I recently thought very much about the life of mammals who live in our cities, such as cats, and dogs. To see if I will find a philosophy in this, because, as we know, the Nature Is Our Best Teacher!. We do not usually pay attention to them, Because we are convinced that we are humans and we are proud of it. And that's the point!.

Living in the city (for some of us) is like life in hell، Now imagine how life is look like for animals in our advanced cities.

Cats can go up the wall but dogs can not, so it's harder to be a dog than a cat, right!?

Animals can not suicide, apparently they have to suffer until the End، Even if they do not want it.

  1. What if you were sentenced to life in the same city and same time after death, but this time as a cat, and if you're unlucky as a dog?

On the condition that you must reproduce، Otherwise this vicious circle will continue to get even worse!.

The cat/dog knows that (s)he's been human, but (s)he's not able to talk .

  1. Now imagine that you look at yourself as a cat, what do you think of your own behavior?

  2. Has this topic been philosophically examined so far?

  • 3
    It's a very extensive answer and definitely out of my understanding, but after some research I found this paper fairly educational nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:8641838 Mar 16, 2018 at 18:27
  • 1
    2. I would have done great things, but I only have little paws!
    – ttnphns
    Mar 17, 2018 at 7:19
  • 1
    How about imagining if you were a bat?. Also fun fact- a dog in my neighborhood committed suicide (maybe - it jumped over a high fence with its leash still on it. If that doesn't sound like suicide I don't know what is). Mar 21, 2018 at 10:12

1 Answer 1


A primary text on this sort of thing is Thomas Nagel's "What is it Like to Be a Bat". This doesn't directly answer your question but you will see why it applies to how you find your answer.

Nagel's argument is that we lack epistemic access to the mental states of animals in two senses. Not only can we not conceptualise the phenomenal experience of a bat, as even if we were to do so, we would be doing so through the lens of human experience and thus we would only be able to experience how a human would experience being a bat. The second sense is that we lack the linguistic capacity to express these phenomenal states. Consider how hard it is for us to accurately express phenomenal states with other humans. This issue is far greater when doing the same for other animals. This is why Wittgenstein writes that "If a lion could talk, we would not understand him."

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .