René Descartes And Reason, By David Hume

Given what we know or can safely assume to be true of animal brains and behaviors, do animals actually exhibit thought and reason? The answer depends in large measure on one’s definition of thought and reason. Philosophers René Descartes and David Hume hold conflicting views about the nature and possession of thought and reason and, as a result, offer starkly different arguments for and against the existence of thought and reason in animals. While Descartes maintains in Part Five of Discourse on Method that only humans are capable of conscious thought, Hume asserts that human and animal behaviors are not so different in Section Nine of his An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Descartes argues that although animals are living, organic

Descartes describes this idea by saying: “although there are many animals that show more skill than we do in some of their actions, we nevertheless see that they show none at all in many other actions. Consequently, the fact that they do something better than we do does not prove that they have any intelligence, for, were that the case, they would have more of it than any of us and would excel in everything… [rather, it] is nature that acts in them, according to the depositing of their organs—just as we see that a clock composed exclusively of wheels and springs can count the hours and measure tie more accurately than we can with all out carefulness ” (Descartes, 59). In comparing animals to a clock, Descartes makes it clear that animals have no more ability than a machine. For example, while there may be some things an animal excels at, such as ADD EXAMPLE, that animal would not be able to preform even mundane human tasks. In fact, for Descartes, animals are very similar to computers: they are programmed to do certain things, and that which they are not programmed to do cannot be done. Nature “programs” animals with certain abilities and reflexes; however, unlike humans, animals cannot expand on theses skills, which for Descartes is a sign of no consciousness

First, in citing the inability of animals to communicate through language as humans do, Descartes does not provide sufficient evidence. For example, Descartes names magpies and parrots as animals that have the ability to utter words, but not the ability to speak (Descartes, 58). However Descartes does not explain why this is, he simply states that these animals do not think in the way that humans do when they speak and moves on to the next subject. Second, in comparing animals with machines, Descartes ignores the fact that like humans, animals are living, breathing organisms with a unique brain. Machines can only do what they have been programmed to do, and while for the most part an animal will demonstrate the same behaviors, this is not always the case. For example, while sheep may typical graze in grass-filled fields, if all of a sudden a wolf appears the sheep’s’ flight or fight reflex will kick in, and the sheep will run. That is to say, machines, unlike animals and humans, are only programmed to handle a certain amount of situations. Animals and humans, unlike machines, have the ability to adapt if a new situation is