Do fishes have feelings?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Descartes, animals can have three different grades of sensation: physical, conscious, and self-conscious. Descartes indicated that we have only the first in common with nonhuman creatures. His denial that animals have minds prevents animals from having either conscious or self-conscious tools. Regan's interpretation is more consistent with what Descartes actually wrote. Animals only "felt joy" and other emotions in the first grade of sensation, which is a very unfamiliar sense of "feeling": the animals, in response to a physical stimulus, would mechanically respond by dancing about, appearing happy, or the like, even though the "animal machines" would not consciously feel anything. Thus Descartes actually wrote that animals do not feel "pain in the strict sense," since they lack understanding or a mind, and also that they are not aware of any thing. This appears to rule out the view that animals have conscious feelings according to Descartes. This view did not go uncontested even in Descartes' own time. Voltaire (1694-1778) famously wrote a generation later: "Answer me, machinist, has nature arranged all the means of feeling in this animal, so that it may not feel?"

There are a few people who still hold to Cartesianism. Bernard Rollin found the animals-feel-no-pain thesis expressed in the Bulletin of the National Society for Medical Research, a U.S. lobby group that tries "to block legislation that would in any way place restrictions on biomedical research." Peter Harrison, a philosopher, defends Cartesianism based largely on the view that we cannot absolutely prove that animals feel pain (his argument is much more detailed, however). The criticism of Descartes' view of animals stems from its conflict with commonsense experience of animals and also its being at odds with a variety of considerations in favor of holding that animals can suffer.
Click to expand...
Alright, where'd you plagiarize this from? Reminds me of my "History of Psychology" class. ZzZzZzZZzzzzzz...
 
Ha ha.

I was just amused and this discussion reminded me of Philosphy class too. I really dug that stuff. I'm an armchair phillospher. And I lifted if from a google search on Animals + Descartes + emotions.

I don't really believe all of Cartesian phillosphy, but it is a great tool to think about your connection to the world.

Rich
 
like chunk says there is a big difference betweeen short term and long term memory

i have a daughter who has very poor short term memory.
means she is unable to remember the homeworks set for her at school
will go to get something and instantly forget what it was
she needs to be told things over and over for them to sink in
but she knows what time dinner is and where the crisps are

comparing my daughter to a fish is not exactly what i am doing
but what i am saying is that food and company are things easily remembered (they give you company to get the food btw not to be social)

pain is also another way to condition someone or something
if you get a shock everytime you go to the biscuit tin how often would you go there.
therefore if a net causes pain it is a conditioned response to avoid it

emotions in a fish depends on how much they enjoy reproducing :)
i guess, although they do seem to be healthier and happier with other fish (depending on fish type i assume less so with territorial fish maybe)

one neon will not be happy without lots more to swim with it.

boredom dont know but the piranha i saw at the aquarium the other day looked totally fed up healthy yes but definately on the bored side

just me two cents worth
 
russjet said:
one neon will not be happy without lots more to swim with it.
Click to expand...

I understand that this wasnt your point, im just using what you said to restate my point; a neon cant be "happy."

The reason schooling fish appear to be "happy" when stocked with the same fish, ie bright colors, increased activity, etc. is because their instinct is to school. The mechanics of a school of fish can be explained like this: each fish aligns itself with 3 other fish: one above/slightly in front of, and one to each side. This rule isn’t always followed exactly, it’s more of a rule of thumb for schooling fish; each fish trying to align itself in this manner, but not always doing so. Each fish follows this structure, so when you see a barracuda or other predatory fish (I just named barracuda because they rule) dive through a school of fish you often see a “ripple effect” through the entire school; the fish in danger disregard the schooling rule and scatter in different directions, the fish not in immediate danger follow the fish that scattered which causes the entire school to move.

Soooo, a schooling fish not kept in a school generally results in excess stress, causing discoloration and nervousness (“unhappy”). It’s a long-winded explanation, I know, but my point is that every “emotion” a fish seems to have can be explained as instinct.



i watch too much discovery channel, and i want you all to know that you are my outlet for all the useless "knowledge" i might pick up.
 
Last edited:
chunksofpoooo said:
Do fish have feelings?

no, of course not. As far as the pain argument is concerned, I think it all comes down to what your definition of pain is. If you define pain as an emotional response, then no, fish technically don’t feel "pain." If you define pain as the response to damage being done or about to be done (as I do), then yes, fish do feel "pain."

Concerning the response to food/feeding time/memory:
There is something called the palovian (sp?) response. A scientist did a number of studies with a dog involving a bell and food (this is a greatly simplified explanation, mind you). Every time he fed the dog, he rang the bell just before. He found that the dog would anticipate food (salivation, increased production of stomach acid, etc) every time he rang the bell, even if he didn’t feed the dog. This is what’s happening when you feed your fish. Regardless of whether you feed your fish or not, every time you walk up to your tank and do whatever (open the hood, pick up the food container, etc) your fish will "presume" its getting food and act accordingly. This ties into fish memory as well (sorta). There is a great difference between short term memory, long term memory, and memory based on pain. If you walk by your tank once and tap the glass, your fish will scatter (most likely), but after a short period of time your fish will resume whatever activity they were previously doing: short term memory. The palovian response is, in a way, "long term memory." Your fish "learns" when feeding time is and responds to whatever stimuli triggers the response, your fish "remembers" what that stimulus is. If you hurt your fish or stress your fish with your fish net (just an example) then your fish will "remember" the net and avoid it. When it comes down to it all these types of memory are in actuality instinct. Your fish isn’t born with the knowledge that a net is painful/stressful, your fish isn’t born with the knowledge that your presence generally means food, but your fish is born with the instinct to associate certain things (you, your net, whatever) and respond accordingly in order to survive. Your fish are as smart as they need to be to survive, no more, and (generally) no less.
Click to expand...
You are basically calling fish pointless to humans. Why don't you just buy a pet dog or something else if you think this of your fish?
 
A statue doesn't need to acknowledge my presence for me to appreciate it's beauty, or wish to protect it from destruction.
 
Rushdude said:
You are basically calling fish pointless to humans. Why don't you just buy a pet dog or something else if you think this of your fish?
Click to expand...


i never said at any point that fish are useless to humans. In fact, im hard pressed to find any point in either of my posts that even hints at that. Im saying that fish dont have the intellegence level to have feelings or emotion, but like OG said, thats not gonna stop me from protecting them from harm, appreciating their beauty, encouraging others to look into the hobby.
 
PumaWard said:
I'm sorry, but physical pain isn't an emotion, and doesn't require an emotion to be sense.
Click to expand...

Ok, so do you need to experience suffering or distress to experience pain? Because it has been proven that certain animals do not share the distress and suffering that we humans do, hence they wouldn't experience 'pain'.
 
I once seen this thing on Max X. I felt sick to my stomach while watching it. To make something long, short; A restaurant prepared a fish recipe as such. Take fish out, scale it, cut it down the middle, rip out its guts, flour and season its body and while holding the head, place the body in cooking oil to fry him(body only). The part that hurt me the most was when they showed the family eating at the fishes body, he was alive the whole time opening and closing his mouth. :sad
It really ticked me off. I wished that I changed the channel. I do believe that fish are able to feel pain.
 
I once seen this thing on Max X. I felt sick to my stomach while watching it. To make something long, short; A restaurant prepared a fish recipe as such. Take fish out, scale it, cut it down the middle, rip out its guts, flour and season its body and while holding the head, place the body in cooking oil to fry him(body only). The part that hurt me the most was when they showed the family eating at the fishes body, he was alive the whole time opening and closing his mouth.
It really ticked me off. I wished that I changed the channel. I do believe that fish are able to feel pain.
Click to expand...
I think i've seen that before too..
Thats taking 'fresh" to another level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom