Mirror Neurons: Evolution, Empathy, and Animals

[TheNoNamedOne]

In the last few years scientists think they are honing in on the physical reactions in the mind that creates what we call empathy. This emotion is thought to be brought on by what has been identified as mirror neurons, which are playing an integral role in the development of the Theory of Mind.

Basically, mirror neurons activate when one animal observes another animal and experiences feelings to a certain degree as if they were that animal-- hence empathy. These mirror neurons are located in the cortex area of the brain and have been observed in animals from birds to primates, therefore, how much anyone species may have, or how developed they maybe could be, and most probably they are, linked to not only physical evolution, but social evolution as well.

Empathy is what brings forth feelings of sadness, pity,disgust, outrage etc... And these emotions are driving forces for change in society i.e. those changes that seek to limit those actions which cause suffering.

Most accept that physical and social evolution is a slow process, and only after those visionaries calling for change can gather enough people to cause a tipping point, does usually change in customs and laws come about. I suspect that those people who are concerned with animal protectionism, those persons disgusted and moved to action from a strong sense of empathy and recognizing injustice at the treatment of them, are those who at a mind level are on the further developed scale of evolution -- as it pertains to mirror neurons.

As Abolitionists were ahead of their time and on the right side of history and social change because of that (a higher sense of empathy leading demand for justice and rights), so, too, are animal protectionists of the general population. Physical evolution begins with small changes and grows from that, and this is compatible with social evolution as it pertains to lessening suffering and expanding rights under protections, where, too, small change comes from a vanguard of a few vissionaries and small groups.

Therefore, those who wince at cruelty to animals and seek to alleviate that because their larger developed sense of empathy drives them to that, are more advanced when it comes to mirror neurons on the evolutionary scale. Perhaps they have more, or they are activated more easily.

[dk]

The fact that you wince at animal cruelty and someone else doesn't doesn't necessarily mean that you have more mirror neurons. It is very likely that the other person most likely feels empathy towards a different subject.

Or are these the "animal cruelty neurons".

[TheNoNamedOne]

The fact that you wince at animal cruelty and someone else doesn't doesn't necessarily mean that you have more mirror neurons. It is very likely that the other person most likely feels empathy towards a different subject.

Or are these the "animal cruelty neurons".

Humans are animals. In fact, if you go back in history you will find that some of the leaders who fought for child protection laws and other humanitarian concerns were deeply involved in animal protectionism. Their empathy cut across the species barrier i.e. it seems to be much wider and inclusive -- not narrower or more exclusive, as are those who have no or very little concern for animals appear to be. The latter's spectrum is a more limited one.

Supporting the narrower, more exclusive, and perhaps maybe even non existant or inactive mirror neurons, is the fact that many serial murderers and other kinds of murderers, who show no or very little empathy for their victims, have first practiced on killing and torturing nonhuman animals, once again showing no empathy for them, before moving on to humans as their targets. Their lack of empathy is reversed, in that it cuts across more species spectrums for their targeted cruelty.

They would therefore, be at the far end, in effect the opposite end of animal protectionists as it concerns mirror neurons, either in number, activity, or evolution of them. All other people would fall somewhere in between the two.

[dk]

If you really need to believe that you have more mirror neurons than the rest of us, go right ahead. I just think this is very one-sided.

Now, show me an article proving that animal activists ACTUALLY HAVE more mirror neurons than those who eat beef. You went from explaining what mirror neurons were to saying that it may very well be that animal protectionists have more of them than the rest of us. I think that's a jump.

Like I said, some people have empathy for different subjects. It isn't "animals or nothing".

My aunt has adopted 8 children (and raised them all to adulthood) and eats beef. I'm pretty sure she has every bit as much--if not more--empathy than any of us on this forum.

[TheNoNamedOne]

If you really need to believe that you have more mirror neurons than the rest of us, go right ahead.

It is not a question of a "need to believe." It is an observation that I am suggesting which could explain "why". If the whole thing were wrong, I would still care for animals, and that would render, as it is now, your statement false.

Now, show me an article proving that animal activists ACTUALLY HAVE more mirror neurons than those who eat beef. You went from explaining what mirror neurons were to saying that it may very well be that animal protectionists have more of them than the rest of us.

Exactly, that is my point -- "it may very well be" -- keyword "may" in case you didn't notice and what that implies. It means there is no definitive proof yet and the Theory of Mind and mirror neurons has not been completely worked out yet. I am suggesting this is what it could be -- I am not supposing definitely that it is. I am attempting to provide an explanation as to why there is a subset of society in virtually all societies that empathise with not only humans but also animals.

Just because solid proof has not been discovered yet, does not make the defalt that suggestions are worthless or should not be forthcoming -- that is what hypothesises are for! i.e. to think outside the box and or get thought exercises going on it before even all the data has come in or perhaps even before beginning gathering it.

Like I said, some people have empathy for different subjects. It isn't "animals or nothing".

The point is not about different subjects. I think we all agree with that. The point is about a wide target for them rather than a narrower target.

My aunt has adopted 8 children (and raised them all to adulthood) and eats beef. I'm pretty sure she has every bit as much--if not more--empathy than any of us on this forum.

Yes, children. One target group. See my previous reply before your quote here. btw, Kudos to your aunt.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Or are these the "animal cruelty neurons".

@your sarcasm:

I wince at many kinds of cruelty and injustice, and feel a need to speak out and encourage thought on them as well. I already have more than a few threads and posts here dealing with that here, from landmines, bullying, suicide, war, and all the horrible things I empathise with that stems from those things. My empathy has a very wide and inclusive target where pain and suffering are -- not an exclusive one based on prejudice or pleasure and benefit for myself.