I wanted to say basically what Sam Rosen said, so just to make sure I understood your point correctly, do you literally believe that statement “animals can feel hunger” is false? (And the same for babies?)
It seems to me that you have basically redefined “feeling X” to “feeling X while adult human”.
I do not understand why animals evolved to pretend having emotions. I mean, what’s the point of one pig signalling “I am in pain” to another pig, if that other pig obviously knows that there is no such thing as pain. Why did all the lying evolve, when there was no one to lie to?
Does Occam’s razor really favor this hypothesis over “animals act as if they feel pain/hunger, because they feel pain/hunger”?
I am not saying that lying does not exist. I am saying that in order for lying to make sense, the “what the lie is about” must exist first, otherwise no one will respond to the lie. I can lie about being in pain, because there is such a thing as pain. I can’t lie about being in qwertyuiop (especially if I am an animal and can’t make up words).
Your theory predicts that first the animals would evolve pretending to qwertyuiop (which isn’t even a thing at that moment), and only millions of years later a sapient species would evolve which actually qwertyuiops.
EDIT:
LOL, I asked the same thing a year ago, didn’t notice that until now.
I wanted to say basically what Sam Rosen said, so just to make sure I understood your point correctly, do you literally believe that statement “animals can feel hunger” is false? (And the same for babies?)
It seems to me that you have basically redefined “feeling X” to “feeling X while adult human”.
I do not understand why animals evolved to pretend having emotions. I mean, what’s the point of one pig signalling “I am in pain” to another pig, if that other pig obviously knows that there is no such thing as pain. Why did all the lying evolve, when there was no one to lie to?
Does Occam’s razor really favor this hypothesis over “animals act as if they feel pain/hunger, because they feel pain/hunger”?
I am not saying that lying does not exist. I am saying that in order for lying to make sense, the “what the lie is about” must exist first, otherwise no one will respond to the lie. I can lie about being in pain, because there is such a thing as pain. I can’t lie about being in qwertyuiop (especially if I am an animal and can’t make up words).
Your theory predicts that first the animals would evolve pretending to qwertyuiop (which isn’t even a thing at that moment), and only millions of years later a sapient species would evolve which actually qwertyuiops.
EDIT:
LOL, I asked the same thing a year ago, didn’t notice that until now.