Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-03T19:40:38.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

There Is No Special Problem of Mindreading in Nonhuman Animals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Marta Halina
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There is currently a consensus among comparative psychologists that nonhuman animals are capable of some forms of mindreading. Several philosophers and psychologists have criticized this consensus, however, arguing that there is a “logical problem” with the experimental approach used to test for mindreading in nonhuman animals. I argue that the logical problem is no more than a version of the general skeptical problem known as the theoretician’s dilemma. As such, it is not a problem that comparative psychologists must solve before providing evidence for mindreading.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 82 , Issue 3 , July 2015 , pp. 473 - 490
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

This paper was presented to the Philosophy of Science Research Group at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. I thank the members of that group for their helpful comments and discussion. I also thank William Bechtel, Nancy Cartwright, and C. Kenneth Waters for discussions that led to the development of the main ideas presented here, Carl Craver for detailed comments on the penultimate draft, and three anonymous reviewers for their careful and constructive feedback.

The title of this paper is inspired by Callender and Cohen’s article “There Is No Special Problem about Scientific Representation” (2006). Callender and Cohen argue that the problems of scientific representation are just the problems of representation in general and thus that the proposed solutions for the latter can be applied to the former. Similarly, I argue that the problems involved in establishing the claim that nonhuman animals mindread are no different from the problems involved in establishing any theoretical claim in science. Thus, the proposed solutions to the latter can be applied to the former.

References

Andrews, Kristin. 2005. “Chimpanzee Theory of Mind: Looking in All the Wrong Places?” Mind and Language 20 (5): 521–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Kristin 2012. Review of Mindreading Animals: The Debate over What Animals Know about Other Minds, by Robert W. Lurz. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.Google Scholar
Andrews, Kristin, and Huss, Brian. 2014. “Anthropomorphism, Anthropectomy, and the Null Hypothesis.” Biology and Philosophy 29:711–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bräuer, Juliane, Call, Josep, and Tomasello, Michael. 2007. “Chimpanzees Really Know What Others Can See in a Competitive Situation.” Animal Cognition 10:439–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckner, Cameron. 2014. “The Semantic Problem(s) with Research on Animal Mind-Reading.” Mind and Language 29 (5): 566–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Call, Josep. 2001. “Chimpanzee Social Cognition.” TRENDS in Cognitive Science 5 (9): 388–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Call, Josep, Hare, Brian, and Tomasello, Michael. 1998. “Chimpanzee Gaze Following in an Object-Choice Task.” Animal Cognition 1 (2): 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Call, Josep, and Tomasello, Michael. 2008. “Does the Chimpanzee Have a Theory of Mind? 30 Years Later.” TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 12 (5): 187–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Callender, Craig, and Cohen, Jonathan. 2006. “There Is No Special Problem about Scientific Representation.” Theoria 55:7–25.Google Scholar
Fletcher, Logan, and Carruthers, Peter. 2013. “Behavior-Reading versus Mentalizing in Animals.” In Agency and Joint Attention, ed. Metcalfe, Janet and Terrace, Herbert S., 82–99. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, Shaun, and Povinelli, Daniel J.. 2012. “Enactive and Behavioral Abstraction Accounts of Social Understanding in Chimpanzees, Infants, and Adults.” Review of Philosophy and Psychology 3:145–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, Brian, Call, Josep, Agnetta, Bryan, and Tomasello, Michael. 2000. “Chimpanzees Know What Conspecifics Do and Do Not See.” Animal Behaviour 59:771–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, Brian, Call, Josep, and Tomasello, Michael. 2001. “Do Chimpanzees Know What Conspecifics Know?” Animal Behaviour 61:139–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hare, Brian, and Tomasello, Michael. 2006. “Chimpanzees Deceive a Human by Hiding.” Cognition 101 (3): 495–514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hempel, Carl G. 1958. “The Theoretician’s Dilemma: A Study in the Logic of Theory Construction.” In Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, ed. Feigl, Herbert, Scriven, Michael, and Maxwell, Grover, 37–98. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Heyes, Cecilia. 1998. “Theory of Mind in Nonhuman Primates.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21:101–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopkins, William, Taglialatela, Jared P., and Leavens, David A.. 2007. “Chimpanzees Differentially Produce Novel Vocalizations to Capture the Attention of a Human.” Animal Behaviour 73 (2): 281–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hostetter, Autumn B., Cantero, Monica, and Hopkins, William D.. 2001. “Differential Use of Vocal and Gestural Communication by Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in Response to the Attentional Status of a Human (Homo sapiens).” Journal of Comparative Psychology 115 (4): 337–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hostetter, Autumn B., Russell, Jamie L., Freeman, Hani, and Hopkins, William D.. 2007. “Now You See Me, Now You Don’t: Evidence That Chimpanzees Understand the Role of the Eyes in Attention.” Animal Cognition 10 (1): 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurley, Susan, and Nudds, Matthew. 2006. “The Question of Animal Rationality: Theory and Evidence.” In Rational Animals?, ed. Hurley, Susan and Nudds, Matthew, 1–83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaminski, Juliane, Call, Josep, and Tomasello, Michael. 2004. “Body Orientation and Face Orientation: Two Factors Controlling Apes’ Begging Behavior from Humans.” Animal Cognition 7:216–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaminski, Juliane, Call, Josep, and Tomasello, Michael 2008. “Chimpanzees Know What Others Know, but Not What They Believe.” Cognition 109:224–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leavens, David A., Hostetter, Autumn B., Wesley, Michael J., and Hopkins, William D.. 2004. “Tactical Use of Unimodal and Bimodal Communication by Chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes.” Animal Behaviour 67:467–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leavens, David A., Russell, Jamie L., and Hopkins, William D.. 2010. “Multimodal Communication by Captive Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).” Animal Cognition 13 (1): 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebal, Katja, Pika, Simone, Call, Josep, and Tomasello, Michael. 2004. “To Move or Not to Move: How Apes Adjust to the Attentional State of Others.” Interaction Studies 5 (2): 199–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lurz, Robert. 2009. “If Chimpanzees Are Mindreaders, Could Behavioral Science Tell? Toward a Solution to the Logical Problem.” Philosophical Psychology 22 (3): 305–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lurz, Robert 2011. Mindreading Animals: The Debate over What Animals Know about Other Minds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lurz, Robert W., and Krachun, Carla. 2011. “How Could We Know Whether Nonhuman Primates Understand Others’ Internal Goals and Intentions? Solving Povinelli’s Problem.” Review of Philosophy and Psychology 2 (3): 449–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melis, Alicia P., Call, Josep, and Tomasello, Michael. 2006. “Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) Conceal Visual and Auditory Information from Others.” Journal of Comparative Psychology 120 (2): 154–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mill, John Stuart. 1872/1872. The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Vol. 7, A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive, ed. Robson, John M.. Repr. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Nichols, Shaun, and Stich, Stephen P.. 2003. Mindreading: An Integrated Account of Pretence, Self-Awareness, and Understanding Other Minds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penn, Derek C. 2011. “How Folk Psychology Ruined Comparative Psychology and What Scrub Jays Can Do about It.” In Animal Thinking: Contemporary Issues in Comparative Cognition, ed. Menzel, Randolf and Fischer, Julia, 253–65. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Penn, Derek C., Holyoak, Keith J., and Povinelli, Daniel J.. 2008. “Darwin’s Mistake: Explaining the Discontinuity between Human and Nonhuman Minds.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (2): 109–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penn, Derek C., and Povinelli, Daniel J.. 2007. “On the Lack of Evidence That Chimpanzees Possess Anything Remotely Resembling a ‘Theory of Mind.’” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 362:731–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penn, Derek C., and Povinelli, Daniel J. 2009. “On Becoming Approximately Rational: The Relational Reinterpretation Hypothesis.” In Rational Animals, Irrational Humans, ed. Watanabe, Shigeru, Blaisdell, Aaron P., Huber, Ludwig, and Young, Allan, 23–44. Tokyo: Keio University Press.Google Scholar
Watanabe, Shigeru, Blaisdell, Aaron P., Huber, Ludwig, and Young, Allan 2013. “The Comparative Delusion: Beyond Behavioristic and Mentalistic Explanations for Nonhuman Social Cognition.” In Agency and Joint Attention, ed. Metcalfe, Janet and Terrace, Herbert S., 62–81. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Perner, Josef. 1991. Understanding the Representational Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Poss, Sarah R., Kuhar, Chris, Stoinski, Tara S., and Hopkins, William D.. 2006. “Differential Use of Attentional and Visual Communicative Signaling by Orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) and Gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) in Response to the Attentional Status of a Human.” American Journal of Primatology 68 (10): 978–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Povinelli, Daniel J., and Eddy, Timothy J.. 1996. “What Young Chimpanzees Know about Seeing.” Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 61 (3): 1–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Povinelli, Daniel J., and Vonk, Jennifer. 2003. “Chimpanzee Minds: Suspiciously Human?” TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 7 (4): 157–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Povinelli, Daniel J., and Vonk, Jennifer 2004. “We Don’t Need a Microscope to Explore the Chimpanzee’s Mind.” Mind and Language 19 (1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Premack, David, and Woodruff, Guy. 1978. “Does the Chimpanzee Have a Theory of Mind?” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1 (4): 515–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tempelmann, Sebastian, Kaminski, Juliane, and Liebal, Katja. 2011. “Focus on the Essential: All Great Apes Know When Others Are Being Attentive.” Animal Cognition 14 (3): 433–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, Michael, and Call, Josep. 2006. “Do Chimpanzees Know What Others See—or Only What They Are Looking At?” In Rational Animals?, ed. Hurley, Susan and Nudds, Matthew, 371–84. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael, Call, Josep, and Hare, Brian. 2003. “Chimpanzees Understand Psychological States—the Question Is Which Ones and to What Extent.” TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 7 (4): 153–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, Michael, Hare, Brian, and Agnetta, Bryan. 1999. “Chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes, Follow Gaze Direction Geometrically.” Animal Behaviour 58:769–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vonk, Jennifer, and Povinelli, Daniel J.. 2006. “Similarity and Difference in the Conceptual Systems of Primates: The Unobservability Hypothesis.” In Comparative Cognition: Experimental Exploration of Animal Intelligence, ed. Wasserman, Edward A. and Zentall, Thomas R., 363–87. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Whiten, Andrew. 1993. “Evolving a Theory of Mind: The Nature of Non-verbal Mentalism in Other Primates.” In Understanding Other Minds: Perspectives from Autism, ed. Baron-Cohen, Simon, Tager-Flusberg, Helen, and Cohen, Donald J., 367–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, Simon, Tager-Flusberg, Helen, and Cohen, Donald J. 1996. “When Does Smart Behavior-Reading Become Mind-Reading?” In Theories of Theories of Mind, ed. Carruthers, Peter and Smith, Peter K., 277–92. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Peter K. 1998. “Triangulation, Intervening Variables, and Experience Projection.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21:132–33.Google Scholar
Whiten, Andrew, and Suddendorf, Thomas. 2001. “Meta-representation and Secondary Representation.” TRENDS in Cognitive Science 5 (9): 378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar