Skip to main content

Verified by Psychology Today

Cognition

Animals Know More About Death and Dying Than We Often Assume

Susana Monsó's new book dispels anthropocentric biases about mortality.

Key points

  • "Playing Possum" is the first philosophical book to deal with the topic of animals’ death-related cognition.
  • The concept of death may be much easier to acquire than has usually been presupposed.
  • The book argues against emotional anthropocentrism, that only human-like reactions to death deserve attention.
Gleive Marcio Rodrigues de Souza/Pexels.
Source: Gleive Marcio Rodrigues de Souza/Pexels.

I've long been interested in what nonhuman animals (animals) know and feel about death and dying including if they know when others are dying.1 I'm still on the fence about this most important topic, and I learned a lot from a very illuminating essay written by Dr. Susana Monsó titled "What animals think of death: Having a concept of death, far from being a uniquely human feat, is a fairly common trait in the animal kingdom." Thus, I was thrilled to learn about Susana's new book called Playing Possum: How Animals Understand Death and that she had time to answer a few questions about her extremely thoughtful, important, and seminal ideas.

Marc Bekoff: Why did you write Playing Possum?

Susana Monsó: In 2020 I was approached by a Spanish press that wanted me to write a book for a popular audience. The project seemed very attractive to me because I thought that the work I had been doing as part of my Lise Meitner project on “Animals and the Concept of Death” would be appealing to a large audience. And I also just thought it would be really fun to try to ’translate’ my ideas into a more accessible language. The book turned out to be a joy to write and the response has been great so far.

Princeton University Press/with permission.
Source: Princeton University Press/with permission.

MB: How does your book relate to your background and general areas of interest?

SM: Although I did my MA thesis in animal ethics, I later transitioned into philosophy of animal minds, because as an ethicist I find that it's paramount that we know the minds and behaviour of animals before we theorise about how we ought to treat them. In my work on animal minds, I’ve been most interested in (socio-)cognitive capacities that have been traditionally construed as uniquely human. A lot of my work revolves around the question of whether animals can behave in ways that could be described as moral and I have also tackled the issue of animal rationality. Playing Possum is the result of a research project I led, which was funded by the Austrian Science Fund, where I considered the question of whether animals can understand death, which is another capacity that has traditionally been considered exclusive to humans. Playing Possum also deals with the question of the biases that can affect scientific research. In particular, I consider anthropocentric biases that have guided the debate until now.

MB: Who do you hope to reach with your book?

SM: The book has been adapted for a wide readership and it is my hope that it will reach all kinds of audiences. I’m especially hoping to be read by people who are scientifically curious but who are not already enamoured of animals, in the hope of kindling in them some awe and respect for the animal kingdom in all its diversity. At the same time, the book defends a philosophical thesis (that many animals probably have some understanding of death) in a way that I hope is rigorous and scientifically informed, so I’m also hoping it will be picked up by scholars working on animal cognition within different fields.

MB: What are some of the major topics you consider?

SM: Playing Possum addresses the question of whether animals can understand death by means of an exploration of two biases that have plagued the debate so far, which I term intellectual anthropocentrism and emotional anthropocentrism (following Monsó & Osuna-Mascaró, 2021). Intellectual anthropocentrism refers to the idea that the only way of understanding death is the human way, which has led to an over-intellectualisation of the concept of death.

In contrast to this, I defend that the minimal concept of death just consists of the notions of non-functionality and irreversibility, and that the creature who understands that dead individuals don’t do things and that this is an irreversible state already understands something about death. Emotional anthropocentrism, in turn, refers to the idea that the only emotional reactions to death that are worthy of our attention are human-like reactions, which has led to an excessive focus on grief as a response to death. If we get rid of these two biases, I argue, it becomes apparent that the concept of death is much easier to acquire than has usually been presupposed and will probably be widespread in the animal kingdom.

MB: How does your book differ from others that are concerned with some of the same general topics?

SM: There are many great books out there that deal with the philosophy of animal minds, such as Kristin Andrews’ The Animal Mind, and while there has been a lot of attention to animals’ social cognition (see Robert Lurz’ Mindreading Animals or Do Apes Read Minds?, also by Kristin Andrews) Playing Possum is the first philosophical book to deal with the specific topic of animals’ death-related cognition. It differs from other philosophical works on death, such as Michael Cholbi’s Grief, in that it deals with how other animals, rather than just us, relate to and cope with death. And it differs from other works on animal grief, such as Barbara King’s How Animals Grieve, in that grief forms just a small piece of the philosophical puzzle that I construct, and I also consider what animals may learn about death in contexts where another’s demise is not seen as a loss but as a gain, such as instances of predation.

MB: Are you hopeful that as people learn more about what nonhumans know about death and dying it will change their moral perspective on animals?

SM: I always consider myself to do philosophy of animal minds for animal ethics, so while Playing Possum doesn’t explicitly address any ethical issues, it is absolutely my hope that readers will gain a newfound appreciation for animals by learning that they relate to death in ways that can be very similar but also very different from ours. I believe that an important reason why so many humans lost respect for the natural world has do to with our detachment from it, and that simply by observing animals, interacting with them, and reading about them, we will inevitably be filled with awe and respect for them.

References

What Can Dogs, Coyotes, and Opossums Tell Us about Death?; Dogs, Dying, and Death—and How to Help Them Cope; What Do Animals Know and Feel About Death and Dying?; Do Dogs Understand When They're Dying?; Do Dogs Know They're Dying? What Citizen Science Tells Us; Do Dogs Know They're Dying?

advertisement
More from Marc Bekoff Ph.D.
More from Psychology Today