PETER HARRISON

“ANIMAL PAIN”

Harrison’s primary claim: animals don’t have pain like we do because of three deep differences between humans and animals—

(A) Humans are less subject to natural selection.

(B) Humans have freedom of choice and animals don’t.

(C) Humans have continuity of consciousness and animals don’t.

Throughout the article he explains how he thinks these differences are relevant to experiencing pain.

*****

(A) Humans are less subject to natural selection

pg. 129: No love-sick, grief-stricken, headache-ridden animals

o Animals with emotional pain and chronic physical pain, would die off quickly, and wouldn’t propagate the genes for that sort of pain; as a result, that sort of pain would be eliminated through natural selection. So that sort of pain is absent in animals.

o Humans, by contrast, live in communities that protect their weaker members. So individuals with emotional pain and chronic physical pain do survive, reproduce, and propagate genes for that sort of pain. So that sort of pain is present in humans.

*****

(B) Humans have freedom of choice and animals don’t

pg. 131: Pain in animals would be superfluous

o In humans, pain is sometimes superfluous—like when you touch an iron with your finger and you both feel pain and reflexively pull away your finger. The reflex would work just as well without the pain. But sometimes pain has a point, like when suffering tells a marathon runner to choose whether or not to stop.

o In animals, pain never leads to decision making of that sort. So if it existed at all, then it would always be superfluous. But animals don’t (often) have superfluous traits. So they probably don’t have any pain.

*****

pg. 132-33 What about the brain evidence?

o It’s true that animals have “nociceptors” (“pain” neurons) like ours. But two humans with the same nociceptor activity can differ in pain experience because of their different thoughts (examples:  childbirth, soldiers, sportsmen). So the presence of nociceptors in animals tells us little about what they feel.

*****

(C) Humans have continuity of consciousness and animals don’t

pg. 134: Dreaming

Jones has a terrifying dream, moans, and cries out (his wife notices), but he remains asleep and remembers nothing in the morning.  

1. Because it was never recalled, Jones’s “suffering” was not conscious suffering.

2. But animals never recall their past “sufferings.”

Therefore,

3. Animal “suffering” is never real suffering.

pg. 135: Amnesiesthetic

A patient is given “amnesiesthetic” instead of anesthesia during surgery; it induces paralysis and amnesia but has no effect on the pain centers of the brain.  The surgeon operates as usual.  The patient wakes up afterwards and remembers nothing.

1. The patient cannot recall any “pain” felt during the operation, so no pain was really felt.

2. But animals never recall their past “pains.”

Therefore,

3. All animal “pains” are like the “pain” during the surgery—not real, conscious pains.

pg. 138: Pain requires continuity

Harrison writes:

1. Continuity of experience is the crucial aspect of the human awareness of pain.

2. Animals lack that continuity of experience, and therefore,

3. Animals do not experience pain as we do.

*****

pg. 138: Implications

“It should not be thought that I am advocating that we beat our infants and pets. There are other moral considerations which show this kind of behavior to be wrong irrespective of what patients feel. On the other hand, if my view of animal pain is correct, such causes as animal liberation may need to be rethought…”