I try to take a course at the College Of The Atlantic every two years. Why not? The courses are informative, interesting, and lots of fun. And they happen to be taught on a small, but pretty, campus that is located just minutes away from one of the hidden jewels of the national park system - Acadia National Park, in spectacularly beautiful Bar Harbor, Maine. I've taken courses in Tide Pool Ecology, Conservation Photography, Creative Writing in Botany, and several others. Without question, one of the most enjoyable courses was one on Biological Oceanography, taught by a fellow named Sean Todd - one of the foremost marine mammal biologists on the East coast. (I often kidded Sean, asking him if there was a family connection to Sweeney.) Come to think of it - I wrote a song about him - which I sang to the class at the end of the course - to the tune of Under The Sea from The Little Mermaid. Perhaps I'll share it with you guys and gals.
But I digress.
I learned a lot through that course with Sean. Sean is one of the biologists who is called upon to do a forensics pathology report when a marine mammal washes up on shore. (Marine mammals are protected by federal law - the Marine Mammals Act. Therefore a cause of death has to be reported for every marine mammal that appears on shore.) During one class, I asked Sean the inevitable questions: Are whales sentient creatures? Do they think? Are they self- aware? Sean, who had obviously been asked this question many times before, replied "No", and explained that he thinks of whales as "the cows of the ocean" - no smarter than livestock. They follow each other, emit sounds that allow them to locate each other, but as for true intelligence, in his estimation (which was considerable) the answer was an unequivicable "no".
I have to admit, it was a difficult answer to accept. I recognize that there was a lot of personal bias there. We want whales to be sentient, intelligent beings. We, as humans, want to believe that whales lord over the oceanic realms as we do, for better or for worse, on the terrestrial realm. We want to - if for no other reason - than to believe that on some primordial, spiritual level, we are not alone. Disney's Fantasia 2 may have been terrible (don't get me started) but no one, regardless of age, could fail to be moved at the final tableau where the whales were seen to fly balletically out from the ocean to meet their ultimate, predestined celestial destiny. Hmmm - digressing again. (I do say to you - let your mind dance, right? Well, I'm dancin', I'm dancin...)
Turns out that whales - at least sperm whales - may in fact be more than the "cows of the seas". About a week ago, biologists at Scotland's University of St. Andrew's - where golf was invented - discovered that sperm whales seem to announce their presence with "discrete personal identifiers". In other words, it appears that the whales announce their presence by stating their names.
This conclusion is preliminary - they've only studied three caribbean whales, but the data is intriguing, and in some ways, somewhat startling. The whales, which typically use clicking sounds to communicate across vast stretches of oceanic water. A kind of cetacean (whale) morse code. Whales will greet each other by attaching a distinct coda to their clicks. In music, a coda is a musical phrase that is attached to end of a piece. In this case, the coda is "created" by the individual whale to identify him or herself. Called 5R, it’s a distinct sound made up of five consecutive clicks, with varying pauses between the clicks. While it may sound identical in each whale to casual listeners, variations in click timing became apparent after careful data analysis. Each of the researchers’ whales had its own personal 5R coda. In other words, each whale had an identifier - a name.
Could this be a random occurrance? A meaningless exception without importance? Perhaps. But it has been noted that dolphins have individualized whistles. And like dolphins, sperm whales maintain complex inter-relationships and social groups over long distances. Individual identification would be something that would provide a distinct benefit to the social order.
Man's history with sperm whales is fraught with confrontation and adversity. Hunted with a vengeance for the substance that fills their head. This is the "melon" used for sonar/navigation, thought to be "spermaceti" - sperm - by the ancient marriners. "spermaceti" - a waxy substance that provided light to the world before the age of petroleum, and their blubber was "rendered" or boiled down to create fuel. Man hunted whale, and occasionally the sperm whale torpedoed itself in suicdal attacks against man in his whaling ships. Such an occurence happened to the whaling ship Essex in the mid-19th century. This incident influenced Herman Melville to write Moby Dick - arguably the greatest American novel, and one which virtually no one has read. It is tough reading.
But I digress.
Whaling has not disappeared, but it has certainly narrowed in its scope and intensity. All around the globe,countries gain more income from eco-tourism - whale watching - than from killing whales. Live whales are have become an economic asset, to be both protected and cherished. They are beautiful, magnificent creatures to behold. Once seen, never forgotten. And now it seems, they do not forget each other. It seems that whales do not merely communicate with each other, but also identify each other, and themselves, with names. We have so much more to learn. What more could they possibly teach us?
Some scientists argue that whales, like primates, should be considered "non-human person" - sentient, thinking, self-aware creatures that maintain complex societies and display evidence of sophisticated thought processes. On a physical/neurological level, their brains display many similarities to those of human beings. Yet we know that despite similarities in 99.5% of our DNA, no one would ever confuse a human with a chimpanzee. One half of one percent difference is profound. But it certainly suggests a strong familial relationship.
What are the criteria we should be looking for to determine a status of "non-human personhood"? How should humans interact with these sentient beings of land and sea? Are humans the "lord of the manor", or do we need to re-examine our relationship to the rest of the world - even further than we already may have done? And once we align ourselves to the rest of the world, what then?
Perhaps that is one other "ghost in the machine" - one other singularity that we will one day attain. And perhaps, at that moment, an unforeseen destiny will have been met. And the whales will be seen emerging out of the oceans, in silent flight, towards the celestial heavens above.
8 comments:
I think this all depends on how you define "sentience." If it means that these animals can make relatively logical decisions, make "conversation" with each other, and have some sort of society, then they are sentient. Obviously, their cerebrums are not capable of the same kind of thoughts we have, but if they can do some of the simple things we do, then they should qualify.
It's difficult to say how we should treat these animals. Right now, we are doing the right thing. We've made whaling illegal because they are endangered. But I don't think we should do any more than that. They are animals of the wild, not dogs or cats, if you're insinuating that we should treat them like pets.
As for the part "are humans the lord of the manor," I think not. This is not our planet and all other life forms have a right to it as much as we do. Just because we have the ability to take control doesn't mean we should.
When one thinks about the different forms of life in Biology, they should be thinking about the connections between these different forms as well. This is what this post is about in my opinion. Humans always seem to be asking where they stand in the world and also in relation to other animals on the planet. We are still asking this question, but this post brings up the question of where humans draw the line.
Mr. Engler asks: “Are humans the "lord of the manor", or do we need to re-examine our relationship to the rest of the world - even further than we already may have done?” Unfortunately I do believe that humans are the “lords of the manor”. Although I do not think it is right for this to be so, it is so. We do have the majority of control over the planet but we cannot overlook the fact that we are controlling animals that were once equal to us.
Focusing specifically on the whales is a good example on our involvement with other animals and our effect on other living organisms. I find it interesting that we are learning how whales can communicate with each other because it shows that animals do not rely on humans for everything and they still have some freedom; through their voice. Maybe humans are not meant to discover or know everything (imagine that!). We are trying to learn more about the animals we live with each and every day and it can help us protect the beings, but when does a human step back and let nature take its course?
While thinking about Mr. Engler’s prompt, the main question I thought of was: When do humans let animals be? I think the problem is that everyone draws the line a different spot so we never really know where the line is. In the case of the whales, the science is very interesting and it is fun to learn that whale’s are communicating in such ways, but one cannot forget that humans have become the “lords of the manor” whether we like it or not. I believe that in the way animals have evolved, we will stay the “lords”. But if we are the “lords”, we really need to pay more attention to the other beings that we’re living with.
First of all, i think that my response last week, could and probably was, taken the wrong way. What i was trying to say was very similar to Aidans point of view.
You mentioned in the blog that people are gaining more money to whale watch than actually killing whales. However, as i mentioned in my presentation, whale watching is a threat to whales as well. Whale watching boats follow the whales which are a threat because of the pollution they cause. Whale watching boats release so much pollution when they are just idling which they do for long periods of time to watch the whales and they do so in/around the whales habitat.
Also, it says what our relationship should be with the whales. Personally, maybe we should not have that much of a relationship with the whales. With too much interaction with whales they become too desensitized with humans and will come near boats and get run over. Our only interaction with the whales should be trying to save their habitat and food source.
With the “lords of the manor” aspect. I think we are; however, we’re are a destructive lord of the manor. Like a lord of the manor who is also a pyromaniac.
Sydney
I agree with just about everything Oriana said. I think that we have assumed that we are the most powerful beings on this earth, therefore we are able to have control over everything around us.
There needs to be a line drawn to say what we control and what we can not. We have a belief that we need to be involved in everything we can get our hands on. This can sometimes be a good thing or a bad thing. It can be good in cases where we decide to help and get involved for the better. But when we decide that we deserve to be involved because we are in control of everything, then we become power crazy and end up making very bad destructive decisions.
We need to pay better attention to the effects our actions are having on the world and creatures around us.
-Sarah
All I could think about throughout this article was the whaling that you were describing. I suppose it was a bit more understandable in the mid 19th century to kill whales, because they used the whale's fat for fuel, and whales then were not in such grave danger.
Now the whaling that happens every year in Japan for what seems to be pure sport is terrifying. I think in a National Geograpic magazine that we own there is a picture of a harbor in Japan where all of the whales have been harvested, and are now being cut up. All of the water in the harbor is a deep red. It looks as though the water is meant to be that color.
The fact that we hold these mass harvests of our planet's animals without considering the consequences is terrible. I think sometimes we forget about the damage that we can do in such a small period of time.
-Marley
WHALES ARE PEOPE TOO!
That sounds pretty weird to me...but whatever. Right now I don't think any whales should be harvested from the ocean for two reasons. The first reason being that I believe whales are large and smart creatures. Because of their size I imagine that they must play a pretty valuable and significant role in the ocean ecosystem. The second reason I don't think any whales should be killed is because I don't think there should be any commercial fishing from the ocean whatsoever. I believe that if we want seafood then we will have to farm these fish just like meat.
But I digress. (sorry, I had to)
I know this is a happy news but I still think of all the bad things happening in the ocean as I read this article. I think of over fishing, whale hunting, pollution, and noise pollution. The oceans seem like such a sensitive ecosystem and reading about its animals just reinforces that idea in my head.
So when you say "complete," you mean an entire society??
According to the definition you gave in the blog, a non-human personhood is a "complex society capable of sophisticated thought process."
But then the question emerges: what makes a "society?" Does it need to be a certain amount of.....animals or mammals? When you say "complete sentience," I get a little confused. Maybe I don't understand the question, so maybe I'll just rant.... I'll just let my mind dance....
I think this entire thing is amazing. I certainly think Sean Todd was wrong when he said that these animals aren't "intelligent." I think is extraordinary that sperm whales and dolphins are able to "personalize" their own coda. These mammals are communicating! They aren't just making random noises that will get the attention they are looking for.
It's almost more intelligent than the way that humans communicate. Their language requires a significant amount of attention. It's connecting specific pauses and clicks in the coda which requires a different part of the brain. Maybe I'm just bored with our language, I'm the kind of person that wants to learn 3+ crazy foreign languages before I die. So this really interests me.
I completely agree with what Sydney said in her post about the "lord of the manor" title that, apparently, we humans have won. Humans have developed in an extraordinary way... But we are also destroying.... We're powerful and, yes, intelligent, but we are getting way to ahead of ourselves.
Once again I am put in the position of having tried and failed to post a response. What fun!
So, here are my condensed thoughts on the subject at hand. If humans are the "Lords of the Manor," and arguably, we are, then we are really stewards of the manor. That is we have the responsibility to protect the beasts and plants of the garden. "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility."
Next, we must examine this idea of sentience. I fully believe that all animals have personalities, emotions, wants and desires. That is enough for me to classify them as being sentient. What most people fail to understand is that all life, from a newborn baby to a poisonous mushroom, has the desire to live. Furthermore, for one live to continue another must end. Many humans, in ignorance, attempt to free themselves from causing death by abstaining from flesh. They do not realize that plants have just as much will to live as animals do. For one thing to eat another mus die, it is a simple basic fact of life. But that doesn't mean that we have the right to kill any animal or plant that gets in our way, that where the stewardship comes in.
If you ever have the chance to read Kahlil Gibran's "The
Prophet," do. The chapter which is called Eating and Drinking is most pertinent to the matter at hand. Basically, our killing of and apple or a doe is justified because we too will die so that others might live, hopefully. The Lion King did a pretty good job of explaining it, its called The Circle of Life.
Post a Comment