Pros And Cons Of Anthropomorphism

1. In the C.L Cannon, it explains anthropomorphism and its attempt to explain the animals behavioral and psychological processes that is similar to that of humans. Few researchers favor using the notions of anthropomorphism, whereas others believe that it should be avoided simply because there is not scientific system attached to it. These opposing views can be displayed in Griffen (1984) and Wynne (2004). There was a century long silence with anthropomorphism, until Donald Griffen resurrected the notion. Griffen believed that it was a constructive tool to understanding animal behavior. Griffen explains that animals behavior is an important attribute when examining conscious thinking, for example, its adaptability to changing circumstances (Griffen 1984). If an animal obtains food through series of complex actions that it has never performed before, then this would display rational thinking
Wynne (2004) argues that anthropomorphism is not a developed scientific system, rather it is merely hypotheses that is informal folk psychology. He furthers this by stating that anthropomorphism is of no use to scientific psychologists. He argues against Griffens evidence of consciousness in the language of honeybees (Wynne 2004). Bees communicate the direction, distance and quality of nectar. He exaplains that this form of communication is limited than human language and that bees only communicate experience of nectar experience and potential hive sites. The honey bees communication does not match the level of human communication, in which it is unlimited to experiences. Thus, to conclude, there are many opposing views on the cannon of anthropomorphism. Some researchers favor the cannon due to the evidence of animal behavior, such as Griffen (1984). Other researchers, however, argue against this cannon because it has no scientific system and provide evidence on the limited