Snakes/Reptiles and their Emotions The argument

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoax

This has been discussed a thousand times, you should have just dredged up one of the old horses and beat it around for a bit, the answer is and always will be THEY DON'T HAVE EYEBROWS!!!! So they can't show you how they feel.... It is sad really I would like to know when my snake is confused or scared or in the mood for some sweet sweet rat.

Mike

---

Not beating a dead horse. Just putting another nail in the coffin ;) :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nate

Here's a quick video that I did to show that snakes do show emotions. :gj:

YouTube - Snakes DO show emotions

---

Proof is undeniable. That snake is very emotional. Brought a tear to me eye.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heathertoft

My snakes (including the one I'm snake-sitting right now here) do not love me. One actively dislikes my presence. The other two do are neutral...they do not perceive me as a threat, nor am I anything that merits much attention. I'm pretty sure my Ball Python, Macchiato, views me as nothing more than the Largish Warm Perch/Branch I Sometimes Occupy That Makes Heartbeaty Sounds And Might Possibly Be A Large, Harmless Animal Of Some Kind.

And I am fine with that. ;)

I did not get my snakes with the desire or need for them to love me, or like me, or know I exist as an entity all my own. I love THEM, and name them, and sing to them even though they can't hear me (little Neheb, the charcoal Corn Snake I'm snake-sitting for, has his own theme song now: "You are my sunshine, my only sunshine...you make me happy, because you're gray...yer a snake an' can't hear me say I love you, but I sing it to you anyway!") and otherwise slather them with affection and consider it a major breakthrough when Bowline, my Pueblan Milk Snake, doesn't musk at the mere hint of my presence.

I am emotionally mature enough not to NEED my pets to love me. I love them unconditionally, and that means I require nothing more or less of them than for them to be content, comfortable and well-cared-for.

Anyone who gets a snake expecting it to love them is in for a shock, they aren't mammals and unlike a dog, who modifies it's behaviour (for good or ill) based on what it thinks it's human companion wants, my snakes will take no action to express affection...and likely can't feel affection as we know it.

However, being human, I felt an emotional response when I re-designed Macchiato's enclosure, gently set him inside it, and watched him look around, tongue-flick for two seconds, then zoom back into my hands and up my arm with a supprising ammount of speed.

I felt emotionally as if he were saying, "I like you." Intellectually, I know the truth: he was just opting for a familar perch/branch (MY ARM) than what had become an unfamilar place to be.

And, again, I'm totally okay with it being a very one-sided relationship. :)

---

This is the best explanation on this subject ever (IMO) when the next person beats on this horse this post should be pasted and the thread locked.

Mike

It's kinda like asking anyone how many demensions are there. Most will say 3, some will say 4, with time being the 4th. But is the definitive answer? Well, we (humans) say there's 4, so it must be 4. But is it?

I know there is at least one more, known as the 5th Demension. Enjoy the song and the clothing.;)

Jim Smith


YouTube - The 5th Demension "Stoned Soul Picnic" Ed Sullivan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoax

This is the best explanation on this subject ever (IMO) when the next person beats on this horse this post should be pasted and the thread locked.

Mike

---

Whoa now...hold your horses. This is a pleasant and civil conversation. If it offends you, don't read it and go on to the next subject. There can be merit to this discussion. I don't know what, what maybe. It's all in fun. Lets learn to relax and enjoy each other's opinion. We must come to a place we're we can not only tolerate each others annoying drivel, but relish in the fact that we all can come together to discuss any subject.

Oops, times up, that will be $350 and you can check with my secretary to schedule next week's appointment. ;)

Jim Smith

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_h_smith

I don't claim to be an expert on this subject (or many other subjects for that matter), but I don't know how much we (as humans) understand other animals. I think OUR REALITY IS OUR PERCEPTION. We cannot undestand that which is beyond our perception. I know this is getting deep, so I'm sorry.

If you lived in the jungle and never saw an airplane, what would you perceive this thing to be? I don't know, because I know what an airplane is and can't understand their perception.

If you lived on the top of a mountain and you saw a fish for the first time, what would you think of the fish? I don't know, because I know what a fish is and can't understand their perception. And I'm just talking about another human. Now, we're talking about reptiles.

Do we conclude that reptiles perceive as we do? Do we believe that everything that makes you a person has to pertain to what makes a reptile a reptile?

Okay now it's really getting deep. But I don't know if we (meaning the human race) actually understand as much of the world as we think we do. We perceive things in the human sense, but do we really know what's going on. Because we are at the top of what we believe to be the evolutionary charts, we pat ourselves on the back, telling ourselves how much we know and we are better off for it. But I think the animals have it much better than we do. How many of you can find north or south without the use of a compass? How many of us could survive without our manmade tools? Ever heard the word horse sense? They know where to step and stop short of that rattlesnake without seeing it. I can keep on going with examples, but I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

We know what we know and convienently try to surround everything with that knowledge.

:soapbx::soapbx::soapbx:
Jim Smith

---

You're entitled to your opinion, but let me try to explain why your opinion is wrong ;)

What you're arguing is completely unrelated to snakes having emotion. Snakes emotions are not a matter of relativity and perception. It is fine to ask philisophical questions like "what would we think of _____ if we had never seen one" but a snake doesn't have the capacity to even form thoughts like that. They have no cortex! They have no ability to construct abstract thoughts. Their reactions to stimuli are based on the fight or flight reflex. IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO GO OUT ON A LIMB you could say that snakes can express two emotions; anger and fear. Either their brain sends out a message that says "get aggressive" or it sends out a message that says "run the heck away". Or they can stay neutral. That's it.

I guess I have trouble understanding why "They don't have that part of their brain" isn't a good enough explanation... It's not a matter of we just can't imagine what it's like to think like a snake; it's that snakes lack the physical capability to 'think'.

How about this way. It's like if I said "Pigs can fly"; but pigs can't fly, they don't have wings; "No, see, pigs can fly, they just maybe fly differently than we can imagine them flying". See how rediculous that sounds? Now how about "Snakes can feel"; but snakes can't feel, they don't have that part of their brain; "No, see..."

I dunno, believe what you want, just have some PHYSICAL evidence to back it up.

As for kremmel's post about plants... What a load of crap. Like... Common, seriously? Backster is a crackpot with no scientific training. His experiments have been recreated numerous times with strict control for extraneous variables and yielded no statistically significant results each and every time, to which Backster always responds that the scientists "misunderstood" something about his theory. There's a reason his work hasn't been widespread even though it's been around for over 40 years; because it's not true.

Also, wth was up with that whole dimensions thing? There are three dimensions. X, Y, and Z. You know why there are only three dimensions? Because the concept of dimensions is a human invention. So really, asking whether snakes have emotions is nothing like asking nonsensical questions about "5th dimensions". That one just confused the hell out of me :S

Either way, loving this thread, keep the responses coming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MustBeSatan

You're entitled to your opinion, but let me try to explain why your opinion is wrong ;)

---

If its an opinion, it can't be wrong.

Quote:

---

What you're arguing is completely unrelated to snakes having emotion. Snakes emotions are not a matter of relativity and perception. It is fine to ask philisophical questions like "what would we think of _____ if we had never seen one" but a snake doesn't have the capacity to even form thoughts like that. They have no cortex! They have no ability to construct abstract thoughts. Their reactions to stimuli are based on the fight or flight reflex. IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO GO OUT ON A LIMB you could say that snakes can express two emotions; anger and fear. Either their brain sends out a message that says "get aggressive" or it sends out a message that says "run the heck away". Or they can stay neutral. That's it.

---

See that's where you're thinking like a human again. You're putting human sense into a non-human scenerio. We believe what we perceive to be the truth. Just like many years ago, we as a civilization knew the Earth was flat, now we know differently. We've learned beyond our perception.

Quote:

---

I guess I have trouble understanding why "They don't have that part of their brain" isn't a good enough explanation... It's not a matter of we just can't imagine what it's like to think like a snake; it's that snakes lack the physical capability to 'think'.

---

Again, you're equating human knowledge with what could be. I'm asking you to think outside the box. Just because we investigate something and because of our knowledge base, we say something has to be this or that. Who's to say we're just thinking the Earth is still flat?

Quote:

---

How about this way. It's like if I said "Pigs can fly"; but pigs can't fly, they don't have wings; "No, see, pigs can fly, they just maybe fly differently than we can imagine them flying". See how rediculous that sounds? Now how about "Snakes can feel"; but snakes can't feel, they don't have that part of their brain; "No, see..."

---

No this is not the same. Pigs can't fly or have never made it known to us. Therefore we perceive pigs can't fly. In order to have flight, animals need to be endowed with some type of wing structure. Since pigs do not have these, they cannot fly. But a snake has a brain, it may not be constructed in a way that we can understand its function. We try to put our human understanding on the line and say that since we need to have this or that and a snake does not have either, therefore they can't have feelings. Well who's to say? Why can't we realize that just because we don't know something, doesn't make it imposible. Humans discover new things all the time. When did the first boat float on water? When did the first plane fly? When did we realize the Earth was not at the center of the universe? Before all of these discoveries, we knew we had the answers, then something changed. A discovery was made and now we know how to build a boat, build a plane, realize we are just a small blip in the cosmic scheme of things. We make discoveries all the time, then our perceived world changes. Not before the dicovery, but after.

Quote:

---

I dunno, believe what you want, just have some PHYSICAL evidence to back it up.

---

Theoritical Physics-Theory of physics. Where the human race learns about things that have never been thought of before. I can ask you the same thing, show me physical proof that a snake can't have feelings? Not what we think we know as fact but actual facts as known by the cosmic beings, otherwise known as God. Just because we think as a race (society) we know the answer, doesn't mean we do. We only perceive the answer by what we can observe. When we are enlightented with unfounded knowledge is the only time we can say we've learned something new. Maybe, we haven't learned the right "stuff" just yet to satisfy your need to percieve actual knowledge.

I know this is a lot of mumbo jumbo, but this is why we need to continue our growth of perceived knowledge. One day, maybe we will actually know everything, but my guess is that if this day were to come, it will be millions of years from now.

Quote:

---

Also, wth was up with that whole dimensions thing? There are three dimensions. X, Y, and Z. You know why there are only three dimensions? Because the concept of dimensions is a human invention. So really, asking whether snakes have emotions is nothing like asking nonsensical questions about "5th dimensions". That one just confused the hell out of me :S

Either way, loving this thread, keep the responses coming.

---

Again, you can't think past what you know as fact. Well, lets just say we don't know everything as a race. Could there not be more than 3 dimensions? Some of the greatest people in science today are saying that time is now the 4th dimension. If you believe the string theory, we are in as many as 18 dimensions. Now I won't talk to that fact, because it WAY beyond my understanding. I'm just wanting people to see that just because we think we know the facts, doesn't mean we do. We believe the facts as we know them. A new discover will and has in the past many times, changed our definition of a fact. A fact stays a fact until it is proven not to be a fact.

It is okay that you see your world the way you see it. It is a human fault that many of us are doomed to relive every day. However, I don't accept your reality as the only answer.

As for the 5th demension thing, it's what's called a joke. Did you watch the video?

Jim Smith

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_h_smith

No this is not the same. Pigs can't fly or have never made it known to us. Therefore we perceive pigs can't fly. In order to have flight, animals need to be endowed with some type of wing structure. Since pigs do not have these, they cannot fly. But a snake has a brain, it may not be constructed in a way that we can understand its function. We try to put our human understanding on the line and say that since we need to have this or that and a snake does not have either, therefore they can't have feelings. Well who's to say? Why can't we realize that just because we don't know something, doesn't make it imposible. Humans discover new things all the time. When did the first boat float on water? When did the first plane fly? When did we realize the Earth was not at the center of the universe? Before all of these discoveries, we knew we had the answers, then something changed. A discovery was made and now we know how to build a boat, build a plane, realize we are just a small blip in the cosmic scheme of things. We make discoveries all the time, then our perceived world changes. Not before the dicovery, but after.

---

You completely missed my point. You say that Pigs don't have the wing structure necessary to fly. Snakes don't have the BRAIN structure necessary to feel. We used to think the earth was flat, and we know now that it is not. We used to not understand the structure of the brain, and now we know a whole lot about it. One of the things we know is that there is a part of the brain devoted to emotion, and snakes don't have it.

So you see, we have discovered that snakes can't feel, just the same as we discovered the world was not flat. Through scientific investigation. The proof is there, the physical, scientific proof is there.

I just noticed this comment:

"I can ask you the same thing, show me physical proof that a snake can't have feelings?"

So here ya go.

http://www.buffalostate.edu/orgs/bcp...cs/triune.html

The brain, devided into its evolutionary milestones as according to triune brain theory. Reptiles only have the first part, conviniently called the "Reptilian Complex", which DOES NOT have any of the parts necessary to feel emotion. Those parts are present in the Limbic brain (i.e. the amygdala), which evolved in mammals. Hope that helps further your understanding of what we know about the brain.

“Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me... Anything can happen, child. Anything can be." -Shel Silverstein

:)

Again, we know what we think we know. That is until a new discovery allows us to transend the known facts. I do not deny what you're quoting, but is this the true fact or just a percieved fact that will change when a new discovery has been made?

Jim Smith