4.5 Article

Profiles of animal consciousness: A species-sensitive, two-tier account to quality and distribution

期刊

COGNITION
卷 235, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105409

关键词

Animal consciousness; Animal cognition; Evidence of consciousness; Consciousness profiles

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The science of animal consciousness investigates the distribution and quality of conscious experience in different animal species. A two-tier account is proposed to distinguish and address both questions, using ten dimensions of consciousness and cognitive capacities as operationalizations. This framework achieves three valuable aims: separating strong and weak indicators of consciousness, including differences in specific contents and in the processing of those contents, and combining evidence from each dimension to derive a multi-dimensional consciousness profile for different species.
The science of animal consciousness investigates (i) which animal species are conscious (the distribution ques-tion) and (ii) how conscious experience differs in detail between species (the quality question). We propose a framework which clearly distinguishes both questions and tackles both of them. This two-tier account distin-guishes consciousness along ten dimensions and suggests cognitive capacities which serve as distinct oper-ationalizations for each dimension. The two-tier account achieves three valuable aims: First, it separates strong and weak indicators of the presence of consciousness. Second, these indicators include not only different specific contents but also differences in the way particular contents are processed (by processes of learning, reasoning or abstraction). Third, evidence of consciousness from each dimension can be combined to derive the distinctive multi-dimensional consciousness profile of various species. Thus, the two-tier account shows how the kind of conscious experience of different species can be systematically compared.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据