Many individuals look at their dog or cat and wonder what the furry little creatures are thinking or question the reasoning behind a particular action. Here is encountered a very large debate in the philosophical and psychological world. Are certain animals, other than humans, rational creatures? Of course, there are people who sit on both sides of the fence on the rationality issue. Donald Davidson, author of "Rational Animals", proposes that no other creature on the face of the earth has the ability to rationalize, besides the human. Mr. Davidson derives a particular formula for proving, in his mind, that his hypotheses are correct. I, however, differ with Davidson's views and even question his logic at points. Throughout the course of my essay, I will describe Davidson's progression of thought as well as confirm his theory unworkable. By proving against Davidson's theory, I hope to undoubtedly show that there are, in fact, certain rational higher-level animals.

Donald Davidson attempts to beat down any arguments for animal rationality in his essay, "Rational Animals". Davidson does do a relatively good job of convincing the reader of his notions. By prop

osing a progression of four interlocked steps, which condenses to only two later in the essay, Davidson hopes to dissolve any doubt that animals do not have rational minds.

Now I will proceed to prove both the extrapolated and condensed versions of Davidson's theory wrong by falsifying one statement he makes. Davidson claims that animals are incapable of having a network, or concept, of beliefs. Yet there is one weak spot that Davidson opens up in the latter part of his essay. This element is surprise. In his essay, Davidson claims that in order to experience surprise, an animal must have a network of beliefs. Of course, Davidson says that animals, other than humans, are incapable of having a network of beliefs and, therefore, incapable of surprise. This is where Davidson is wrong.

Now, one may say that nothing good can come from prime time television in the world today. Yet I have found a wonderful piece of evidence that supports my point on a seemingly worthless show: America's Funniest Home Videos. In this particular clip, which I witnessed, A dog is seen chasing a small cat into a barn. Now the inside of the barn is hidden to the viewer of the home-video, so no one knows what lies inside. Moments following the dog's zealous entry into the barn, he is seen running out at top speed with a giant tiger lazily ambling after him. Despite the fact that the inside of the barn is out of sight of the human observer, one can easily deduce what transpired indoors. The dog was expecting to pounce upon a helpless cat when a giant tiger appears directly in front of him. The dog immediately switches from attack to defensive mode and flees from the barn.

First, Davidson proposes that animals do not have a network of beliefs. Both Davidson and I agree on our definition of what a belief is. A belief is the knowledge of a certain idea, object, or concept. In regard to describing the term "network of beliefs", a quotation from Davidson's essay works the best: "One belief demands many beliefs, and beliefs demand other basic attitudes such as intentions, desires, . . . " (Davidson, 473). Therefore a network of beliefs is one or many deeper beliefs about a particular belief. This step lay

Some common words found in the essay are:
Home Videos, According Davidson, Rational Animals, Animals Davidson, Davidson's Beliefs, , Thirdly Davidson, Donald Davidson, network beliefs, rational animals, concept beliefs, experiencing surprise, animals rational, animal rationality, rational creatures, language davidson, concept belief, davidson claims, capable experiencing surprise, animals capable experiencing, animals rational creatures,
Approximate Word count = 1490
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)