Whale vs. Dawkins

In class we heard a podcast about a whale being trapped in various nets. The divers who were out to save her believe that her pain was unexplainable. Removing net by net, and finally freeing this whale from pain, the divers start to feel that the whale was thanking each of them. As she would look deep into their eyes, it was almost like she was showing the gratitude that she felt. Richard Dawkins wrote the Selfish Gene in 1976. It's pretty basic on biology, but he mostly shares his point of view. He believes that whales or animals in general aren't able to feel anything at all. It's not scientifically  proven. If anything animals act the way they do because of the benefit received, or one that they will receive. This is exactly what Dawkins explains in his 10th chapter of the book. 

In his book he gives various specific theories that support his idea of animals being nothing but selfish. The first theory is none as the cave theory. It's suitable for camouflaged birds that crouch frozen in the undergrowth when danger is coming towards them. He states, "suppose a flock of such birds is feeding a field. A hawk flies past in the distance. he has not yet seen the flock and he is not flying directly towards them, but there is danger that his keen eyes will spot them at any moment and he will race into the attack. Suppose one member of the flock see the hawk but the rest have not yet done so. this  one sharped- eyed individual could immediately freeze and crouch in the grass. But this would do hime little good because his companions are still walking around conspicuously and noisily. Any one of them could attract the hawks attention and then the whole flock is in peril. From a purely selfish point of view the best policy for the individual who spots the hawk first is to hiss a quick warning to his companions and so shut them up and reduce the chance that they will inadvertently summon the hawk into his own vicinity." (page 168)   

The second theory is called Zahavi's theory. It can be put like this: "the crucial bit of lateral thinking is the idea that sotting, far from being a signal to other gazelles, is really aimed at the predators. It is noticed by the other gazelles and it affects their behavior, but this is incidental, for it is primarily selected as a signal to the predator. Translated roughly into English it makes: 'Look how high I can jump, I am obviously such a fit and healthy gazelle, you can't catch me, you would be much wiser to catch my neighbor who is not jumping so high!' In less anthropomorphic terms, genes for jumping high and ostentatiously are unlikely to be eaten by predator because predators tend to choose prey who look easy to catch..... According to this theory, the display is far from altruistic. If anything it is selfish, since its object is to persuade the predator to chance somebody else." (page 171)

In my opinion, I do believe that animals are much more than selfish. They can feel. They don't a spindle cell to feel anything either. They are living organism, just like we are. Just because they don't have five fingers on each hand, or on each foot, does not make them any less sensitive. We can get hurt, animals can too. We both can feel pain and both can feel scared. For example, a dog might feel the same pain we do when someone steps on his tail, just like us when we fell from our bikes. Bogs cry, when someone steps on them, and we cry when we fell off our bikes. We know a dog is scared when he hides behind his owners legs, and when we were little we would do the same thing with our parents. When a dog sees another dog he tends wags his tail, and maybe even bark to show excitement. We tend to smile, or jump up and down. So how is it that animals don't feel anything? The fact that they express things differently, doesn't mean that they are not capable of feeling.