Endorsing Nonhuman Consciousness Is Defensible Ethics but Dubious Science
Abstract
We distinguish between ethical and scientific approaches to nonhuman consciousness. Ethically, we endorse liberal inference of consciousness to mitigate moral hazard. Scientifically, we advocate for skepticism because no convincing testable causal role for consciousness in behavior has been articulated. Claims that complex behaviors necessitate consciousness lack clear mechanistic justifications, and many complex behaviors appear to proceed without consciousness. Progress in the study of consciousness will require specifying what consciousness causes that cannot occur without it.
Keywords : animal consciousness, scientific skepticism, causal explanation, behavioral complexity