If we admit that animals are conscious, is it contrary to the principles of dialectical materialism?

One: We often divide animals and humans into two different species. (This is the premise, that is to say that in philosophy man is not an animal, they are discussed separately)

The views you are talking about are only mentioned in Marx's philosophy, and he does not represent all philosophical thoughts. In Mageri, he said that matter determines consciousness. Consciousness is just a function that is unique to the human brain.

Note that he is talking about the human brain, not including the brain of animals) Three: Marx said that consciousness can only be possessed by human beings, and that can only be called consciousness through practice. Such as:

A werewolf grew up in the forest and did not enter society, so he is not socially conscious, although he has a human brain. And Marx called the feelings of animals and plants not consciousness, but stress. It is different from humans.

Therefore, Marx did not admit that animals are conscious, he only said that it is stressful, and believed that only people who have experienced it can produce consciousness in the brain.

Disobey. Dialectical materialism holds that consciousness is a reflection of objective existence in the human brain.

So animals are unconscious.

Here we have to distinguish the difference between consciousness and thinking. Thinking is the sum total of consciousness in a series of autonomous logical relationships. Thinking determines the difference between man and robot, and determines the difference between human and animal instinctive consciousness.

Dialectical materialism is a philosophical thought that holds that matter is the root of the world, and that all phenomena and laws can be explained by the movement and change of matter. The relationship between humans and animals, as two important members of the biological world, can also be understood by the idea of dialectical materialism.

The material basis determines the essential difference between humans and animals.

Dialectical materialism holds that matter is the root of the world, and that the essence of matter is eternal movement and change. Both humans and animals are products of matter, but there are essential differences between them. The root of this distinction lies in the fact that humans have highly developed brain and language abilities, which allow them to engage in mental activity, communication, and cultural inheritance.

These special abilities have enabled human beings to participate in the life of society and create a rich civilization and culture. Therefore, although both humans and animals are material, the material way of man has a high degree of particularity.

The sociality of human beings is one of the essential differences between humans and animals.

Dialectical materialism holds that human beings are social animals, and that their existence and development are realized in social relations. This social nature gives profound connotations to human interaction and cooperation. Animals, on the other hand, are based on the form of a group, and there is no clear social relationship between groups.

Therefore, human sociality is one of the essential differences between humans and animals, and it is a unique characteristic of human beings.

Human subjective initiative is the essential difference between humans and animals.

Dialectical materialism believes that human beings have strong subjective initiative, which makes human material methods and material consciousness accompany oaks with a high degree of autonomy and creativity. Human beings are rational and capable of discovering and creating knowledge that can be used to transform and exploit nature. Animals, on the other hand, are characterized by instinct and instinctive behavior, and their behavior is determined by the physical characteristics and environmental factors of the reed.

Therefore, human subjective agency is the second essential difference between humans and animals, and this agency is closely related to the unique high-level social mode of human beings.

The commonalities and differences between humans and animals should be respected.

Dialectical materialism believes that there are commonalities and differences between humans and animals. These commonalities and differences should be respected and understood. Neither can we simply see humans as a type of animal, nor can we simply sever the connection and interaction between humans and animals.

Only through a deep understanding of the essential attributes of humans and animals can we better understand and grasp the development trend of human beings.

Conclusion Under the guidance of dialectical materialism, we should correctly understand the relationship between humans and animals. Humans and animals are fundamentally different, but they also have a connection of coexistence and symbiosis. Only by looking at the commonalities and differences between humans and animals with a correct attitude can we better promote the development and progress of human society.

The lower class may be able to communicate their consciousness, but the upper class old horse is dismissive.

The reason why dialectical materialism considers cognition to be an active reflection of the objective world is because:

First, dialectical materialism adheres to the materialist line of moving from things to feelings and thoughts, which is different from the idealist line of insisting on moving from thoughts and feelings to things, and adheres to the principle of solipsistic reflection, which holds that knowledge is a reflection of the objective world.

Second, dialectical materialism overcomes the epistemology of the old materialism, that is, the epistemology of metaphysical materialism, regards human cognition as an intuitive, passive and passive reflection and acceptance of external objects, similar to an activity like looking in a mirror, departs from practice to examine the problem of cognition, does not understand the decisive role of practice in cognition, introduces the viewpoint of practice into epistemology, and scientifically stipulates that the subject and object of cognition are based on practice, and the relationship between subject and object is first and foremost a relationship between transformation and transformation. On this basis, the relationship between them is created between the reflection and the reflected. Cognition is a two-way interactive process of subjectification and objectification of the subject on the basis of practice, and it is a process of active creation of the subject of cognition.

Third, dialectical materialism overcomes the epistemology of the old materialism, that is, the epistemology of metaphysical materialism, and regards human cognition as an intuitive and passive reflection and acceptance of external objects, similar to an activity like looking in a mirror, does not understand the dialectical nature of cognition, departs from dialectics to examine the problem of cognition, does not regard cognition as a process of continuous development, and considers cognition to be completed at one time. Dialectical materialism applies dialectics to the theory of reflection and to the investigation of the development process of cognition, and scientifically reveals the multifaceted dialectical relations in the process of cognition, such as the dialectical relations between subjectivity and objectivity, cognition and practice, perceptual and rational, relative truth and absolute truth, etc., therefore, it comprehensively reveals the dialectical nature of the process of cognition, and regards cognition as a dynamic process of cognition full of contradictions from ignorance to knowledge, from shallow to deep.

Fourth, the reflection theory of dialectical materialism, which is characterized by the practical viewpoint and the dialectical viewpoint, not only refutes the idealistic transcendental theory and the agnostic skepticism, but also overcomes the defects of the old materialist intuitive reflection theory, establishes the dynamic and revolutionary reflection theory based on the scientific outlook on practice, and realizes the transformation in the history of human cognition.

Fifth, dialectical materialist epistemology holds that cognition is the active reflection of the subject on the object. This kind of active reflection has two characteristics: on the one hand, the reflection has the nature of copying, that is, human cognition, as a reflection of objective things, must take objective things as the prototype, and it always tries to reproduce the state, attributes, relations, essence, and laws of objective things in its thinking.

The facsimile nature of the reflection determines the objectivity of the reflection. On the other hand, reflection is creative. The facsimile of reflection is by no means a visual depiction of an object or a mirror-like reflection of the original.

If the process of people's reflection of the object is regarded as a process of information activity, then in this process, there is not only the acceptance of the information of the object of cognition, but also the analysis, selection, application, reorganization, integration, construction and virtualization of the information of the object of cognition.

An important part of dialectical materialism is the scientific theory of human cognition, cognitive ability, cognitive form, cognitive process, and cognitive truth. It is first and foremost agnostic. Believe that the objective material world is knowable.

People are able to understand not only the phenomena of the material world, but also their essence through them. Human cognition is unlimited, and there are only things in the world that have not yet been known, and there are no things that cannot be known, thus drawing a clear line with agnosticism. Its basic premise is reflectivity.

It is believed that the material world does not exist independently according to people's subjective will, and that human consciousness is the product of the long-term development of matter, the function of the human brain, and the reflection of the material world. Adhering to the materialist line of understanding from objects to sensations and thoughts, and drawing a clear line of line from idealism to understanding from thoughts and sensations to objects. It is pragmatism.

For the first time in the history of human cognition, the scientific concept of practice was introduced into epistemology, and it was believed that practice is the foundation of cognition, the first of cognition, the driving force of cognition development, the purpose of cognition, and the only criterion for testing the truth of cognition. It applies dialectics to epistemology, emphasizing that human cognition is a process of deepening and dynamic dialectical development. The dialectic of understanding is manifested in the relationship between understanding and practice, and understanding comes from practice, which in turn guides practice and serves practice.

It is manifested in the process of understanding, people's understanding of the world is not completed at one time, but is a process of repeated and infinitely deepened.

This is true, but it is not necessarily good that the philosophical part of the first thing is qualified, saying that consciousness is produced in the human brain. According to this definition, animals only have animal brains, and no brains, so of course there is no consciousness.

Why don't I think this definition is good? Because a good definition should provide some convenience for understanding the world, rather than rigidly pulling out properties and aggregating them, or patching them indefinitely.

To put it simply, if something looks like a bird, behaves like a bird, feels like a bird, and eats like a bird, then it is a bird. Then "it's a bird" is a good definition, unless you have other strong evidence to disprove that definition, strong enough to counteract these obvious subjective intuitions.

Answer: C Analysis: Cognition cannot be completely equated with consciousness, cognition can be a reflection of the phenomenon of things, or it can be a reflection of the essence of things, so A and B are not correct.

Cognition is a philosophical concept corresponding to practice, and matter corresponds to consciousness, so d is also incorrect, so C is chosen