I just read your reply to my post on the archive, Madokanon
>I feel like there's just not really a clear way of ever knowing as long as we can't communicate properly, anything with their actions could be written off as just what they do and nothing rational. I think the show of understanding affection is at least something, though.But would it be instinct or would it be merely a vague floating association of one memory with one feeling? A lot of what humans do and say (like fashion, memes, and determined expressions) seems to be based on things learned by imitation too, but then again, nobody would claim humans are irrational robot-like beings that work only on outlined procedures linking one thing observed to a corresponding reaction.
If a bird builds a nest, does it do it because it has learned to do so from other birds, or because it has that natural instinct to arrange a bunch of twigs and branches in an open circle-like form large enough for it to fit in, or because it supposes that it ought to find a place to keep its eggs, building a nest only because that is what its body and mind are limited to being capable of building using what is available in its limited surroundings?
It could be more of a scale instead, in which sea sponges are on the lowest end of cognitive potential, bugs are only slightly higher, then reptiles and birds are somewhat above them but are still not really capable of reasoning and teaching things to their young, and mammals are almost quite there, but not exactly, and then humans are right at the peak but even then they're not really perfectly rational in regards to all their decisions and apparent behavior.
But of course, we can never be sure about anything we can't directly observe and making inferences always means we are at risk of falling into baseless speculation, if not outright sinking into fantasies.
>>15544640>Having cereal with warm milk is one of the worst things in the worldMaybe it wouldn't be too bad during wintertime.
