Classics Revisited: “The evolution of nests and nest-building in birds”, by Dr Nicholas E Collias (1964) American Zoologist 4(2): 175–190

Although one of the most studied organisms in other disciplines, the role of birds as zoogeomorphic agents has been somewhat overlooked in geography literature. Bird nests serve as a manifestation of the reciprocal relationships that birds have with their environment. Dr Nicholas E. Collias’s “The evolution of nests and nest-building in birds”, published in American Zoologist (1964), was one of the first to hypothesize the intimate connection between bird nests and their landscapes. Researchers interested in understanding the role birds have as zoogeomorphic agents should view Collias (1964) as an essential resource for information and inspiration for further exploration.

The negative impact of scientific ideology on education about the moral status of animals

The article presents an analysis of the ethical views of Bernard Rollin, an American zoologist and philosopher who examined how the education about the moral status of animals has been affected by the so-called scientific ideology. This way of thinking denies animal suffering and consciousness in stark contrast with our commonsense knowledge and collective human experience. Rollin points to positivism and behaviourism as twin philosophical and psychological sources of this scientific ideology. Positivism rejected the concept of consciousness as a subjective, metaphysical, unscientific, non-measurable state and separated science from values and ethics. Behaviourism further obstructed moral reflection on the acceptable methods of treatment of animals not only by eliminating the category of animal consciousness, but also by replacing the vocabulary to describe its experimental manifestations with one of observable actions (reinforcement and aversion). Behaviourism denies animal suffering and other states of consciousness on the epistemological principle that they are difficult to verify. This paradigm continues to be successfully applied in modern biomedical laboratories and blinds scientists to both the pain inflicted on animals and the moral repercussions of animal consciousness. Positivism and behaviourism alike cast animals as models and biological mechanisms to distort our understanding of their nature and justify their harm. The article presents an analysis of the ethical views of Bernard Rollin, an American zoologist and philosopher who examined how the education about the moral status of animals has been affected by the so-called scientific ideology. This way of thinking denies animal suffering and consciousness in stark contrast with our commonsense knowledge and collective human experience. Rollin points to positivism and behaviourism as twin philosophical and psychological sources of this scientific ideology. Positivism rejected the concept of consciousness as a subjective, metaphysical, unscientific, non-measurable state and separated science from values and ethics. Behaviourism further obstructed moral reflection on the acceptable methods of treatment of animals not only by eliminating the category of animal consciousness, but also by replacing the vocabulary to describe its experimental manifestations with one of observable actions (reinforcement and aversion). Behaviourism denies animal suffering and other states of consciousness on the epistemological principle that they are difficult to verify. This paradigm continues to be successfully applied in modern biomedical laboratories and blinds scientists to both the pain inflicted on animals and the moral repercussions of animal consciousness. Positivism and behaviourism alike cast animals as models and biological mechanisms to distort our understanding of their nature and justify their harm.

Animals' consciousness and human self-consciousness

Introduction: Consciousness consists of states of sentience, feeling or awareness while awake, not in comma and alive. The current neuroscientific trend suggests the correlation of conscious experience with certain corticothalamic circuits, thus constituting part of the brain function. Animals show signs of consciousness but distinctive human element appears to be self-consciousness, the acute sense of self-awareness. Objectives: Our aim is to clarify whether animals are conscious, and if so, what the level of their consciousness is and what neuronal mechanisms are underlying in what is supposed to be human’s unique feature of consciousness. Methods & Results: A search of the literature in relevant journals (e.g. Nature Neuroscience, American Zoologist) and manually from identified articles’ reference list was conducted. Experiments (including mirror tests, language learning and comprehending tests, exposure to social competition environments, etc.) as well as the given of similarities in neuroanatomical architecture of mammals, behavior and the idea of evolutionary continuity propose that animals are conscious but the level of that remains to be investigated. On the other hand, humans feature, in addition, self-consciousness, being able to perceive and explain their emotions and actions. Conclusion: The claim that animals don’t share the state of consciousness is a remnant of the human’s high belief of being a privileged species amongst others. Nonetheless, the particular characteristic of self-consciousness seems to be exclusively attributed to human kind. However, further research should be made to understand deeply the neuronal background of the enigmatic as it is now features of consciousness and self-consciousness.