Anthropomorphization as a method of working with indirect data

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15633/lie.31105

Keywords:

anthropomorphism, behavior, analogy, animal, paleobiology

Abstract

In ethology, anthropomorphization – the attribution of uniquely human characteristics to animals – is often criticized as unscientific. However, this approach seeks to reveal analogies between different species, a practice that finds parallels in paleobiology through the use of phylogenetic bracketing and the search for analogies among extant species. Both disciplines share a reliance on indirect data, though the reasons for this limitation differ. This article compares selected paleobiological methods to anthropomorphization, arguing that the latter should be recognized and validated as a legitimate scientific method.

References

Agassi J., Anthropomorphism in science, in: Dictionary of the history of ideas: studies of selected pivotal ideas, ed. P. P. Wiener, New York 1973, pp. 87–91.

Andrews K., Beyond anthropomorphism: attributing psychological properties to animals, in: Oxford handbook of animal ethics, eds. T. L. Beauchamp, R. G. Frey, Oxford 2011, pp. 469–494, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195371963.013.0017.

Barrett P. M., Rayfield E. J., Ecological and evolutionary implications of dinosaur feeding behaviour, “Trends in Ecology & Evolution” 21 (2006) no. 4, pp. 217–224, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.01.002.

Bekoff M., The emotional lives of animals: a leading scientist explores animal joy, sorrow, and empathy — and why they matter, New World Library, 2010.

Brusatte S., Dinosaur paleobiology, Chichester–Hoboken, NJ 2012, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118274071.

Burghardt G., Cognitive ethology and critical anthropomorphism: a snake with two heads and hognose snakes that play dead, in: Cognitive ethology: The minds of other animals. Essays in honor of Donald R. Griffin, ed. by C. A. Ristau, New York–London 1991, pp. 53–90.

De Renzi M., Some philosophical questions about paleontology and their practical consequences, “Acta Geológica Hispánica” 16 (1981) Núm. 1–2, pp. 7–23.

Eckstein M. K., Guerra-Carrillo B., Miller Singley A. T., Bunge S. A., Beyond eye gaze: what else can eyetracking reveal about cognition and cognitive development?, “Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience” 25 (2017), pp. 69–91, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2016.11.001.

Helton W. S., Cephalic index and perceived dog trainability, “Behavioural Processes” 82 (2009) no. 3, pp. 355–358, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2009.08.004

Morgan C. L., An introduction to comparative psychology, New ed., rev, London 1903, https://doi.org/10.1037/13701-000.

Norell M. A., Clark J. M., Chiappe L. M., Dashzeveg D., A nesting dinosaur, “Nature” 378 (1995) no. 6559, pp. 774–776, https://doi.org/10.1038/378774a0.

Waal F. B. de, Anthropomorphism and anthropodenial: consistency in our thinking about humans and other animals, “Philosophical Topics” 27 (1999) no. 1, pp. 255–280, https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics199927122.

Waal F. B. de, Are we in anthropodenial, “Discover” 18 (1997) no. 7, pp. 50–53.

Witmer L. M., The Extant Phylogenetic Bracket and the importance of reconstructing soft tissues in fossils, in: Functional morphology in vertebrate paleontology, ed. J. Thomason, Cambridge 1995, pp. 19–33.

Wynne C. D., What are animals? Why anthropomorphism is still not a scientific approach to behavior, “Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews” 2 (2007), pp. 125–135, https://doi.org/10.3819/ccbr.2008.20008.

Downloads

Published

2025-06-26

Issue

Section

Articles