Give it space, give it space.
I'm Caleb.
He named you.
Must be special.
Consciousness presents one of the fundamental questions of science and philosophy.
As of yet, there is no clear consensus as to what it is, how it can be measured,
or to what extent it is present in other species.
This notorious ambiguity however has made it a fascinating subject for films to explore.
A number of recent sci-fi films in particular have engaged the issue by envisioning other minds
such as those of A.I.’s, replicants and aliens,
creating a diverse image of consciousness as obvious and intimate, as well as unknown and frightening.
Taken together, they form an interesting reflection of the cognitive sciences
and its efforts towards understanding consciousness,
and most importantly; they show what has been missing.
In his book ‘Are we smart enough to know how smart animals are?’
Dutch primatologist Frans de Waal presents an extensive overview of the cognitive revolution
that eroded or disproved many of our old assumptions regarding consciousness.
One of the main arguments is that consciousness is still too often seen as a uniquely human trait;
an idea that can be traced back to old religious and philosophical theories on the soul
which have been carried over into modernity by philosophers such as Rene Descartes.
This claim to a soul or special mental quality, even to this day,
often has the implicit assumption that our consciousness is a reflection of something higher.
At the very least;
it lets us believe that the grand mysteries of the universe are eventually within our grasp.
In 2001: A Space Odyssey for example; we see how our species was specifically selected
by a higher lifeform to evolve into greater consciousness.
This God-like element is more often than not just an extension of human consciousness;
a vision of our destiny.
This is made obvious in films such as Prometheus where the creators of life on our planet
also happen to carry a close resemblance to us.
Interstellar is perhaps the most extreme example of this as the 5-dimensional guiding presence
turns out to literally be an evolved version of our species.
They're not beings.
They're us.
But even in films such as Arrival, where the higher forms of intelligence seem more alien to us,
their consciousness is ultimately accessible and understandable.
When it comes to other minds living on this planet;
we also see this human-centeredness reflected in many explorations into consciousness.
Films like Ex Machina, Blade Runner, Chappie and Rise of the Planet of the Apes for example
contain other minds in the form of A.I.’s, manufactured humans and apes modified by an experimental drug.
I think it’s fair to assume that everyone watching these films is willing to accept
that these other minds have a significant degree of consciousness, but why is that?
Besides the simple fact that they’re all portrayed by human actors,
it is interesting that these other minds are all created by us.
Perhaps the creation of consciousness is part of that great vision of human destiny,
which would explain why we are more likely to attribute consciousness to our own creations,
than to those that are already around us.
If you've created a conscious machine, it's not the history of man.
That's the history of gods.
Nevertheless, this need for human-ness parallels the insistence
to keep consciousness within the realm of humanity.
For Frans de Waal, this not only poses an unfair challenge for other species that lack this quality,
but it also greatly stifles our research into consciousness;
Although we cannot directly measure consciousness, other species show evidence of having precisely
those capacities traditionally viewed as its indicators.
To maintain that they possess these capacities in the absence of consciousness
introduces an unnecessary dichotomy.
It suggests that they do what we do but in fundamentally different ways.
From an evolutionary standpoint, this sounds illogical.
And logic is one of those other capacities we pride ourselves on.
Indeed, many of the indicators of what was believed to be our unique consciousness,
such as using tools, using logic and reasoning to solve new problems, self-awareness, mental time travel,
and even empathy and basic signs of morality,
have now been observed and documented in various animals.
My god,
look at your eyes.
Almost human.
The common response to this has been to just raise the bar for what it means to have consciousness,
but this constant redefining of our specialness
has led to many scientists believing that our human uniqueness is not so much a valid hypothesis,
but more like a dogmatic principle to be defended at all costs.
I know what consciousness is.
oh that's nice.
And yet, it is important to push beyond these biases for multiple reasons.
First; it pushes the boundaries of our scientific knowledge and methodology.
Before we even begin to answer the grand questions surrounding consciousness
there’s still significant progress to be made in how we should study it;
how should we conduct experiments?
What do we test for?
How do we perceive and interpret results?
Frans de Waal emphasizes that for now, the goal is modest;
We wish to pinpoint mental processes by measuring observable outcomes.
He feels we are too obsessed with the pinnacles of cognition,
and that instead of aiming for grandiose claims about consciousness
we should adopt a bottom-up, evolutionary approach
and begin by uncovering the building-blocks of this strange phenomenon.
We need to find out, do they make conscious choices,
or is their motivation so instinctive, that they don't understand a 'why' question at all?
This may not be as exciting, but it does open a door to some fascinating questions like
did consciousness evolve at a later stage with a narrow distribution?
Or is it an older, more broadly shared trait?
Did it evolve from one common ancestor?
Or did it arise multiple times like winged flight,
which evolved independently in dinosaurs, bats, insects and birds?
If so, what other qualities could it hold?
Questions like these also have ethical implications.
Frans de Waal observed that the more researchers in his field learned about the minds of animals,
the more concerned they became with their wellbeing.
But the undeniable elephant in the room is animal agriculture.
Okja is one of the few fictional films to really portray this industry and reveals how much there is at stake morally
with the question of animals being conscious or just soulless machines.
Ultimately, moving away from our human-centric approach to consciousness will help us to
better understand other species in their own self-centered, subjective worlds, their Umwelt,
as it is called, which will eventually give us a better sense of our own place in evolution.
But this requires us to look beyond ourselves, beyond our biases, our fears, and our comfort.
It requires us to be truly empathic.
True empathy is not self-focused but other-oriented.
Instead of making humanity the measure of all things,
we need to evaluate other species by what they are.
We are only beginning to understand consciousness.
Most of the frontier still lies ahead.
But if we’re really willing to venture into it, then, who knows,
someday we might just might find what is as of yet beyond our imagination.