miriam Webster defines consciousness in vague terms, calling it “the normal state of being awake and able to understand what is happening around you.” Ah, but what does a “normal state of being awake mean”? Wikipedia does a good job summarizing current thought and relaying a history of the use of the term, but it still is a relatively poorly understood phenomenon. Not long ago, in part because of the influence of early behaviorists, scientists were discouraged from talking about subjective states like consciousness in our own species. Recently, however, the big C has become the focus of study in a variety of fields.
I’m lucky to teach at the same university that houses one of the world’s expert researchers on consciousness, Guilio Tononi. I was able to catch one of his talks about the phenomenon, and was fascinated by his theory about its origins. I occasionally understood some of the math he uses to describe his theory, having had to learn the mathematics of information theory when I took ethology as an undergraduate. The relatively simple summary is that, he argues, consciousness occurs when all the parts of your brain are communicating with each other, as they are doing when you are awake. When you are asleep, all parts of your brain are still active, but are not communicating to each other. The value of his perspective is that, if true, we can use this perspective to determine if people who appear to be in comas are conscious, a far better method than simply asking them to answer a question when they might not be able to move or speak. At the end of his talk I asked him if he thought animals like dogs were conscious and he said “Oh yes, I don’t see why not.” Perhaps not in exactly the same way as humans, but their brains are complicated enough to generate the kind of cross-communication that he thinks is essential to consciousness.
Here’s my question for you: What would a dog need to do to prove to you that it is conscious? Guard against an immediate reaction of “Of course my dog is conscious!” Remember that people can do amazing things while sleepwalking and are completely unconscious, including driving cars in traffic. Indeed, some research suggests that most of the decisions we make are made unconsciously long before we are aware of the decision making process. So… can we know if dogs are conscious? Does it matter to you? I’m all ears…
MEANWHILE, back on the farm: All the hard work in the garden is paying off; the 50 new day lilies that we planted in new garden behind the retaining wall (also new) are starting to bloom. Right now we are pretty much in lily heaven, there are dozens of day lilies and Asian lilies blooming. And such easy keepers! You gotta love ’em. Here’s one of the new ones (from White Flower Farm).
This weekend I also got to work Willie and Maggie on sheep at a farm about an hour north of here. Willie needs work on his driving. He used to like driving, but tended to over flank and ended up stopping and starting the sheep rather than creating a continuous flow. Now he is better at staying “on the bubble” (the exact place where he needs to be to keep the sheep moving forward in the right direction) but often stops and looks back at me. That means he loses control of the sheep and has to start all over again with a “lift.” It’s a serious problem, one that means he couldn’t be competitive in a trial right now. It started after his shoulder surgery and yearlong layoff, which seemed to destroy much of his confidence. But he has always hated putting much pressure on sheep, being far happier to run huge, open outruns and avoid putting pressure on the flock. My job at the moment is to make driving fun again for him, so that’s what we’ve been doing–letting him move the sheep at a pace faster than one normally wants, loping freely after the sheep with few directional signals from me.
Maggie too needs work feeling comfortable putting pressure on the sheep. She’d much rather do an outrun and keep their heads pointed toward me than push them forward. Some dogs love the feeling of pressure between them and the sheep, as if there was an invisible rod between them. Others love to do big outruns and keep their heads pointed toward you, but avoid using the force of their presence to push the sheep forward. Dogs at the other end of the continuum are too pushy, and tend not to listen as well and move too fast. It’s a rare dog indeed who comes hard wired with the perfect amount of both push and sensitivity. Maggie and I are working on it together, and she is indeed getting more confidence. Most importantly, it feels like we are truly a team now. She is a joy to work and, truth be known, if I could get away with it I’d do little but work my dogs on sheep right now. There is so much I need to be teaching Maggie: better leash manners, more CC around unfamiliar dogs, etc. etc., but I take my spare moments and work her and Willie on sheep. Well, winter is coming soon enough, right? Plenty of time to work on that other stuff when the nights are long and the snow is flying.
Here’s Maggie on part of the new retaining wall. She loves to walk along it, and was posing beautifully by the stairs when I went to take this photo. But she lay down when I said “Stay” (she seems to have defined Stay as meaning, Lie Down and Stay, although I’ve never intentionally taught that) and then struggled to figure out how to lie down on the wall. Once down she tongue flicked, presumably somewhat nervous about her position on the wall. I was about to take another “better” photo, but thought you’d all appreciate this version.
Mireille says
I’ve interpreted consciousness as ‘being aware that the actions that one takes, has consequences for those around us’. A bit like beng able to ‘see’ what younare doing, instead of only ‘doing what you are doing’. And yes, I do believe dog’s have a consciousness, I have read and seen to many examples of dogs doing somenthing with the intention of provoking a response instead of ‘just doing’ something.
Judy Sutton says
Re Dog Consciousness: YES, they are. In fact they are more conscious than humans … especially when outdoors. How else could they survive? Perhaps I confuse consciousness with instinct and/or survival but an unconscious dog is a dead dog or drugged dog. Even when they are asleep, they have a level of consciousness. However there are those dogs who have just given up due to repeated neglect, abuse, etc. and shut down becoming unresponsive.
Pamela says
Fascinating question. And good to think about what consciousness actually means.
I think dogs show consciousness when they make choices that go against their interests if they were simply acting according to stimulus and response.
For example, my dog is food motivated. And yet she will follow me home instead of a stranger with a yummy treat.
I believe her brain is communicating amongst different parts. She has memories of me giving her yummy treats at other times. And my familiarity is more comforting to her than novelty, even when it smells like liver cookies.
gayla says
I like Mireille’s definition/interpretation. But I’d stop at “has consequences.” Not just for those around us, but also (mostly?) for ourselves. Lineal thinking. And with the debate about dog’s ability to conceptualize time, I can see the argument against it. I think the argument is absurd,of course. But I can see it.
Monika & Sam says
Ah, yes, semantics…easy to cause trouble…every time. Thanks for posting a thought provoking topic that undoubtedly will take lots of different sides by different folks. 🙂
LisaW says
Your descriptions of Willie’s and Maggie’s mild aversion to putting pressure on the flock seems to me to be a great example of consciousness. When they move beyond their lack of confidence and/or unease and move the sheep forward in the right direction at the right speed, they are doing so with the consciousness of pushing past their hesitation and doing what you asked. How could that not be a conscious act? (I know you stated you believed that animals had consciousness, but it was such a clear example to me.)
One example of my dog’s consciousness is her traumatic stress disorder. Her response to certain stimuli and contexts (phantom tail syndrome, certain movements or sounds) demonstrates a strong connection and communication with her brain and I’d add body. She also has bad dreams on occasion (waking up with a high jump and cry or snarl), and I would posit that as another example of her consciousness. I think sleepwalking or bad dreams are indicative of consciousness. We may not be fully conscious, but aren’t we responding to things we experienced while awake just in a less conscious state? If she didn’t have consciousness, why would she have bad dreams?
Mike Koenig says
I believe “consciousness” has a lot to do with being able to understand, and then appropriately react to a “non-standard” situation. As an example of this were the quick actions taken by my 12 Y.O. female Siberian Husky/Vizsla cross, Mahlee. (I adopted her from H.O.P.E. Safehouse in Racine WI, exactly two months ago as a companion for my 14 Y.O. male “Heinz 57” cross, Riley.)
Mahlee, Riley, and I, go to the local off-lead dog park in Racine almost every night. One of Mahlee’s dog friends at the dog park is an 11 month old female Doberman Pinscher named Gracie. Gracie was born totally deaf. Gracie’s owner is doing a great job of socializing her to other dogs, and Gracie is learning to accept and play with other dogs at the dog park. Gracie still gets startled when other “hearing” dogs approach her too quickly from behind, because she can’t hear them coming.
I was standing talking to Gracie’s owner, with Gracie sitting next to her. A certain 2 Y.O. female Golden Retriever, who is a little over-bearing at times, was trying to instigate something with Gracie, which Gracie was trying desparately to ignore. Mahlee was standing by Gracie, and all of a sudden Mahlee stood straight and tall, and she gave the Golden Retriever one loud, sharp, warning bark to leave Gracie alone. When the Golden ignored this warning, immediately Mahlee, who was standing about 12 inches from the Golden, gave the Retriever a single, quick and very hard shoulder- smash, which knocked the Golden sideways by about 2 feet. There was no further barking from Mahlee, nor was there ever any growling. This shoulder-bump was enough to definitely get the message across to the Golden to leave Gracie alone. The Golden walked away.
To me, Mahlee’s actions showed both consciousness, and some altruism, since she was able to quickly assess a threatening situation to a “friend in need”, and then she took swift and decisive “non-violent” action to remedy the situation. She appeared to think only of Gracie and not of herself.
Kat says
I love all the thought provoking blogs you write. I’m firmly in the dogs have consciousness camp. There are certainly a lot of rote/practiced behaviors that dogs and people do that don’t require consciousness; sleep driving for example. Driving, when you’ve done it a lot, becomes a combination of muscle memory and practiced scenarios. I would imagine that hunting behavior would also be muscle memory and practiced scenarios to an adult wolf. The same would probably be true of fetching a ball for a dog.
Where I see consciousness in my dogs is their problem solving in novel circumstances. The example I’m thinking of is how Ranger solved the problem of being asked to paws up on something not strong enough to support his weight. The local pet food store holds quarterly events which include dog obstacle/activity courses and/or games. People pay a nominal fee to have their dog participate and the proceeds support a local dog charity. Dogs that excel win prizes. This particular event was a tricks course where you walked around the course and at each station asked your dog for a trick if they could do the trick/behavior you won a point, get all the points win a prize. Ranger had been doing everything I asked of him until we came to the paws up station. He took one look at the flimsy plastic box that he was to put his paws on and refused. My interpretation was that he realized the box was not strong enough to support him. I agreed the box wasn’t strong enough and told him to walk on but he refused, studied the situation for a bit and laid down with his fore paws draped over the box. He had created a novel solution that met the criteria of putting his paws on the box without collapsing the box under him. The calculations he needed to make–identifying the behavior, realizing the box wasn’t strong enough, figuring out how to put his paws on the box without breaking it–required more than simply muscle memory and practice; he had to apply the things he knows to solve a problem. To me that takes consciousness.
diane says
Mr. Coppinger is an interesting character. I am trying to watch all the 2013 seminars and selected one of his talks just to see if he was as cantankerous as he seemed in the 2014 panel discussions! I thought he was quite controversial, but genuinely interested in getting people to think. (like my opinion matters!)
I would disagree with his statement. Consciousness is hard to define and beyond me to do so. I found the idea that the math could help determine the true states of people or any animal in a coma interesting and hopeful in the hands of people with knowledge and skill to do so.
But I see too many decisions made and problems solved by dogs (and many other animals) to support a statement that they are just acting out motor patterns. My first dog actively communicated to me through body language to bring me to a bird caught in a twine in our tree in the back yard (why he wanted to show me the bird may not have been for me to set the bird free – he was probably disappointed when it was not awarded to him) – but he actively sought me out in the front yard, and kept communicating with me to follow him to the bird. This is problem solving to gain a result…not just motor patterns.
Perhaps Mr. Coppinger meant a higher consciousness????? – Good luck defining that one. And if that’s what he meant, then just throw me in the motor pattern category along with the dogs!
Marjorie says
Interesting question. I believe all life has its own level of consciousness. For me consciousness is self awareness and the ability to reflect upon that awareness. I think people who live with animals and who are close to nature are always light years ahead of where the scientist are in acceptance and understanding of the essence of life.
parallel says
I think before we can ask the question of dogs, we need to ask it of ourselves. The vast majority of humans simply assume that we are conscious. I think many assume that even if dogs are as well, the human consciousness is somehow *different* or more so….that consciousness is not simply there or not but a scale that differs from intelligence.
When I was quite young I read a series of books that talked about the mind as a machine that runs programs. We’re apes and if we see a treat, we cheer. If we see a threat, we scream. We don’t get a choice in being an instinct driven, hard-wired machine. Pretending that we’re not results in bad decision making; a machine that insists it isn’t a machine won’t be in charge of what programs it runs. That’s the only choice we get to make, and the most effective, efficient way to do that starts with admitting that what we call consciousness is just window dressing. It doesn’t make us not machines, just machines that know we are machines and therefore have the ability to change our operating mode.
That idea stuck with me in a very profound way. Consciousness then is defined as the ability to change one’s mode. That in turn is defined as the ability to recognize when one’s actions are inappropriate to the situation (an appropriate action gets results, it’s that simple) and changing one’s actions in response, even if it goes against one’s instincts or desires. An inner sense of self is simply what is necessary to give us that ability and is just part of the biological machine. This does put consciousness on a scale then; we are all conscious, but some are more conscious than others because they understand consciousness as a program of the machine.
Okay, I’ve prattled on quite a bit. I don’t know why this stuck with me so hard, but I think about it often and try to make sure I’m acting appropriately to achieve the results I want, not just running old programs for the sake of running them. Under this theory, I do believe that dogs and other animals are conscious. Perhaps even more so than humans, because a dog isn’t going to insist they aren’t a machine.
Harry George says
I’m not sure that starting from the proposition that dogs do not have consciousness is at all helpful because it is patently obvious to anyone who has interacted with dogs that they do. It is, however, quite interesting to inquire as to the nature and extent of their consciousness and how similar or dissimilar it is to human consciousness.
My dog can’t speak and can’t read, but he is far more conscious of what is going on around him than I am – because several of his senses are far more acute than mine. Basically, he takes in information and makes decisions on what to do about it and he initiates communications about many things and responds to communications from me. I’m sure he has no concept of infinity or a republican form of government, but other than the scope of our consciousnesses, I really don’t see that the nature of his consciousness and mine are that different. I also perceive that he is far better and discerning and understanding non-verbal communications than I am or other humans are. Defining the scope of those similarities and differences is quite interesting. Debating whether dogs have consciousness at all is a rather foolish exercise, in my opinion.
Em says
Learned behaviours would convince me. There are some responses based on autonomic functions such as salivation that can be generated unconsciously such as in the case of Pavlov’s experiment. Behaviours such as learning to sit may eventually become automatic (if you do it right), but the act of learning these behaviours requires consciousness and all parts of the brain working together.
Nic1 says
I tend to think dogs are conscious – they are capable of learning in specific ways and can problem solve. They are capable of developing ‘relationships’ with humans and other types of animals. They don’t understand reciprocity as we do and I would tend to think that they are not rational and are amoral. They do stuff because it gets them what they want or it makes them feel good. There isn’t much evidence that they mentally time travel (perhaps olfactory memory though?) and they lack the ability to generalise behaviour between contexts. Dogs don’t have the same monkey brain as ours (much smaller pre frontal cortex) and therefore have slightly different biology when it comes to behaviour and decision making. We will never know what it feels like to be a dog.
Some types and breeds of dogs are compelled to practice certain motor pattern sequences because they have been selectively bred with that in mind. These tend to be built around the predatory motor pattern sequence. This does not make them unconscious simply because they are compelled by genetics and the environment to fulfill this.
Fascinating! I have no idea if I am on the right path here but I am off to read more!
Kristina Spaulding says
Such an interesting question! I agree that it is one that is very difficult question to answer. As you say, the two main issues are definition and measurement. Part of the difficulty comes from the fact that consciousness is typically used to describe different things. For one, it can be used to describe a state of wakefulness which obviously dogs have, and I think it is the least interesting question.
It also often refers to self-awareness which Gordon Gallup defines as the ability to “reflect on oneself”. Self-awareness is required for all kinds of other abilities such as empathy, perspective taking (imagining yourself in the place of another) and theory of mind. Theory of mind involves having the ability to understand that other individuals have different thoughts, beliefs, values, etc. than your own AND being able to use that information to make predictions about their behavior and guide your interactions with them. The jury is still out here and much more research needs to be done, but evidence suggests that dogs do not recognize themselves in mirrors, which is a requirement for self-awareness.
But there is also a third way of defining consciousness, the most elusive type. Here is a quote from the New York Time’s article you linked: “Consciousness, Dr. Tononi says, is nothing more than integrated information. ” Based on this definition, I do think dogs have consciousness. To me, learning would not be possible without integrating information (I know that Skinnerian behaviorists would take major issue with equating learning and consciousness) and dogs are not only capable of learning, but they are capable of quite complex learning. If we wanted to be particularly rigorous in testing their consciousness then I think we would need to be able to show – neurologically – that different brain areas are communicating with each and integrating information in dogs. I don’t think we are at the point yet where we can clearly answer this question, but I have high hopes that we will be there at some point in the future.
I like Tononi’s theory because it allows for a continuum of consciousness, within individuals as well as within and between species. I do not believe that our dogs’ consciousness looks the same as our own – how could it, given their different perceptual experience of the world? But, I also think that difference is one of the reasons we find them so appealing. If they were just like humans, then they would lose that dogginess that makes us love them so much.
Nate says
I feel like I am being lured into a motor pattern by replying to the subject of consciousness in a dog. Any living organism is conscious, there may be a scale to the awareness but in my opinion if an animal or beings senses are functioning there is some consciousness. If we as humans can feel, think, and do why would this not apply to animals as well?
More specifically to dogs, I had a rescue that was being abused…very reactive little fellow, if you accidentally stepped on him or tripped over him he was gonna defend himself. Over time he learned to trust and tell this was unintentional and stopped acting as such. However one day this little guy did something that caused me to loose my temper and something he sensed either by sight, sound, smell or whatever alerted him to take a different stance. Of course I caught myself and felt shameful for letting something I don’t even remember upset me so. To me that ability to perceive and judge a situation is awareness making a dog able to achieve consciousness.
Kathryn says
I think that consciousness involves an ability to think about and choose among possibilities in the environment–as opposed to simply reacting to an immediate stimulus. Making choices, even a simple choice like the chicken looks tastier than the biscuit, requires some level of self awareness.
Accordingly, dogs show consciousness when they show that they have thought out an issue beyond a simple “if A then B” level. For example, an old dog of mine got tired of my other dog guarding all the toys. Although she had never barked before, she ran to a window barking after having mooned over a toy in my toy hoarder’s possession for a hour or so, which caused my toy hoarder to run to the window. As soon as the other dog was distracted, my old dog ran happily to the toys. This required her to 1. identify something she wanted, 2. plan how to get it (distraction), 3. identify an activity (barking at window) that the other dog would want to do more than playing with the toy, and then 4. figure out how to get the other dog to do this alternate activity.
Similarly, I think my current dog was exhibiting a form of consciousness when she became agitated when I crated my puppy in someone else’s house while we trained outside (it was a little hot to leave him in the car). She does not display any signs of agitation when I leave him crated in my car while we train, or if I leave him crated in any new location along with my stuff. But, while he was in my friend’s house, she repeatedly tried to go in and check on him.
I know some would say she was merely acting on instinct (she is a female and a member of a herding breed), and I’m sure this is true to a degree. But she was also clearly reasoning that whatever she is concerned about (possibly that he will be left behind or injured) is less likely to happen if he is in our car or, more interestingly, if I “claim” the space in which I leave him with a coat or a bag. This is fairly abstract thinking on her part: if puppy is left behind (“A”), this is bad (“B”), but if puppy is left (“A”) with a coat or bag (“C”), puppy is probably safe (“S”).
We don’t accuse human mothers of being unconscious when they get worried about leaving their child in a strange place or if they calm down about the strange place when they see someone or something familiar! I think consciousness is really a continuum of sorts and that we all (humans and animals both) move up and down it–a human mother might react on instinct alone if she sees her child about to fall, but no one says its simply instinct when she periodically goes to check on her child playing in the yard to make sure the environment is safe–although she is still closer to instinct on the continuum than if she were working a calculus problem.
It’s a bit arrogant to think that other animals can’t possibly be conscious–it is reminiscent of those who were sure that our planet was the center of the universe!
Marianne Johnson says
I believe that dogs are conscious. I have watched our many dogs interact is so many ways over the years. All with their own personalities, for their own reasons.
Ourlast dog, Sheera, was the leader of the extended family pack (over 30 people and 6 dogs when we’re all together). She would keep the peace amongst the critters, and occasionally the humans, when she thought the level of excitement was too high in the group with one loud bark. All the dogs, not just whoever was “rumpusing” would stop and immediately wander off in a different directions. Between people, she would push into the middle of the group who she deemed to “loud and excited” and bark, once. Since she was 100 pound Rottweiler, people tended to listen 🙂 Her body posture was never threatening with humans, more appeasing, ears back, lips relaxed, butt wiggling. All smiles in fact, just LOUD. With the dogs, she would be relaxed, unless someone was too excited to pay attention. Several times she physically intervened in a situation she deemed had gotten out of hand by body slamming the aggressor and rolling them. Not much vocalization that I could hear, her teeth would be bared, but not to the gum line, mostly using her weight and strength to keep the other dog down. Then she would check out the “abused” dog, sniff them head to toe, and occasionally administer a lick or two. After that Sheera would wander off for a nap or a scratch. In a few minutes all the dogs would be back to hanging out again, peace restored. Sheera would keep an eye (or ear?) on the group for a while, though. I did catch a few hard stares from Sheera towards the aggressor dog in situations when she had intervened. Almost as if she didn’t trust that dog not to start something again. It was fascinating to watch. Most of these situations occurred when an older dog got too aroused while playing with a puppy, who would start to panic and yelp. Once it involved a young dog who became so aroused during a play session in the group that the dog bit a young man in the butt (he was rough-housing with the dog, then turned and ran away from her). That time Sheera was very adamant in her intervention. The schooling Sheera handed out to the young dog was harsh and loud. We intervened by calling to Sheera who stood over the younger dog, glaring at her, till my husband and the other dog’s owner got to them. Sheera stalked off with my husband and the younger dog slunk off with her dad. Minutes later all seemed well amongst the dogs, Sheera even barking at one of the other dog’s who got too pushy with young female dog who started the whole business in the first place. I was busy staunching the blood flow on the butt. I can’t say whether Sheera “knew” that biting a human was out of line, or that drawing blood was unacceptable. But to me the fact that Sheera would temper her response to the seriousness of the situation shows conscious thought and decision making.
I think these complex behaviors show consciousness because Sheera had to “learn” appropriate responses from older dogs that she then taught to younger dogs.
Marilyn Kircus says
By the definition of that different parts of the brain communicate, I see dogs showing consciousness. Yesterday I walked past a little German Shepherd mix. She sat up in a very collected pose, made hard direct eye contact with me and then stared at her ball which was sitting about six feet in front of her. I had no problem with that communication. If that had been a child, it would have used words to express its thoughts and asked me to throw the ball but the body language communicated the dog’s thoughts just as well. And yes, she did correctly identify a sucker.
Marjorie says
Another definition of consciousness is to be fully present and in the moment, dogs are a great example of this.
HFR says
Such a cool question. And interesting responses too. I’m not a Coppinger fan and I haven’t heard his argument. But I am leaning toward dogs not having a consciousness. I keep thinking of the very unscientific definition of the word as we use it in every day language. For instance, to say you unconsciously did something is to mean you did it without thinking. Conversely to say you consciously did something is to say you did it with deliberate thought. I don’t think dogs think before they do something. Even what appears to us as conscious thought can be immediate responses to the problem at hand. Each problem solving thought is an independent action.
However, I also think this is what may make dogs special. We all envy their ability to live in the moment. When a dog loses a leg, he just accepts it and seems none the worse for wear. I think that response is aided by a lack of consciousness. This doesn’t mean they don’t have complicated emotions. They mourn, love and rejoice. Just not so sure they are aware of those emotions.
But even as I am writing this I’m thinking of the show I’ve been watching on PBS called My Wild Affair. Each episode demonstrates how strong the bonds are that animals feel and how they can die from the loss of those bonds. Do you need consciousness for that? If you do, then animals have it in spades.
widogmom says
I see complex communication behaviors in my dogs all the time, if that’s what we’re talking about. Abby senses when one of us is ill or upset and, rather than trying to initiate play, spends “quiet time” with us (which is a challenge for a very active two-year-old). Pablo, especially, will sit up “cute” and look at what he wants, then at me…the water dish, the cookies, the patio door, and even the gas fireplace if he thinks it should be on (which is all the time, except for July and August). (Right now, Pablo is communicating to me that he wants me to get my fat fanny off the computer and pet him!) When my husband used to travel extensively for business, the dogs knew that when he put his dress shoes ( “getting lost shoes”) on, he was going away…and brooded appropriately.
I honestly think the people who insist that every move dogs make is a digital response to stimulus or some sort of conditioning are partaking in a popular modern pastime called “flailing for relevance.” Afraid of the sentience competition, much?
SarahA says
Several other people here have essentially stated what I believe, which is that the ability to learn shows consciousness. Certainly one can perform rote behaviors without being conscious, and instinctive behaviors don’t tend to require thought, but to learn new things requires full engagement of the brain.
And an example of a dog performing what might seem a rote behavior, in a conscious manner (because everyone loves examples) was my Staffordshire Bull Terrier, Elmo, who loved to retrieve. He was a dog who wanted everybody in the vicinity to play ball with him, so he’d give his ball to whoever was around, making sure that everybody got a turn.
One time we were visiting my parents. My mother was disabled from strokes, so Elmo’s attempt to give her his ball was not successful, she couldn’t take it from him, or pick it up from the floor. His solution to that was to put the ball on her leg, on the side with her better hand, and push it up with his nose, holding it there until she could get the ball, and toss it (not far, but it was the thought that counted).
That’s the only time he ever gave somebody a ball in that manner. Whether he understood that she was unable to take his ball in the usual way, or if he just hit upon that as a way to encourage somebody so oddly reluctant to play, it wasn’t instinctive or rote, it was something he figured out to deal with a particular situation.
Karen Cummings says
I would argue that the demonstrated ability to solve puzzles and learn show conciousness. A being that is merely following motor patterns without consciousness would be able to act, but would be unable to move outside the presets. Dogs regularly learn behaviors well outside what would be a ” normal” motor pattern.
Donna Hill says
When you see a dog have a lightbulb “aha’ moment when problem solving, you know they have consciousness. For me, it’s as simple at that! They had a realization and that’s all it takes to show us they have consciousness.
Amanda says
I would suggest anyone who needs to explore ‘consciousness’ (including Mr Coppinger) reads Christian De Quincey’s excellent book ‘Consciousness from Zombies to Angels’. De Quincey defines consciousness as “the ability to know (experience), to be aware (subjectivity) and to feel (sentience) along with the ability to create and express intentions and makes choices. These are all nonphysical aspects of reality”.
Based on this I would say yes dogs are definitely conscious. I would also consider that where Coppinger and others who share his beliefs, fall down is their dependence ONLY on biological science (ie the exploration of the physical world). If you only study one subject ie psychology in this case, you are only getting one slice of a very large cake!
Nic1 says
I read recently that people generally find statistical conditional probabilities difficult to understand because stats wasn’t invented until the mid 17th century! Therefore, we have evolved to use rules of thumb or best guesses.
Perhaps there is a decision process that goes on that operates on the subconscious as part of our evolutionary biology? Bit like the limbic system that makes you react in the same way whether you are running for your life from a tiger or giving a presentation in an interview?
It hasn’t found a way to differentiate that the latter isn’t going to kill you.
Milissa says
No time to read the undoubtedly fascinating comments above, just now, but I do believe they are conscious. I think of you watch Border Collies handled by novice handlers you will see one bit of evidence that, while probably dismissed by Ray Coppinger as pattern, I think of examined closely enough could be supported. A very good, natural dog someone’s recognizes the need for, shall we say, intelligent disobedience? That is when the handler gives them a command, and it is wrong for the situation, and the dog knows it, they may choose to ignore the command. Again Mr. C would say, “pattern!” But if you watch these dogs closely they often show signs of stress right before disobeying the command! This indicates to me that my dog is making a conscious (and conflicted) choice. She knows what I’ve asked her to do, she knows it won’t get what I want, she had to decide between her patterned behavior of obedience to my command or her patterned behavior of moving the sheep where she knows I want them. It sends to me that requires assessing the situation, and making a conscious decision about the best thing to do. Maybe?
You’ve got me wondering, so many Border Collies do seem to think stay means lying down! Like you I did not intentionally train my dogs to lie down when I said stay. Sooo, given that when trialing a very nice thing to have is the ability to stop your dog while keeping them on their feet… how to train that and what word to put to it? My girl does it sometimes, but how to put a word to it and make sure she has the connection of the action (or lack of action really) to the command? The lazy part of me thinks maybe I should let her use it as she sees fit, the type A- in me wants the command! Another conundrum, but know you are not alone in this addiction! 😉 So much learning, so much fun! 🙂
em says
Wow, I’m having difficulty consciously repressing my unconscious reaction, “of course dogs have consciousness!” 🙂
My just slightly more intellectual first response was to think to myself, ‘well, obviously, any creature that shows obvious an difference between sleep and wakefulness must be capable of consciousness- how else could they be identifiably UNconscious?
More seriously, I suppose that Dr. Coppinger is actually advocating for a more restrictive definition of consciousness, and in that case I think the question boils down to yet another rehash of the perennial favorite, “do dogs think?”
Yes, I would say. Dogs are capable of making deliberate choices (staying in a sit when they’d like to chase a rabbit for example) that indicate that they ARE able to overcome their instinctive reactions, and that doesn’t seem possible to me without conscious thought.
Add to that the way that dogs learn- I maintain that they can and do learn by observation and inference, and I don’t see how that could be possible possible without consciousness.
I was recently watching television special about the research program at Los Alamos designed to train bees to sniff for bombs, and the scientist discussing the process, after demonstrating that a bee can be classically conditioned to respond to a scent within seconds, explained that bees are so quick to train because they are NOT using conscious thought, but offering simple conditioned responses. Dogs, in contrast, take much longer to train in scent detection because they DON’T learn to detect scent in this simple way, but through the more complex and difficult process of conscious thought.
I don’t imagine that dogs do a whole lot of abstract thinking- I suppose it’s possible that they reflect on the state of world affairs or their own place in the cosmos, but I seriously doubt it. But honestly, if THAT’s the bar for “consciousness” then young human children don’t qualify, either. In fact, some days, I’m not sure whether I would make the cut 😉
Colleen Pepper says
I do believe that dogs have consciousness, however, the more I see and know, the more I have to admit that much of dog behavior is innate. Watching herding dogs “turn on” to sheep at herding tests was a big eye opener for me in that context. I also had a friend whose toy poodle was always jumping up behind her to grab her shirttail. I was amazed to talk to the owner of one of this dogs sons, to find that her dog did the very same thing to her. I have to think this was hard wired in this pup, as he never lived with his father and can’t have learned it from observation. I have a story, though, that was told to me by a client, that I can only attribute to conscious thought. This dog was at home with the mom and a baby and 2 year old child. Having put both kids down for a nap, mom took the opportunity for a shower. Getting out of the shower, she heard both children crying in the babys room, and entered to find a meat mallet in the crib, and their GSD pinning the 2 yr old up against the wall with his shoulder. The 2 year old had been hitting the baby. This dog figured out that he had to stop that, and did it in a manner that did not harm his beloved toddler. I knew this dog for years, he was police dog that had put several criminals in the hospital with his bite. I can’t think this was anything but a conscious maneuver on the part of this dog.
Chris says
I’d describe consciousness as “using many parts of the brain to come to a new conclusion” as well as possible “try to change that conclusion if you don’t like it”. My 3 yo golden Smitten did just that this morning. Usually she goes to doggie day care on Tues Wed and Thurs mornings. I pick her up at lunchtime and she’s a happy, tired girl who obviously enjoys it.
This weekend she ate too much grass and was sick. Even though she seems okay now, I decided to keep her home today (Tues). After our morning walk and her breakfast, she was following me around like a puppy, which is unusual. I finally realized that she had understood that, since I had removed her collar (which I don’t do on her days at day care altho sometimes I forget and automatically remove it by mistake), she understood that it was possible she wasn’t going. She knew it was Tuesday and usually goes (on Monday, she just took a nap when I was leaving.) When I was ready to leave for work, she walked me to the door giving me mega-sad eyes, pleading to go with me and be dropped off as usual. I had to tell her no, she wasn’t going today, but I’d be home for lunch. To anybody who can read dog language, she had obviously understood that a) it was Tuesday, the first day of the week she usually goes to play with her friends; b) there was a danger she wasn’t going to get to go so she stuck close to prevent me leaving without her and c) when it was obvious that I was going to leave without her, tried a last desperate attempt to change my mind by sad eyes. If knowing the day of the week, what’s supposed to happen on the usual schedule, realizing that the schedule is changing (to her displeasure) and taking steps to preven it is not consciousness, then nothing is!
catherine harvey says
I do believe dogs have a consciousness. I m privilege to work with them everyday and when I train with them I can see and feel the direct connection between us. When a dog tries to merely survive on the street he has a very clear view of what needs to be done to live. Things that maybe a mentally challenged person would have a hard time doing ( even if the mentally challenged human is awake). To me consciousness means being aware of who you are . Looking at the empathy that dosg can bring to their human companions why wouldn’t they have their own sort of consciousness. What makes a difference here is how they themselves translate this consciousness in doggie term to them. How can a dog think to itself : hey I have a consciousness.
We know that dogs dream, work for us in many fields, and fight for us. I have never see a robot dream..Have you?
EmilySHS says
I once asked one of the senior monks at our local Buddhist Abbey about this. Her reply was that dogs have what in their tradition is known as single consciousness (they’re aware), while humans have double consciousness (they’re aware and they’re aware that they’re aware.) Kind of like–was it Darwin who first suggested this?–the notion that emotions in animals v. humans is a question of degree, not kind.
The trouble as everyone has pointed out is defining consciousness. It seems like one of those free-floating notions, kind of like “language,” that historically has been redefined as needed to ensure that we have it and animals don’t. 🙂 And it seems like every time we’ve said animals can’t or don’t (use tools, have emotions, have this-or-that kind of cognition), when we get our own human agendas out of the way, well, whoops, we turn out to be wrong.
So here’s my best go–behavior is anatomy–we can only do or sense or experience what our anatomy allows for. If “consciousness”–assuming we ever can define it–turns out to be a process that arises from the centers of the brain that a dog anatomically possesses, yup, they’ve got it. If consciousness is a process arising from and only from well-developed prefrontal cortexes… at that point, I’d say it gets more complex. Because I think there is individual variation–we’ve all met dogs with, dunno how to describe it–something extra in their eyes, a spark, when they look at you, there’s someone deeply home in those eyes. And even in humans, there’s a range of how “conscious” they are from moment to moment, or over a lifetime. All the Eastern traditions agree that consciousness can grow–different practices can enhance it or diminish it. That to me suggests that it has to do with brain function being increased or decreased. We talk about things like clicker training promoting dogs that are more “thoughtful”–more “cognitive”–if that’s literally the case in terms of building more “muscle” in those parts of the brain, the implication would be… some dogs are born conscious, some dogs achieve consciousness and some dogs have consciousness trained upon them. That sounds a lot like us: we come with the capacity, but do we work the muscle?
Judy says
I don’t know what consciousness is, but I know that I have it – it is my personal experience of being aware.
You could just as well ask how/if we know if other humans are conscious. Maybe I’m the only conscious human on the planet. But I assume that other humans are conscious because it is reasonable (though not certain) because they are the same species as me, have similar (though not identical) brains to me, and they behave in very similar (but again not identical) ways to me. My conclusion that other humans have consciousness is therefore inductive, not deductive.
Same with dogs. Dogs are higher mammals, with brains of similar construction, and they respond to many situations just as humans would, showing the same physical signs of fear, joyfulness, and so on. The principle of Occam’s razor (simpler explanations are more likely to be true) suggests that their mental experience is similar to ours – whatever the reason is that we need consciousness, or that consciousness benefits us, it makes sense that dogs would need it or benefit from it in the same way. If they weren’t conscious, we would then have to ask why not?
An interesting thought about consciousness in general, which does relate to how we treat animals – if we could build a robot that was programmed to mimic human behaviour exactly (like in Alien), at what stage of development would we feel that it can really suffer? When would we want to ‘shut it down’ before doing a bit of welding on it? The closer it gets to resembling humans, the more likely consciousness would emerge… but how would we know?
HFR says
Trisha, I wonder if you could clarify if learning or problem solving indicates consciousness. Clearly if it does, then I’m not sure how even Coppinger can argue dogs are not conscious.
The 2014 videos are still not up on the SPARCS site. I’d really like to know how he supported his argument.
Susan Flavell says
I am in the believe dogs have consciousness camp as well because there seems to be so much conscious communication. My 10 yr old ACD x (who often has much to say), will sometimes (when I ask her to come to me but she doesn’t want to) stand perpendicular to me, her head turned away from me but looking out of the corner of her eye and bark. It seems to me she is clearly trying to communicate something and if I may anthropomorphise, I interpret this as “stupid monkey why don’t you understand what I’m trying to tell you, I don’t want to come now I want to ….. ” Other times she seems to be saying that I’ve broken an agreement with her that she should get a treat for putting up with something slightly unpleasant to her, ie nail clipping or physical therapy for her bad back. At these times she looks me in the eye and gives one sharp bark. She “sings” when she wants something but doesn’t feel confident she will get it. She points her butt at me when she is displeased with me. She’ll try other things if the first isn’t working for her.
Sure these could all be reinforced behaviours or instinctual but then much the same could be said of human behaviours. We might think we’re conscious of what we are doing most of the time but I think we are not any where near as conscious of our behaviours and choices as we believe.
Tam says
You say at one point in your article that: – “Before leaping up and arguing that “of course dogs are conscious,” it is valuable to define what we’re talking about. Ah, there’s the rub, because we’re not even sure what consciousness is in humans. . .
Yet later in the same article state : – ” Remember that people can do amazing things while sleepwalking and are completely unconscious, including driving cars in traffic . . .”
If we don’t know what consciousness is, how can we possbily know whether sleepwalkers are conscious or unconscious?
In fact, how can we possibly know whether anyone is conscious or unconscious?
Donna in VA says
My best example of conscious vs unconscious distinction would be the ability/desire to play. It is certainly possible for some people and dogs (and cats) to be categorized as conscious or unconscious and even the same individual at different times in their lives. Nephew’s very elderly dog clearly had no mental activity going on the end of her life. We have had cats that exhibited intelligence and I would argue consciousness, as well as one cat that did not. If you looked into her eyes you would surmise “nobody at home in there”. Machines do not play, and play is not any sort of automatic reaction. It is a voluntary decision to do an activity just for the individual’s own enjoyment. Puppies and kittens play in preparation for adult hunting behavior but adults continue to play because they enjoy it.
Beverly Ann Hebert says
I was watching the SPARCS Conference when Coppinger said that – it is just a wonder to me that anyone who lives with a dog could make such a statement.
But rather than taking that up right now, I only want to say how much I enjoy these conversations on your blog, plus the beautiful photos and personal bits from your own life that you choose to share with us.
This morning I was especially interested to hear about Willie’s herding challenges and about all the things you are trying to teach Maggie, as I too am still struggling with some of the same issues (LLW, calmness around other dogs, etc.) with my own young Border collie, in addition to all the other behaviors I am trying to teach her. I think most people expect trainers’ dogs to be exemplary from the time they enter our homes rather than understanding that our dogs too are works in progress.
Chuck says
While walking Joey the boxer one hot sunny day he sidestepped a puddle of water. That to me signifies that, subconsciously perhaps, a decision making process regarding the preference to stay dry was made.
Recently researchers at UCSD ( a local university here in San Diego) ran a study on dog jealousy. Their conclusion was that yes indeed dogs exhibit jealous behavior. I hope public monies were not spent ‘proving’ something most dog owners already know. My deeper suspicion is that those rooted deeply in scientism believe themselves to be the sole arbiters (or as the horrible president W would say ‘the deciders’) of what people should and shouldn’t believe
Trisha says
Fascinating comments, as usual. A few things:
Remember that learning itself is not a indicator of consciousness. Single-celled creatures can learn to swim away if a light has been paired with a mild shock. Even people learn lots of things without being aware of it, so just learning something doesn’t tell us much about how much an animal is conscious and aware.
Tam’s point (and those of several others) about not being able to prove if other people are conscious is an invaluable point. It is extremely difficult to know, and/or prove than any other being is indeed conscious (thus the agony of people whose loved one is in a coma). That’s part of why Tononi’s work is so important; he is working toward a world in which we would be able to measure it, quantify it and thus identify it. That would be invaluable.
I love EmilySHS’s comment that consciousness can be practiced and enhanced. Brilliant point. Is it possible that dogs who work with people on a lot of complex tasks can become more conscious? Ooooo… such fun to think about!
Of all the examples of the Big C mentioned I have to admit I am most taken by Kat’s story about Ranger refusing to stand on a shaky object but then problem solving by lying down and putting his forepaws on it. An impressive act of cognition indeed. But of course, this asks the question of how aware an individual needs to be to solve a problem. This is also around the time that my mind begins to swirl and my eyes start to roll back into my head. No wonder so many people didn’t want to talk about consciousness for so long; it is a bit like looking up at the stars at night and trying to imagine infinity. I’ll just keep rooting for Tononi to find some way to evaluate consciousness using objective criteria (but never stop wondering and thinking…)
Christina says
I have to say, this is the one corner of the internet where the comments are as fun and interesting to read as the articles!
Here’s something that gives me pause and maybe illustrates how someone could question dogs’ consciousness: On my commute I can sometimes get so lost in thought that I don’t remember driving the 45 minutes to or from work. The “self conscious” or “self aware” part of my brain has a lively internal dialogue, perhaps re-hashing an unpleasant exchange and coming up with clever retorts that I didn’t think of at the time, or planning out future dog-training sessions, or day-dreaming about craft projects for my kids. All the while, some other part of my brain sees the traffic, roads and signals, and responds, but without “conscious thought.” I can brake and shift and change lanes while using my blinker . . . without interrupting the flow of my more abstract thoughts or even being aware that I am doing them. It’s as if there are two parts of my brain that are operating independently. I think of that internal dialogue as my consciousness.
So, can dogs do highly complicated, learned behaviors akin to driving a car through rush-hour traffic for 45 minutes? Yes. Does that prove that they are using abstract thinking (ruminating about past events, planning future actions, being creative)? When I consider how my brain can run on two separate paths like when I’m driving a familiar route, I have to conclude no. That doesn’t mean I have concluded that dogs are not conscious, but it means that seeing even complicated behaviors alone doesn’t prove that they are.
Trisha says
Christina: You’ve hit the nail on the head here (one assumes the nail is not conscious…) with your perfect example. How many times have we driven a familiar route and spent our time thinking about something else? Surely everyone has experienced the “I don’t even know how I got here” feeling. Your last sentence wraps up the challenge perfectly, thanks so much for it!
Kat says
@Christina, Yes, yes, yes! That’s exactly what I was trying to get to. I have practiced the act of driving certain routes so many times that they are automatic. I’ve practiced so many scenarios, switching lanes to avoid a slow driver, braking in response to brake lights ahead of me, etc. that I no longer have to be fully conscious to do those things I can probably do them in my sleep (although I sincerely hope I never engage in sleep driving). However, put me in an unfamiliar place, say an obstacle course, and even though I’ve practiced the motor skills many many times I will still need to be conscious to successfully complete that course, I wouldn’t be able to do it in my sleep. All of my rote skills will need to be managed by my conscious mind to successfully drive through the obstacle course because it is not the familiar easy to predict pattern of my daily commutes. I’m , if you will, locating consciousness in the ability to apply rote/practiced skills successfully in other unfamiliar circumstances.
I love thinking about stuff like this and wondering how you could quantify it in such a way as to be able to test the question of consciousness. Figuring out what it is and where to find it, that’s the challenge.
Kate says
I think Christine brings up another interesting question – while driving , are we conscious when we are aware of our surroundings in the moment or is it when our mind is thinking about things in the future or the past or conversations we will only have in our minds, yet they affect our emotions?
I think it’s possible that dogs and other life forms could be more conscious than humans much of the time (perhaps not cats – I’ve never heard anyone say cats live in the moment). I find I feel more conscious when I don’t listen to the chatter in my head. So my question would be do dogs also have an endless stream of chatter in their heads?
I live with 3 fear biters and as 2 of them have progressed, I’d say they are more at peace and in the moment and the third is still tormented by thoughts a good deal of the time. While with Mickey, the 3rd, it’s easier to see the wheels turning in his mind, my opinion is the other 2 experience more consciousness.
Beth says
I come back to the same dilemma I did when it was asked if barks have meaning. I think part of the problem is trying to answer questions about behavior is that dogs seem to have as much variation in intelligence and independent thinking as they have variation in size and energy levels. Many dogs were bred to be compliant pets and too much independent thinking can hamper that. But other dogs were bred to work independently and make decisions. And genes being what they are, those traits can sometimes show up in dogs that were not purpose-bred too.
Maddie, like many pet dogs, is sweet and wants to please and is a born follower. She seems to go through most of her day in a way that can easily be explained by operant conditioning and the desire for comfort or pleasure. What actions make my humans more likely to cuddle me? Feed me? While there are things she does that could be defined as signs of consciousness, most of them can also be explained in terms of simple learning.
Jack has a working dog temperament, despite the lack of working farm dogs in his immediate pedigree. While he has his people pleasing side, he definitely seems to have his own agenda and train of thought and it is more difficult (though not impossible) to define his behaviors in terms of pure learning or conditioning.
Something that seems to me to be an example of consciousness on his part (and frankly very bad training on my part— I’m a sucker for independent thought in dogs and don’t make a real effort to shape away from it) is a typical walk.
We are so fortunate to live by a several-hundred acre park. Part of it is wooded trails, part of it is pools and picnic areas and playgrounds and the like. There are many different walks we can take, and Jack very clearly favors some (particularly the longer ones) over others.
When we head out, he will sometimes start drifting in a direction he’d prefer to go. If we go a different way (here’s where the bad training comes in!!) he’ll plant his feet and give me a stubborn look. Sometimes he’ll lay down, his nose hopefully pointed in the direction he wants to go. We can be quite some way from the actual branch in the trail that he wants to take, but he can tell well ahead of time from our arc of travel which way we are going—it may be as subtle as we would need to head toward 11 o’clock for his walk but we are heading towards 1 o’clock instead. Sometimes if I continue to go in the less-favored direction (the training gets even worse here!!) he’ll flip on his back. And if I keep walking, he will then grab the leash in his teeth and play-growl and shake his head.
If, on the other hand, we decide to go his way, he will actually run for a little while, almost as if to say “if I hurry and get there they won’t change their mind”.
If he saw me stash really good treats, and he actually walks nicely past the point of contention without argument, he will look up at me and grin in hopes of getting his reward (again, I know, really bad training!).
Anyway, while conditioning clearly plays a role because I have allowed him to get his bossy Corgi way at times (honestly the dog gets to make so few decisions that if he really wants to go on a longer walk I sometimes cave), it also seems to me to indicate consciousness on his part. He has THOUGHT about where he wants to go, he tries to drift in the preferred direction, if he does not get his way he escalates the protest, and if he does get his way he rushes to get there quickly (the only time he runs on leash).
It seems to me that the ability to anticipate that something enjoyable might happen, then recognize well ahead of time that the humans are about to thwart that enjoyable experience, and then protest by going on strike indicates SOME level of higher-level thinking, or thinking about and evaluating the experience rather than just having the experience. If he were a person, I’d say we were having a disagreement and to disagree, both parties have to have ideas to disagree about.
Beth says
I thought of a second behavior that seems to indicate some form of self-awareness. Jack is a social butterfly and loves to meet and greet. Because he is so steady, I allow him to meet and greet difficult dogs and also very small children who don’t necessarily know how to act with dogs.
After a normal encounter he walks away. But if he has been sweet and steady with a screeching and poking toddler, or with a reactive dog who was unpredictable, or a puppy who hasn’t learned manners, or in some other socially difficult circumstance, when we walk away he always looks up at me and smiles. Now clearly he does this because I have rewarded him for being good in difficult circumstances in the past.
But that indicates he has some awareness of having been in a difficult circumstance and now being safely out of it, because he never looks up at me like that when we walk away from less difficult encounters. I suppose one could say he has simply learned that if he feels some stress in a social encounter he may get rewarded after? But isn’t that still indicative of some level of self-awareness?
Robin Jackson says
The statement is meaningless without an agreed upon definition of “consciousness.” And as yet, we don’t have one.
There is a medical definition at the simplest level which just means “responds to stimulus.” As in “not unconscious.” That one could legitimately apply to single celled organisms or anything else which moves towards or away from something based on an evaluation of that thing. To recognise the “not me,” whether that’s intuitive or not.
But above that level, there are zillions of different definitions used in medicine, psychology, law, philosophy, and religion. Seager’s THEORIES OF CONSCIOUSNESS and Blackmore’s CONCIOUSNESS: AN INTRODUCTION, both get criticised as much for what is left out as what they contain, and each contains at least a dozen conflicting definitions. (And not the same dozen either.)
Are sleepwalkers who can drive a car and read a menu “semiconscious”? In a “state of lowered conciousness”? In a “state of split conciousness”? “Concious only in the moment”? All of these and more have been introduced in legal defenses and psychological evaluations and still no one agrees.
To considers dogs, one would first have to say, “if we define ‘conciousness’ as X, are dogs ‘Concious’?” Without defining the term first, there’s simply no way to answer the question in current psychological practice, because we have too many conflicting definitions to choose from.
Jackie Brown says
Dogs in many ways are more conscious than humans. Eckhart Tolle briefly discusses the consciousness of cogs in the short video clip with Oprah Winfrey. Her refers to them a “Guardians of Being.” I love this term and remind myself of this often. http://www.oprah.com/own-a-new-earth/Why-Eckhart-Tolle-Calls-Pets-Guardians-of-Being-Video_2
Elizabeth says
What a conundrum! There have been lots of comments on learning & problem-solving, states of arousal and what is awareness. I don’t think we can answer the question of consciousness in dogs because we simply don’t understand it in ourselves. Is someone with Alzheimer’s conscious? Or someone with a severe brain injury? Or as previously mentioned, very young children? I believe consciousness is a biological construct along a continuum. We have a poor understanding of what this continuum entails. I find the idea of improving consciousness incredible: improving self-awareness certainly, but altering the biological function of our brains? Lots more research to be done! But the bottom line for me is this: I think the state of being of my dogs, conscious or not, is absolutely perfect and I would not have them any other way.
Maggie Moss says
Have you read ‘How Dogs Love Us ‘By Gregory Bernes
A Neuroscientist and His adopted Dog Decode the Canine Brain.
“A rollicking yet scientifically serious study of the mental life of dogs,”-PATRICIA CHURCHLAND, author of Touching a Nerve.
Amelia says
Most folks seem to find evidence of their dogs’ consciousness in altruism, but the first thing I think of is deception! Both of my kids play varying tricks on each other to get the other dog’s stuff without conflict. A few times one has even barked at the window to get the other off a coveted bed! I also see interesting responses to novel situations, weird moments of conflicting emotions, or long pauses in which the dog truly seems to be considering. My point is that my sense that my dogs are self-aware is based (rather unscientifically) on a large body of small instances, the sum of which suggests that something is going on behind the cute puppy eyes.
em says
I’m particularly intrigued by the role that memory plays in our perception of our own consciousness. Almost invariably, when a person describes themselves as having been unconscious or semi-conscious, they explain that they have no memory of it. This is an important insight, I think, into how consciousness is defined, but it can also be a problematic one.
I know for a fact that I have no memory of billions and billions of moments for which I would, at the time, have considered myself conscious. I am sure that on July 25th, 2010, for example, I spent most of the day awake, alert, and thinking. But I have no memory of that particular day. A person who is driving while in reverie may not be forming memories of their choices, but does that necessarily mean that the choices are not conscious? I’m not sure that I accept that they aren’t.
Regardless of how we define varying states of consciousness to include sleepwalkers and daydreamers (how telling that we have ready-made words to describe this experience of partial consciousness), if memory of our experiences and choices is a factor in defining consciousness, I have to conclude that on that score, dogs DO make the cut.
Otis anecdote: (and I so absolutely agree with Beth, conscious thought is just so, so much easier to see in certain dogs than in others. Sandy is mostly a creature of impulse and agreement, without much focus. My mental image of her as she works to figure out a new trick is like that famous image from Looney Tunes, where her eyes are like slot machines, images whizzing past until ding!ding! a combination appears. Sometimes it’s a jackpot, sometimes not, but I can just picture her mind zipping from one possibility to another, almost at random. Otis is unmistakably, obviously, a focused thinker. Enough that it sometimes creeps people out, sometimes appeals strongly to them. My mom, not really a dog person, said it best, I think. ‘I love Otis. He really SEES you’. )
Anyhow, here is an example of typical Otis’ behavior: In the unusual even that either my husband or I is at home when he leaves for his morning walk, he will search the house for us upon his return. When both of us accompany him or one of us has already left the house when Otis leaves for his walk, he walks straight to the kitchen where he is immediately fed. On at least 95% of days, this is his pattern- walk through the door, turn right into the kitchen, wait on mat until feeding. On the occasion that my husband or I is at home when he returns, however, Otis turns left, away from the kitchen, searches the house until he finds us or has scanned every room, then returns immediately to the kitchen for his meal. My husband and I never seek one another before feeding the dogs when we return, so this is not a learned behavior pattern.
Otis changes his pattern of going into the kitchen based, as far as I can tell, solely on his memory of whether my husband or I were at home when he left the house. About half the time, we are home when he returns, and he finds us, and about half the time we are not at home when he returns, so he searches every room in the house, upstairs and down, before heading back to the kitchen. Thus, I don’t think he is cued by any immediate stimulus- he doesn’t seem to know whether we are in the house or not when he begins his search. I also don’t think he is triggered by any ‘tell’ of mine or my husband’s- often I’ll be standing in the kitchen, confused and holding his food dish as I hear him galloping up the stairs, before I remember that my husband had a dentist appointment that morning and had thus still been home when we left for our walk.
If we were not at home when he left the house, Otis doesn’t search, and doesn’t appear distressed to find that we are not at home when he returns. If we were at home and remain there to be found when he returns, he does not show any distress. But, if we were at home when he left and are not at home when he returns, Otis will often appear agitated, and especially in the very rare case that I’m the missing one, will be extremely ‘clingy’ upon my return, sometimes even rushing the door to stay with me if I try to go out again (almost unheard-of, he does this perhaps once or twice a year).
I cannot, for the life of me, figure out how this behavior is possible without conscious memory. The fact that Sandy does NOT do this, I can’t explain with confidence. It could be that a) she doesn’t remember whether we were home when she left b) she has never associated us being home when she left with us being home when she returns or c) she doesn’t care. I think they’re all pretty equally probable. 🙂
Beth says
I was searching my memory of long-ago psychology classes last night and could not recall the term I wanted, the one for the part of the brain that sort of oversees the others and runs the show.
I remember it now: executive function.
There seems to be ok dispute in the literature that mammals share executive function. So I suppose my question is this: does not this shared ability to plan, problem solve, and sort long term memories for relevant data imply consciousness?
Beth says
Silly auto correct. That should be “there seems to be no dispute in the literature…”
Ron says
This “argument” should not even exist. It comes from late 16th and early 17th century attempts by early zoologists to understand why their specimens were screaming and moving around as they were being dissected alive.
Some argued that the animals were merely moving via instinct and not feeling pain, therefore they had no “soul” (ie consciousness). The smart ones thought that the animals have “souls” no matter how rudimentary the church would allow these “souls” to be. From those early days came the idea that animals had consciousness, or not, depending on how limited the scientific framework was of the scientists observing the animals’ behaviour.
If consciousness implies an awareness of the environment around an organism, then animals have consciousness. This also implies that the organism can move away from danger when needed, reproduce or move toward food. Then it follows that all living organisms have some form of consciousness. All living organisms will move away from danger except for plants, coral and other sedentary aquatic creatures and even those organisms are known to have some form of defense mechanisms and exhibit rudimentary behaviour outside of pure instinct. This is not just due to “mechanical instincts” whatever that reductionist term may mean.
Anyone arguing against this is too anthropocentric to even entertain the thought that animals feel pain, let alone have consciousness. This argument is a throwback to the 15th and 16th centuries if ever there was one.
Robin Jackson says
Given that we can’t discuss “consciousness” until we agree on a definition for it, I did want to share my favourite counterexample for the notion that everything dogs do is a very simple form of Pavlovian or operant reward history.
We have two dogs. Food is prepared in the kitchen, but the dogs are fed in two separate rooms since Tulip is 25 pounds, a slow eater, and not very food motivated while Dilly is 75 pounds, a fast eater, and super food motivated. So if they weren’t in different rooms, Dilly would bug Tulip until she left before finishing.
The routine is simple. Dilly brings me both bowls. I prepare the food. I call the dogs to dinner. Dilly goes to his designated room to wait. Tulip goes to hers. I bring Tulip her bowl and shut the door. I then bring Dilly his bowl.
Dilly never gets food in the room that Tulip eats in, so he has zero reward history for going to that room.
On occasion, Tulip has been too interested in stuff going on outside to come in when I call. Which leaves Dilly sitting by his mat waiting, me with the two bowls in the kitchen, and Tulip outside. Usually she comes in in a minute or so.
Six or seven times over 9 years Tulip simply hasn’t come in right away. On each occasion, Dilly waits as patiently as he can, which is not very. After about 3 minutes, he comes back in the kitchen. And twice, when I was still waiting there, he went into the room where Tulip gets fed, very deliberately sat at HER mat, and whistled to get my attention.
Remember he has NO reward history for sitting at that mat, in that room.
What he does have, somewhere in his brain, is an understanding that a dog sitting at that mat is an antecedent to his getting his food in his room down the hall.
There are still several possibilities, of course. He may be saying, “Look, you want a dog in this room? Here’s a dog in this room. Serve dinner already!”
He may be simply thinking that that’s the room that gets served first, so he’s going to wait there and hope that maybe he’ll get to eat the food there when it comes. The counter to this is that the instant he hears Tulip coming in through the dog door he leaps out of that room again and runs back to his mat in the other room.
My point though, is that he has no reward history whatsoever for him being in that room. Yet he clearly has some concept that that room is important in his getting his dinner–so important that he leaves the kitchen, where the bowls are, and goes there–but only on the occasions when Tulip has “broken the chain” by not going there herself. As soon as she reappears in the house, he vacates the spot to let her take it again.
This is problem solving behavior on a very high level. It’s recognizing the antecedents that DON’T involve him, and trying to fill the gaps in some way.
As I said, I can’t know exactly what’s going on in his head, of course, but I do know this is not something a one celled organism would do. It’s intentional, it’s goal oriented, but it’s offering a behavior for which he has no reward history.
When he does this, I may laugh, but I basically ignore him–I don’t reward him there, and I don’t call him out again.
Whether or not that’s “consciousness” depends on the definition being used, with the whole sleepwalker issue tossed in. But I would argue that it’s clearly not just a matter of “acting out motor patterns.”
FWIW,
Robin J.
dale says
Dogs can also use complicated planning.. We have two Wheaten Terriers. One time leo had a real bone and was chewing it while laying in his crate. The other dog Cleo took a stuffed toy and brought it over about eight feet away from the crate and began playing around with it. After a few minutes Leo decided he would take it away from her. He dashed out of the crate and grabbed the toy away and ran off across the room. Cleo had let him get it and instantly ran over to the crate and grabbed the bone and on to under the bed with it. Dogs dont only have consiousness but a high level of planning ability.
Kat says
When we first adopted her Finna had separation anxiety and would greet me in the mornings by leaping all over me and mouthing me. Not my favorite way to start the day but since she’d never learned any impulse control and I was bleary minded before caffeine doing any training wasn’t in the cards. I came up with the idea of offering her a game of tug first thing as an alternative to being assaulted with joy each morning. That’s been our routine since. I open the door and offer a rope she grabs it and tugs me out of my room and we play tug for a minute or two before she is victorious and proudly carries the rope downstairs to wait at the door to go out. If I win the game of tug I can toss it down the stairs and she’ll chase it and wait at the door for me to come down and take her out. Finna doesn’t like that though so if she can she’ll grab the rope and continue the game until she wins.
Here’s the part that intrigues me, in light of this discussion. If I let Finna win she doesn’t take the rope downstairs she keeps presenting me with the rope until I’ll tug again and she can actually win. She recognizes when she has taken the rope away by her own power vs I’ve surrendered it to her and she doesn’t just want the rope she wants the, for want of a better way of describing it, satisfaction of a real victory and not just a pretend victory. Since she can tell when I let her win and refuses to accept that victory (I really don’t recommend trying to walk down the stairs with 70 lbs of dog trying to get you to grab the other end of the rope and tug some more) she must have enough consciousness or at least self-awareness to know that she could let someone else win and thus recognize when I do it. I find it all quite fascinating.
Beth says
Kat’s story reminded me that Jack also has several games which have rules. We play a tag game where I came up with the rules– I was surprised by how intuitively he understood them– but he also has a ball game that has internal rules of his own design.
He likes to hold a tennis-ball sized Ultraball in his mouth and push a larger plastic Jolly Ball with his nose, up and down the hall and through the house. We either throw or kick the ball, and he runs after it with the small ball in his mouth and pushes jolly ball back to us with his nose.
If the ball encounters an obstacle, such as a pair of shoes or a wall, he must push it around the obstacle with his nose.
If the ball gets stuck in an accessible internal corner of a wall, he’ll push the ball up the corner of the wall with his nose and flip it, seal-like, over his back and then resume pushing it at speed back to us. He will sometimes spend significant amounts of time navigating around obstacles.
If, however, the ball gets somewhere where it can’t be pushed— behind the bathroom door, behind the pedestal sink— he is allowed to drop the ball in his mouth, pick up the other ball with his now-free mouth, and place it back in the field of play. Like mini-golf, the rule seems to be that he can only move it about 5 inches out away from the obstacle before picking up the smaller ball and resuming pushing with his nose.
If the ball gets somewhere he can’t or won’t get it— in the bathroom waste basket, or behind the toilet where he might knock into the scary toilet brush receptacle— he will drop the ball in his mouth and bark for us to help. When we get the lost ball, he will pick the smaller ball back up and we throw the ball back into play.
These are all HIS rules— I could not possibly have taught something so complex myself— and he follows them with amazing consistency; close to 100%. It took me some time to see the patterns myself, but now I do they are so obvious.
It strikes me as not just being amazingly sophisticated, but as strikingly similar to the rules we use for games like soccer and mini-golf where we are not meant to touch the ball with our hands.
Anyway, I would think that coming up with sophisticated rules for your own game would surely be a sign of consciousness? It is not instinct. It is not even traditional problem-solving, because moving the ball with his mouth would be the easiest way out of the problem. He is absolutely trying to achieve the goal of moving the ball with his nose whenever possible and has come up with his own rules about dealing with obstacles.
Tanya says
Hi There, I have just come across your blog, whilst searching for information on Border Coliies and dogs in general.
We have recently moved to Spain, from the UK, and have a small Finca – 1 hectare in a remote corner of Spain. We recently have adopted 2 dogs, both now 4 months old. Border Collie and a Spanish Mastiff. I am trying to train Meg – border collie) and she is fairly responsive to sit, stay lie down and recalling, which is a start. I would like to take her further, BUT the heat here at the moment is preventing me. My other dog is a Mastiff weighing in at 4.5 months 26 Kilo (58lbs) is an absolute dream, They are best buddies, wish I could send you a picture, despite their size differences. Any way just want to say, love the blog, and will be reading your recent posts to catch up with your life. Look forward to chatting again and picking up any tips you may offer for a calm border collie!
Nate says
I went back and read “Dogs” by RC and on page 269 or 265, I forget exactly he refers to dogs not conscious to whether or not a dog realizes the light in a room is on or that a door is ajar. I fully understand this point and do agree. I still do not revise my original opinion that dogs are conscious, but at the same time I do agree with the point made in the book. If a terrier bays a quarry underground, then bays above ground to the same quarry, the dog is performing the same action unaffected by environment so hence I can see a dog performing unconscious. However during the find phase, if a different quarry than expected is present the dog usually postures differently, showing signs of awareness to the environment, but proceeds to loose this awareness once the next step in the motor pattern is reached.
Hatch says
Yes, I believe dogs are conscious. My dog has a full range of emotions, recognizes people, remembers past events, has a daily routine, and even dreams. I can tell when he’s happy, sad, angry, excited, or when he’s been up to some mischief. He “communicates” when he wants a treat, to go outside, or wants to play. If our dog doesn’t meet the definition of possessing a consciousness, then neither do I.
Gayla says
Em, your story about Otis is fascinating… Am I correct in assuming he doesn’t show any separation issues except in this context?
Robin Jackson says
@Nate,
I haven’t read that particular book, but I’d argue that it very much depends on the situation. A typical beagle on a scent trail certainly loses all sense of what else is going on, and beagles also typically have the most difficulty learning verbal cues.
But a typical border collie absolutely notices whether the light is on, the door ajar, or the human has given a new verbal cue in an ordinary tone of voice at 100 yards in the middle of working sheep.
I don’t quite understand the terrier baying example, but high prey drive dogs like the typical beagle or terrier do function very differently than interrupted prey drive dogs like the typical Labrador or border collie.
There have been a number of studies on “selective attention” in humans, the most famous probably being the “invisible gorilla” tests. If asked to do something that requires detailed focus, such as counting the number of basketball passes in a short video, about half the people will fail to notice other major changes in the environment. Half. It’s amazing, but true, and even more amazing when you’re given foreknowledge of what’s going to change, because it just seems so obvious.
http://www.theinvisiblegorilla.com/gorilla_experiment.html
I would argue that in the case of many dogs, including the working beagles and terriers, what we’re seeing in many contexts is simply the same selective attention we can measurably see in humans.
I would further argue that the fact that environmental awareness changes by context much more closely fits a selective attention hypothesis than a biological robot one. We know from human studies that context is exactly what affects selective attention. Given a task to do, attention to background diminishes.
A human mother watching her own child on the playground is much less likely to be able to give the details of a bicycle accident that occurred in the background than someone who was sitting on the same bench waiting for a friend. Yet once the friend arrives, the second person may be just as bad a witness. Context determines the amount of attention available for noticing background events.
Just a FWIW,
Robin J.
Christina says
@Em, I think the memory issue might be a red herring. First, if someone had asked you at the end of the day on July 25, 2010, what you did that day, I think you would have remembered most of it – those memories were formed but were not converted to long-term memory. That is unlike a situation where the person or being is not aware of something, and therefore no memory can be formed.
More importantly, though, the Driving In Reverie thought experiment illustrates that one can carry out incredibly complicated behaviors while the self-aware/reflective/internal-dialogue part of one’s brain is occupied doing something else. Thus, the fact that dogs carry out incredibly complicated behaviors does not, by itself, prove that they have a self-aware/reflective/internal-dialogue inner state.
em says
@gayla, Yes, that’s right, Otis does not show separation issues otherwise.
@Christine, I think you are quite right to make the distinction between short and long term memory. My overall point, though, I think stands. The question isn’t whether dogs are reflective and self-aware but whether they are ‘conscious’ (whatever that means).
I myself often have no specific memory of the mundane details of my day to day life- absentminded is what I’ve always called it- not, I would argue, because I am not conscious for these experiences, but because I am distracted from them by a strong focus on something else- I miss that gorilla in the experiment EVERY darned time- (amusingly enough it is often because of my preoccupation with my abstract, internal, self-reflective thoughts- the hallmarks of the most rigorous definition of consciousness- that I am often seem so absent and remember so little about my drive to work). Thus, I don’t accept that the ability to drive to work while thinking about something else serves as satisfactory evidence that it is possible to drive to work without the ability to think. And since I feel that the ability to think is a mark of consciousness, I therefore don’t accept the phenomenon of driving in reverie as evidence that ‘complex tasks can be performed without conscious thought,” mostly because I don’t see constant self-awareness on a metaphysical level as a definitive quality of consciousness. I think it a better description of the phenomenon to say, ‘habitual tasks can be performed with minimal cognitive effort and memory formation.’ But if lack of memory is not necessarily prove that a person was NOT conscious, the presence of memory seems to me like positive evidence that they WERE. If you’ll forgive the Cartesian reasoning, how can a being reflect on a memory if they can’t think? And then, how can they think if they are not conscious? The question of whether we think (and are therefore conscious, on some level) when we are dreaming, I’ll leave for another day.
While I do accept without a qualm the idea that quite complex actions, like the chemical defense reactions of a tree, can be the result of unconscious responses, and I also agree that like people, dogs frequently engage in reflexive, instinctive behaviors that do not require conscious thought or decision-making, the other half of my point (I probably expressed this badly) is that my dog DOES show signs of non-habitual decision- making based on medium-term memory (he remembers whether my husband was in the house when we left it, two hours previously), and I don’t see how this sort of memory can be possible WITHOUT conscious thought.
Ms.lewii says
These dogs are pretty