I moved this from goodreads to here, because it's going to be so long. I want to review this book in pieces, because there's so much here to think about. Here's part one.
From the start I love the first topic, in which he gets at our real feelings on who counts as a person, who has personhood or a soul (nonreligious version), based on how we make decisions about what animals it's okay to kill or eat.
I was quite surprised to hear his opinion that babies and young children have less soulness than an adult, and knowing he has kids, I'm wondering how he has missed the fact that even small babies come into the world with 100% personness. They may be less able to control their environment but there's nevertheless a complete 100% personality there. People I've known as babies I can recognize as being the same people, with similar quirks and leanings, as they are as adults.
Hofstadter sees that we're programmed by natural selection to think babies are cute, and thinks that's why we put up with them, which is true, I suppose. But I think natural selection actually points us toward recognizing the truth of children's personhood, rather than fooling us about their real status. Natural selection always works in favor of the animal being selected, it always acts to align that animal toward reality. The forces of natural selection on prey may teach them to hide from predators effectively, for instance, but on predators natural selection acts to teach them to find their prey regardless of its clever stratagms. So I think it's a mistake to think natural selection on a species will ever act to dupe that species into believing something that's not true. You could say it's the babies who are duping the adults, but that has problems too.
That's all an aside from his real point, which is that whether we see it or not, we assign soulness or personhood on some sort of continuum rather than having it be a yes/no binary answer. The details of our various scales will be very different, but we all do have a scale of some sort and not just a soul switch in each creature that's set to on or off. I totally agree with him here.
I wonder if in the future people will look upon the Chik-fil-a ads with cows trying to get people to eat more chicken (and consequently less beef) with horror at how ghastly they are. Of course cows don't want to be slaughtered! How would you feel if you were a cow and saw that joke? Another thing I find creepy is the happy personified pig cartoons that so often grace barbecue restaurants. "Hi, I'm adorable Mr. Piggy, won't you please slaughter and slow roast me and eat me?" These things are funny but pretty sicko, when you think about them, and yet we don't really notice that they're sicko at all. They just seem normal.
From the start I love the first topic, in which he gets at our real feelings on who counts as a person, who has personhood or a soul (nonreligious version), based on how we make decisions about what animals it's okay to kill or eat.
I was quite surprised to hear his opinion that babies and young children have less soulness than an adult, and knowing he has kids, I'm wondering how he has missed the fact that even small babies come into the world with 100% personness. They may be less able to control their environment but there's nevertheless a complete 100% personality there. People I've known as babies I can recognize as being the same people, with similar quirks and leanings, as they are as adults.
Hofstadter sees that we're programmed by natural selection to think babies are cute, and thinks that's why we put up with them, which is true, I suppose. But I think natural selection actually points us toward recognizing the truth of children's personhood, rather than fooling us about their real status. Natural selection always works in favor of the animal being selected, it always acts to align that animal toward reality. The forces of natural selection on prey may teach them to hide from predators effectively, for instance, but on predators natural selection acts to teach them to find their prey regardless of its clever stratagms. So I think it's a mistake to think natural selection on a species will ever act to dupe that species into believing something that's not true. You could say it's the babies who are duping the adults, but that has problems too.
That's all an aside from his real point, which is that whether we see it or not, we assign soulness or personhood on some sort of continuum rather than having it be a yes/no binary answer. The details of our various scales will be very different, but we all do have a scale of some sort and not just a soul switch in each creature that's set to on or off. I totally agree with him here.
I wonder if in the future people will look upon the Chik-fil-a ads with cows trying to get people to eat more chicken (and consequently less beef) with horror at how ghastly they are. Of course cows don't want to be slaughtered! How would you feel if you were a cow and saw that joke? Another thing I find creepy is the happy personified pig cartoons that so often grace barbecue restaurants. "Hi, I'm adorable Mr. Piggy, won't you please slaughter and slow roast me and eat me?" These things are funny but pretty sicko, when you think about them, and yet we don't really notice that they're sicko at all. They just seem normal.