The NY Declaration on Animal Consciousness was announced on
19 April 2024 at New York University. Although the Declaration does not assert
certainty in consciousness across all species there is strong support for the
claim and therefore a call to consider consciousness when making policy
decisions regarding animals. While some might say that any announcement about
animal consciousness is not news or might shrug off the “realistic possibility”
of consciousness in, for example, fish, the Declaration has wide-ranging
implications in areas of teaching, medical research, suburban and rural
development, wildlife conservation, etc.
For instance, while many of the signatories are research
scientists, what care is henceforth required for “animals” used in experiments?
Should animals be excluded from lab experiments, given computer generated
imaging and other forms of visual effects and artificial intelligence? Should
animal experiments that simply replicate known results cease? Beyond the
university lab, what about animals, from mice to monkeys, used in experiments
for the corporate beauty, pharmaceutical, or medical industries? What happens
to businesses that breed animals simply for the purpose of sale as human food
or research bodies in labs? At the conference, one audience member inquired
about the fate of animals at the close of an experiment. The person who
answered the question, and a primary signatory to the Declaration, said she
does not dispose of animals when an experiment is done; but that begs the
question about practices of “euthanasia” among other scientists. If you stop
and look around, you will realize how animals are ingrained into our lives as
pets, companions, workers, food, or objects of entertainment. So, the
crystallization of meaning in the Declaration boils down to how we treat the
lives of others.
The original 40 signatories don’t call for animal rights but
“welfare,” which implies that animals can be used “humanely” for our use. Should
animals be objects of experimentation in the first place? Activists would object to the welfare
reference and insist on animal rights. The presentation at the start of the
conference made clear that among the 40 primary signatories there was
discussion and disagreement, so it’s likely that some lean more to rights while
others rest on welfare. That’s not a criticism but a reflection of the reality
about how animals are currently viewed. Though a declaration, much of the
language admits “uncertainty” (as of now) and opens with a question about which
animals have a “capacity” for consciousness. To their credit, the signatories
imply that many organisms including fish have such a capacity in various
degrees based on their evolutionary adaptations. Clearly then, the Declaration
is an important development and tool for researchers and animal activists
alike. For example, in advancing concerns about welfare or rights, many people
can raise legitimate claims about how animals are treated with reference to
this document.
The statement of animal consciousness is brief but includes
background material, which highlights (in simplified form here) how crows can learn,
octopuses evade pain, cuttlefish have memories, cleaner wrasse fish can
identify themselves, bees engage in free play, etc. The point is that a
consensus of leaders in this arena of inquiry, from scientists to philosophers,
confirm that more species have subjective awareness than has been recognized
heretofore. Ongoing evidence firmly suggests that more animals have phenomenal
consciousness or sentience exhibited in a range of behaviors, from
self-consciousness, problem solving, planning, etc. This evidence, so far based
on different species, posits a range of “more likely” to the “realistic
possibility” and “strong scientific support” of consciousness across a broad
range of species.
However one thinks, the New York Declaration on Animal
Consciousness is yet another important step forward regarding how humans
interact with the living world. Assuming our human ethics of caring, animal
rights are linked with human rights, so this pronouncement is a crucial
development in establishing rights for all living organisms. To bolster the
authority and credibility of the Declaration, the announcement has been covered
by many outlets large and small, from Nature News to The Hill.
For academic references used by the writers of the New York
Declaration, go HERE.
The New York Declaration comes almost twelve years after the
Cambridge Declaration of Consciousness, HERE.
Readers might also be interested in the PETA argument for
animal sentience and emotions, HERE.
There’s also a declaration of animal personhood by the
University of Toulon, France, HERE.
Additional resources for the curious can be found on the Literary Veganism
site, HERE.
-Gregory F. Tague, Ph.D. and Fredericka A. Jacks
.jpg)