Mikhalevich & Powell argue that the exclusion of the vast majority of arthropods from moral standing is unwarranted, particularly given the purported evidence for cognition and sentience in these organisms. The implied association between consciousness and moral standing is questionable and their assumption that rich forms of cognition and flexible behavior are dependent on phenomenal consciousness needs to be reconsidered in light of current neuroscientific evidence. We conclude by proposing a neural algorithmic approach for deciphering whether organisms are capable of subjective experience
All animal species have adapted for survival and no species is superior overall. For cognitive capac...
There is no way to include invertebrates within the moral sphere without being “extreme” — to use Mi...
We appreciate the goals of Mikhalevich & Powell (M&P) and largely agree with their conclusions but w...
Mikhalevich & Powell argue that the exclusion of the vast majority of arthropods from moral standing...
In common with most other authors, Mikhalevich & Powell assume that phenomenal consciousness is a “p...
I commend Mikhalevich & Powell for extending the discussion of cognition and its relation to moral s...
Mikhalevich & Powell (M&P) set up the basic criteria for according moral status equitably, including...
Mikhalevich & Powell provide convincing empirical evidence that at least some invertebrates are sent...
I commend Mikhalevich & Powell for extending the discussion of cognition and its relation to moral s...
Klein & Barron’s analysis focuses on the capacity for any subjective experience at all. It does not ...
Mikhalevich & Powell (2020) argue for considering the welfare of invertebrates, especially insects, ...
Our target article, "Insects have the capacity for subjective experience," has provoked a diverse ra...
—Commentary on Mikhalevich and Powell on invertebrate minds.— Whether or not arthropods are sentient...
Our target article, “Insects have the capacity for subjective experience,” has provoked a diverse ra...
This article calls out the common assumption that moral consciousness occurs at the level of individ...
All animal species have adapted for survival and no species is superior overall. For cognitive capac...
There is no way to include invertebrates within the moral sphere without being “extreme” — to use Mi...
We appreciate the goals of Mikhalevich & Powell (M&P) and largely agree with their conclusions but w...
Mikhalevich & Powell argue that the exclusion of the vast majority of arthropods from moral standing...
In common with most other authors, Mikhalevich & Powell assume that phenomenal consciousness is a “p...
I commend Mikhalevich & Powell for extending the discussion of cognition and its relation to moral s...
Mikhalevich & Powell (M&P) set up the basic criteria for according moral status equitably, including...
Mikhalevich & Powell provide convincing empirical evidence that at least some invertebrates are sent...
I commend Mikhalevich & Powell for extending the discussion of cognition and its relation to moral s...
Klein & Barron’s analysis focuses on the capacity for any subjective experience at all. It does not ...
Mikhalevich & Powell (2020) argue for considering the welfare of invertebrates, especially insects, ...
Our target article, "Insects have the capacity for subjective experience," has provoked a diverse ra...
—Commentary on Mikhalevich and Powell on invertebrate minds.— Whether or not arthropods are sentient...
Our target article, “Insects have the capacity for subjective experience,” has provoked a diverse ra...
This article calls out the common assumption that moral consciousness occurs at the level of individ...
All animal species have adapted for survival and no species is superior overall. For cognitive capac...
There is no way to include invertebrates within the moral sphere without being “extreme” — to use Mi...
We appreciate the goals of Mikhalevich & Powell (M&P) and largely agree with their conclusions but w...