Do fish have good mood days?

As I observe my danios this evening happily swooping through the tank, it occurs to me that they appear to be in a very good mood today. Do fish have good moods or am I anthropomorphising? Good fin days sort of like we have good hair days? For no particular reason, just glad to be alive, enjoying yet another day?

 

Haha, not sure about that. I wonder if fish ever get bored.... seriously. I wish I could teach them to play a game or something.

 

I don't see why not!

I would think you'd especially see fish like bettas having good/bad mood days- they seem to like to show their emotions.

 

Haha, not sure about that. I wonder if fish ever get bored.... seriously. I wish I could teach them to play a game or something.

Maybe you should consider buying a training kit for your fish? Seriously, they do make such a thing. Here is a video:

Of course this kit will work only for some fish like goldfish especially or batta, but I can imagine that trying to rain a bristlenose pleco would probably lead to total failure. Bn plecos are more like cats than like dogs in temperament, and probably consider themselves too smart to do parlor tricks.

 

Haha, not sure about that. I wonder if fish ever get bored.... seriously. I wish I could teach them to play a game or something.

 

LOL

I love when the goldie goes round and round inside the hoop, as if to say, "I'm doing it right, now give me my food!!" lol

 

Fish can get bored, which causes them to be irritable normally. I know for sure that some of the smarter species of fish like Gourami, Loaches, Goldies and Bettas are all very capable of being bored and thus having a bad attitude.

 

Moods are a human emotion. Fish do not have that emotion. I'm sure they are very happy when being fed, when mating and with water changes but I would not call that a mood. I'd call that being a fish.

 

That's too cool haha. I have goldfish in my pond. For some reason one of them is completely black. He's second generation I think, maybe third..... Anyway, he's a dragon! He's probably twice the size of his red siblings. He likes to hangout where the waterfall is

 

Moods are a human emotion. Fish do not have that emotion. I'm sure they are very happy when being fed, when mating and with water changes but I would not call that a mood. I'd call that being a fish.

I respectfully disagree

I've seen animals like horses get their moods. My dogs have their lazy days and their "bouncing-off-the-walls" days. Even my birds will occasionally get a bit ill-tempered and won't put up with as much as they normally do. I don't see why fish can't have their good and bad days

 

Fish aren't as smart? Mine get all excited when they see me but it isn't me that makes them all happy. They know that person in front of their tank is about to feed them.

 

IMO, I think fishes do have mood swings, but it's all about how we take care of them. Stability is one of my pet peeves when it comes down to it. If your fishes do not have that, then I truly think they can be "moody" per say.

That is my 2 cents worth.

 

I agree with carolo43. People tend to anthropomorphise, especially with something we consider as a pet.

Fish are not horses or dogs or people. But lets assume they are, since they are being compared as similar.

Would you feed your horse with horse meat, or dog with dog meat? Why on earth would you feed your fish with fish meat?

If a dog has babies and another dog starts gobbling them all up, we'd be appalled, right? Fish do this all the time in our tanks.

How does one define a fishes "mood" exactly? Isn't that inherently anthropomorphic? If my JD has fry and starts flaring at anything that comes near the tank, I could say that he is in a bad mood, right? Or is he just doing what his instincts drive him to do to protect his young?

If he recognizes me as his food source, and then when I come near the tank or open the lid, I happen to see him wagging his tail and pacing up and down in front of me, does that mean he's happy? Or just hungry and knowing he's about to be fed. Again, instinct.

Alternatively, if he doesn't recognize me, and he hides in his cave, does that mean he's scared? Or does it mean that he is responding, yet again, instinctual reaction to a perceived threat.

It's a slippery slope applying higher emotions to fish, because if you do, then you should also have to apply a higher level of treatment. That means prosecuting anyone that we deem as treating them inhumanely, whether it be a guy with a tank that is a little too small for our liking, the guy who gives his oscar feeder fish, or the millions of food fish that suffocate to death on the deck of a fishing boat daily.

 

I respectively disagree with you, jetajockey. I highly believe that fishes have moods and thoughts.

Just as you have mentioned about fishes eating their own, there are some humans that do the same, as gross as that may seem - Realistically speaking in the nature of facts.

 

You are welcome to disagree with me, but I think I made some valid points that run counter to your statement.

I didn't say that certain creatures couldn't eat their own, my point was emphasizing that we don't accept it ethically if they do, yet we don't apply that same logic to fish. If you want to equate them then it should be the same across the board.

If we deem fish as sentient then they deserve every law, rule, and treatment that we give other sentient animals. That means no more fishing for sport, as that would be immoral. Am I wrong in my logic?

 

I don't fish, I don't eat seafood or any kind of fish, tuna, etc. I can live by that "law" as you put it.

 

Good morning,

My fish are always happy. See...





Ken

 

Fish are not horses or dogs or people. But lets assume they are, since they are being compared as similar.

Would you feed your horse with horse meat, or dog with dog meat? Why on earth would you feed your fish with fish meat?

If a dog has babies and another dog starts gobbling them all up, we'd be appalled, right? Fish do this all the time in our tanks.

Fish however have a ton of babies because they will eat them for food sources and other fish will eat them that is normal so we do not get appauled, or if we do we end up with a million fish in our tanks! Dogs and horses don't typically eat their young and as a result have fewer babies so we do get a shock when they eat their own it is unusual hence the feeling of repulsion.

How does one define a fishes "mood" exactly? Isn't that inherently anthropomorphic? If my JD has fry and starts flaring at anything that comes near the tank, I could say that he is in a bad mood, right? Or is he just doing what his instincts drive him to do to protect his young?

I think it is a fine line between instinct and emotion. When I bang my toe I cry and people could say that I am upset or they could say that it is my instinct to display what can be interpreted as being upset to convey I am not feeling right... personally I would say that I am upset!


I think its safe to say when our fishies are not feeling well they show us that in their lethargic behaviour and being grumpy with other fish not letting the others come near them etc in much the same way humans do. I don't think it is much of a stretch to say the inverse is true when they are displaying playful behaviour with each other and are not expecting food!

EDIT:

When one of my goldfish died from a swimbladder disease for a few days after the fish that I brought at the same time that had effectively grown up together went off their food for a day or two and didn't seem to be doing the typical goldfish thing of sorting the stones and none of them played with the dead fish's "special stone" for several days (the only green pebble in my tank that came in with a plant the dead fish used to always move it to on top of a little wall I had their tank and the the fish used to move it off and then he would move it back etc...) Is this the fish in mourning or was they just unsure about the subtle water changes that having one less heavy bioload fish in the tank? I like to think they were sad due to the loss of their "friend".

 

I don't fish, I don't eat seafood or any kind of fish, tuna, etc. I can live by that "law" as you put it.

That's nice, but there are a few billion others that would have a huge problem.

 

Lol have you heard of Mordin the monkey fish he goes through more moods than any fish I've ever known at the moment he is sulking/mourning because his snails passed away but in about ten minutes he will be crankily mischievous because I'm about to do a water change and then he will just be cranky because I touched his stuff and then of course happy because he will get his dinner lol

 

I too find fishing quite an awful sport and don't agree with it... but then I don't agree with fox hunting badger culling or whaling either! I don't have such an issue with farming as the animals are given a fairly good life and if we didn't farm them then we wouldn't keep them like we do and millions of farm animals would be eradicated. But fishing for sport and the way fox hunting and badger culling is conducted seems unnecessarily cruel and if we stopped doing thee things it's not like there would be a mass slaughter!

I don't however think what humans decide to do to animals should be a factor in how these creatures feel. For years it wasn't deemed immoral to burn witches at the stake!

 

Fish however have a ton of babies because they will eat them for food sources and other fish will eat them that is normal so we do not get appauled, or if we do we end up with a million fish in our tanks! Dogs and horses don't typically eat their young and as a result have fewer babies so we do get a shock when they eat their own it is unusual hence the feeling of repulsion.

I definitely understand where you are coming from, but animals in the wild eat one another all the time, and so would our domesticated ones if they were part of that food chain. I've seen same species housepets (cats for example) go after the young of others, but if I held them to guppy standards I wouldn't think twice about it. My point was that if you are going to hold them to equitable sentience then they should have the same standard of care, not just pick and choose what we want to do or what makes us feel good about ourselves.

I think it is a fine line between instinct and emotion. When I bang my toe I cry and people could say that I am upset or they could say that it is my instinct to display what can be interpreted as being upset to convey I am not feeling right... personally I would say that I am upset!

I've yet to see a fish cry, but I understand. The difference is me, you, dogs, and cats (for example) can show more complex reactions resulting from an injury than a fish does. I know we can imply all kinds of things on a fish but it's just not the same, again, athropomorphism. I see it all the time, "My guppy is hiding in the corner, why is he sad?" "My oscar faces the back wall and doesn't come up to me, why is he mad?" " My fish get excited every time I come to the tank!" and so on and so forth. They all make the assumption that the fish have the capacity to have these emotions to begin with, so they begin off-base and potentially detract from being used as signals to a real problem (disease/bullying/etc).

I think its safe to say when our fishies are not feeling well they show us that in their lethargic behaviour and being grumpy with other fish not letting the others come near them etc in much the same way humans do. I don't think it is much of a stretch to say the inverse is true when they are displaying playful behaviour with each other and are not expecting food!

Lethargy definitely, but grumpy, no. Just because a fish doesn't let others come near it doesn't mean it's being 'grumpy', that's another anthropomorphic statement, because perhaps we as humans don't let others come near us when we are feeling grumpy. The fish could be doing anything from nursing a wound, reacting to perceived danger, defending a territory, or guarding young, so summarizing it as 'grumpy' kinda sells it short of what it could actually be. So no, it's not safe to say that if your fish is being lethargic that it is just being "grumpy", it could have some kind of serious medical issue. I understand the use of words like 'grumpy, playful, etc' when conveying the behavior of a fish, but in the literal sense of these words it tends to be misleading for the reasons I outlined.

As far as 'playfulness' between fish, it could be (and is usually) summarized by mating behavior or setting the social order among the group, not really tossing around the old pigskin to have a good time. I've read lots of things that compare our modern versions of 'play' to extensions/evolutions of that behavior, but that's a different subject.

When one of my goldfish died from a swimbladder disease for a few days after the fish that I brought at the same time that had effectively grown up together went off their food for a day or two and didn't seem to be doing the typical goldfish thing of sorting the stones and none of them played with the dead fish's "special stone" for several days (the only green pebble in my tank that came in with a plant the dead fish used to always move it to on top of a little wall I had their tank and the the fish used to move it off and then he would move it back etc...) Is this the fish in mourning or was they just unsure about the subtle water changes that having one less heavy bioload fish in the tank? I like to think they were sad due to the loss of their "friend".

I don't think fish get sad, or mourn, that's what people do, and I've seen some dogs and other mammals do it as well. Be out of their routine, yes, or acting differently because they are missing part of their group, sure, but remember the only thing that keeps most fish from eating one another is their size or state of hunger. I don't know how many times I've had a fish die randomly and come to find it being pecked apart by his 'friends', some friendship, lol.

 

Here is what I have come to see.

People say animals act off instinct, not emotion. I say, what is the difference and how can you tell. There are different types of emotions as well. You have Complex and Simple. A simple emotion would be stubbing your toe and wincing in pain/getting upset. The emotion is caused by a physical reaction. Your body tells you that you are hurt, much like if you stabbed a fish with a needle it would freak out.

Complex emotions would be like the guy you loved for years telling you that you're ugly and making you cry. The sadness in this case is a response to mental(non-physical) trauma.

Many people will agree that some animals can utilize both and some are only simple. Dolphins, primates and even canines are typically believed to be complex with emotions. They clearly express a broad range of emotion that is beyond simplicity.

Fish are more then likely more simple, some more then others. Bettas get bored. That is a true statement in full. They also get excited. They can be aggravated and territorial as well. They can also be for lack of a better term, aroused(I think this is one of the simplest emotions to be honest). When the betta sees you enter the room it get's excited. Why? The fish associates your presence with interaction of sorts. Be it cleaning the water, playing with it, feeding it or so on. It takes away boredom so we are associated as good things. You can easily say that, that alone sums up to the fish being happy to see us.

 

Fish are more then likely more simple, some more then others. Bettas get bored. That is a true statement in full. They also get excited. They can be aggravated and territorial as well. They can also be for lack of a better term, aroused(I think this is one of the simplest emotions to be honest). When the betta sees you enter the room it get's excited. Why? The fish associates your presence with interaction of sorts. Be it cleaning the water, playing with it, feeding it or so on. It takes away boredom so we are associated as good things. You can easily say that, that alone sums up to the fish being happy to see us.

This makes a lot of sense.

What inclines you to believe in full that a betta can be 'bored'?

I can't think of a time when I've even seen my dog get 'bored', so to speak. That's a pretty complex emotion.
according to wiki: Boredom is an emotional state experienced when an individual is left without anything in particular to do, and not interested in their surroundings.

How does a fish convey that exactly? I don't have to be bored in order to get 'excited' when someone comes to visit.

And excitement doesn't equal happiness, does it? My excitement level would go up tremendously if the police knocked on my door, but I wouldn't be very happy to see them (unless I called them of course lol).

Many people say that fish can recognize them. I've seen this to be true myself also, as my fish will react differently to different people (my cichlids and centrarchids especially). Someone they recognize they will come right up to because they relate it to feeding time. I know this because they often go right up to the surface and wait for their handout. If I don't feed them, within a few minutes they go back to what they were doing.

However a stranger to them they often are indifferent to, or even cautious and react as if they are faced with a potential threat.

These behaviors are simple instinctual driven responses, but I could see how one could construe them as complex emotions of excitement or happiness.

 

It's a slippery slope applying higher emotions to fish, because if you do, then you should also have to apply a higher level of treatment. That means prosecuting anyone that we deem as treating them inhumanely, whether it be a guy with a tank that is a little too small for our liking, the guy who gives his oscar feeder fish, or the millions of food fish that suffocate to death on the deck of a fishing boat daily.

We should be persecuting for these things, whether we care if a fish is bored, happy, or not.

If we deem fish as sentient then they deserve every law, rule, and treatment that we give other sentient animals. That means no more fishing for sport, as that would be immoral. Am I wrong in my logic?

I have never agreed with the killing of anything for sport. Again, it wouldn't matter if I believed a fish could feel emotions the way I do or not. However, it's not illegal to hunt deer, turkey, squirrel, or any other game animal.. for fun/sport. No one is checking your fridge after you bag that big buck to see if you're eating him or not. This isn't going to change because lawmakers are or know hunters too, just like sport fishing won't change.

On the subject of the thread though.. I absolutely believe fish can be bored and/or upset. I've experimented with varying plants in my 1st betta's tank, to see what could survive the lower light there. At one point I yanked a lot of them out and left his tank rather sparse (it was temporary!)

He was really inactive for 3 days until I got my next plant shipment in and refilled his tank with green stuff. He wasn't "nervous" being in the open cuz he's fearless and always up front and in my face anyways. He wasn't suffering from higher nitrates due to the lack of plants, because they weren't growing well enough there to be using any. I didn't imagine any expression of sadness on his face, I saw him behaving differently. He didn't swim much, he just floated around. He'd slowly drift down to the substrate and hang out there awhile, letting his fins "stand" him up, then swim up for a breath and go limp again until he floated slowly back to the bottom. If that isn't bored or sad, I don't know what is. Soon as the plants went in, he was all over the tank again - swimming in and out of them, looping through them, wrigging in between the close-together branches, and in general being the "puppy dog" he normally behaves like.

 

This makes a lot of sense.

What inclines you to believe in full that a betta can be 'bored'?

I can't think of a time when I've even seen my dog get 'bored', so to speak. That's a pretty complex emotion.
according to wiki: Boredom is an emotional state experienced when an individual is left without anything in particular to do, and not interested in their surroundings.

It really isn't that complex. Bored is bored. A fish in a tank with nothing to do. Pretty common. When your betta sleeps in the middle of the day because there is nothing to do, they are bored. Boredom is accepted with bettas by anyone who has properly kept them and knows what tailbiting is. One of the major causes of tailbiting is a bored betta. How do we know? Because the fix is to entertain them with toys and tankmates. Giving them something else to do.

If you havn't seen your dog bored then you are doing a good job as an owner. Bored dogs are no fun. Once again, behaviors such as property destruction and needless howling have been blamed on boredom. Entertaining the dog cuts back on these behaviors.

Like wise, I have seen an aggravated betta and gourami before. For bettas it can be simple things such as big environment changes or new tank mates that put them in foul moods. I had zebra danios in with my gourami. Zebra danios like to play tag with each other(not really tag, but mindless chase). They kept trying to get the gourami in on it by running up and then swimming away last second (they do this with each other as the "tag" part). I had a little hybrid that was very particular to this and one day he swam up to the gourami and the gourami turned and killed him dead before continuing his daily routine. He was aggravated.

I would also like to point out that Emotions are a human notion. Everything we know about them is assumption and based solely off our own experiences with them. However, I believe they are instinct. Bottom line. Regardless of the emotion it is all chemical and sensory receptors to our brain. They also have an evolutionary function. All things do. The function is communication in a highly social setting. This is why primates also express emotions like us, and why dolphins and whales are believed to as well. They wouldn't have them without a use.

Some fish species are highly social as well, maybe they don't have human reference emotions, but something transparently similar. No two evolutionary lines are the same. Bees and Birds have wings. One has membranes over exoskeleton attached to muscles that move faster then the human eye can see. The other has hallow bones, warm blood and feathers and uses air currents and tail rudders to control flight. Yet they both fly.

 

It really isn't that complex. Bored is bored. A fish in a tank with nothing to do. Pretty common. When your betta sleeps in the middle of the day because there is nothing to do, they are bored. Boredom is accepted with bettas by anyone who has properly kept them and knows what tailbiting is. One of the major causes of tailbiting is a bored betta. How do we know? Because the fix is to entertain them with toys and tankmates. Giving them something else to do.

Again, you assume there is something there to "fix". Boredom is a human emotion, so yes, it is complex.
I could say the major cause for tailbiting in bettas is the ridiculously oversized fins that they've been bred to have.
What leads you to think that they are biting their own fins because they are bored? To me it'd be more logical that they do it because they either see it as a threat, or as a hindrance (in the same way that fish scratch themselves when they have parasites).

Giving him something else to do is a method of distraction, just like dangling keys in front of a baby to get him to stop crying. It has nothing to do with boredom.

You assume the fish needs something to do, because we as people need things to do to, or else we get bored. What evidence do you have to substantiate the claim that bettas sleep or bite their tails out of boredom or even get bored at all?

Your premise already assumes they have the capacity to be bored so your conclusions are skewed to that direction.

If you havn't seen your dog bored then you are doing a good job as an owner. Bored dogs are no fun. Once again, behaviors such as property destruction and needless howling have been blamed on boredom. Entertaining the dog cuts back on these behaviors.

Again, these behaviors may be blamed on boredom but can be just another example of anthropomorphism, or just playing a bit fast and loose with the 'boredom' terminology. I do agree that dogs needs mental stimulation, and they have complex emotions, but they can easily show these to us, whereas fish do not.

Like wise, I have seen an aggravated betta and gourami before. For bettas it can be simple things such as big environment changes or new tank mates that put them in foul moods.

Aggravation is not an emotion, it's the result of an action.

If a fish is acting in what is construed as a 'foul mood' after an environmental change or addition of tank mates, it's normally called stress or being territorial, it's not a mood. It's a direct and instinctual response to a change in their environment.

Do you think bettas get in a 'foul mood' when you add a new fish because their feelings are hurt that you aren't satisfied with them alone?

I had zebra danios in with my gourami. Zebra danios like to play tag with each other(not really tag, but mindless chase).

This is breeding and heirarchy behavior and has been well documented in many species.

They kept trying to get the gourami in on it by running up and then swimming away last second (they do this with each other as the "tag" part). I had a little hybrid that was very particular to this and one day he swam up to the gourami and the gourami turned and killed him dead before continuing his daily routine. He was aggravated.

Aggravation is not an emotion. The fish reacted at that point because it deemed it was pertinent to, not because it was angry or had hate for the one that it killed. Did the gourami go around and break things in the tank afterward? Did he go into a corner and huff and puff? If so then the anger response might be a little more plausible, and for the sake of science we should document these things.

I would also like to point out that Emotions are a human notion. Everything we know about them is assumption and based solely off our own experiences with them. However, I believe they are instinct. Bottom line. Regardless of the emotion it is all chemical and sensory receptors to our brain. They also have an evolutionary function. All things do. The function is communication in a highly social setting. This is why primates also express emotions like us, and why dolphins and whales are believed to as well. They wouldn't have them without a use.

So...you are agreeing that fish don't express emotions in the way that more complex animals (mammals) do? If so then wouldn't it be inherently faulty to assign these emotional labels to them?

Some fish species are highly social as well, maybe they don't have human reference emotions, but something transparently similar.

Yes this is something that has been documented and observed time and again. And again, if they don't have human reference emotions then we probably shouldn't be applying them since it's an inaccurate comparison.

I should have asked this a page ago, but is there any actual scientific data showing that fish get bored or angry? Or with this last paragraph are you agreeing that fish do not have the capacity to express complex emotion like humans do?

 

I think you have become confused with my answers. I am neither admitting nor denying the emotional range of animals. I'm supplying "Fill in the blank" answers to be debated off of. Such as you are doing. Using phrases like "Some might say" or ending in a question is a neutral progressive form.

That last paragraph was my own thinking on the topic, yes. BUT it remains neutral to the topic at hand. I said fish may have emotions like humans, but only in similar capacity, like birds wings to bee's wings. Two similar structures with the same function and a completely different make up. This particular theory is neither proven nor can it be properly argued since we couldn't test for things we don't know. It's speculation, all of what has been said on this thread is without any link or reference.

Here is what is a known in the scientific world: Fish have endorphins and the neural transmitters for them. That doesn't mean one thing or another if you don't want it to. I'm just throwing stuff out there again to be argued.

 

And I do love a good debate! I believe that you are saying that fish are displaying human-like emotions but not actually experiencing emotions?

If this is the case then surely by this logic we can not be sure that anything can feel emotion.

The only way that I know a human is experiencing an emotion without directly asking them is by the way they display their emotions. This by itself can be a flawed process. If I cannot ask the person what they are feeling such as an actor on a tv show the way we say that that person is sad or that human is happy is by seeing in them the same facial and body patterns that we see in ourselves when we are happy or sad. Without directly asking them we can and do get this wrong.

There is a theory that all living creatures feel emotion, it just depends upon how expressive the creature is as displaying these emotions as to whether we say "the dog is happy" (wagging its tail) or the "cat is angry" (also by wagging its tail). Those that are less expressive such as bees ants and some fish are not subject to such vigorous animal protection laws that that more expressive creatures benefit from.

Emotion is down to a nervous response to a stimulus. Via mental, physical and chemical signals all these thrown together make the thing in concern behave in a certain way. It is this behaviour that we then interpret as emotions.

I think it is possible that the fish are both displaying instinct and emotion. I mean what do we actually mean by "happy" or "sad".

Aggravation is not an emotion. The fish reacted at that point because it deemed it was pertinent to, not because it was angry or had hate for the one that it killed. Did the gourami go around and break things in the tank afterward? Did he go into a corner and huff and puff? If so then the anger response might be a little more plausible, and for the sake of science we should document these things.

I politely disagree with this. Why did the fish seem deem this act pertinent? Was it acting out because it felt threatened by the other fish? The other fish presumably had never harmed it in the past so why should this time be any different? I presume the fish was not poorly or sick or the SK may have pointed that out.

Why would going in a huff after the fact mean that it was angry I doubt every killer goes in a huff after they have murdered someone and yet we don't have a problem saying that they have emotions (except in extreme psychopathic behaviour).

It is possible the fish was having an "off day" and was more irritable than usual but why is this if the fish was otherwise healthy, if it not something physical causing the change could it be something mental? Something one could call an emotion?

I would probably need more information on the specifics of the case such as if it was near feeding time or bedtime or whatever but assuming all other variables were similar to any other day I think it is reasonable to associate this random act as the fish being annoyed or angry both of which are emotions.

 

Well I could say "We can't be sure anyone feels emotion since it is merely a construct of the human mind" that is a big open ended philosophical dead end that no one likes to hear. Honestly, if they would offer a logic or philosophy course to juniors I would be in it in a heart beat.

 

There is very little in philosophy I find that comes to a dead end. Or maybe that is because I live with a philosopher so it just feels that way!

 

And I do love a good debate! I believe that you are saying that fish are displaying human-like emotions but not actually experiencing emotions?

I'm saying fish don't display human-like emotions at all and that humans just have a knack for anthropomorphizing human emotion onto animals they care about.

I think it is possible that the fish are both displaying instinct and emotion.

Okay, how do we prove that?

I mean what do we actually mean by "happy" or "sad".

That's the inherent problem. People tend to define their animal behaviors with human emotions, when in some cases (like with fish) we have no way of knowing if they have the capacity to begin with. Wanting your pet fish to have feelings isn't going to give it any, but if we look hard enough at anything, we'll begin to see what we want.

I politely disagree with this. Why did the fish seem deem this act pertinent? Was it acting out because it felt threatened by the other fish? The other fish presumably had never harmed it in the past so why should this time be any different? I presume the fish was not poorly or sick or the SK may have pointed that out.

A reaction to aggravation is not necessarily an emotional response. As I've repeated time and again, there is no evidence leading to response out of anger. If an animal gets pestered, it may tolerate it for a time, but at some point it reacts. That doesn't mean it's angry, it just means that it decided to stop tolerating whatever is being done to it. When a fly buzzes around my head constantly, eventually I swat at it, and probably kill it. Does that mean I was angry at it?

Why would going in a huff after the fact mean that it was angry I doubt every killer goes in a huff after they have murdered someone and yet we don't have a problem saying that they have emotions (except in extreme psychopathic behaviour).

I just cited that as an example of why someone would come to the conclusion that it was angry in the first place. Anger is an emotion after all, and heightened anger in humans has these traits tied to it. I'm sure I don't have to explain that in any more detail.

Considering that the fish shows none of these signs, or any others with the exception of the incident itself, where's the evidence of anger again?

It is possible the fish was having an "off day" and was more irritable than usual but why is this if the fish was otherwise healthy, if it not something physical causing the change could it be something mental? Something one could call an emotion?

People call it emotion all the time, that's why we are having this huge thread interchange. I believe this to be inaccurate at best, and we see examples of this behavior with humans and their pets all across the board. Because of that, I think strong evidence is necessary to have a compelling argument.

I would probably need more information on the specifics of the case such as if it was near feeding time or bedtime or whatever but assuming all other variables were similar to any other day I think it is reasonable to associate this random act as the fish being annoyed or angry both of which are emotions.

And I think it's unreasonable to associate it with emotions. I mean people are welcome to do so, but in respect to science it's unreasonable to me to jump to that conclusion without any evidence. At that point I think we will all disagree on what we consider to be evidence, but I consider evidence as something that can prove your case, if it's easily disproven by basic science, or something that is wide open for interpretation, then it's not exactly compelling.

I could say that the fish wasn't annoyed or angry, but that he was in a deep state of depression and anxiety because he caught his girlfriend with another male. He tried to keep his cool around his tankmates, but they just kept prodding him. "What's wrong man? Come on, cheer up!", they said. They just kept poking and prodding and then one day he just SNAPPED. In a fit of rage he reacted to their pokes, and before he came to his senses it was too late, his friend, lies motionless on the tank floor. A heartbroken, now murderer, seethes in his guilt and self hatred.

Maybe that's what happened, sounds plausible to me!

 

Nah, good ol boy was just really irritated with the danios constant games, yes, pack hierarchy, but I didn't feel the need to complicate the answer, much more fun to call it tag. He didn't have a girlfriend (DG, obviously XP). Danios are annoying little pests. There is not a large compilation(meaning there is some) of science to support fish having any form of emotion, there also isn't any(at all) evidence to suggest they don't. No one has been trying to prove it either way(at least, not properly if you ask me). Now, this is not the same as a "You can't prove that aliens don't exist" type of situation, so lets not use that excuse. BUT saying there is no evidence o disprove the theory also doesn't support the theory or vice versa. No one here is right or wrong, so please get that out of your minds because no one will win this debate. At all.

I would suppose that to truley test the theory would require some disections, chemical testing and so on to see what kinds of chemicals their brains produce.

 

Danios are annoying little pests.

Hey! I got to object to that. They are fun, active, and fairly undemanding fish - at least some of us feel that way about them.

 

Oh no, I love them I LOVE THEM, that was merely the opinion of my DG...and probably all other tank inhabitants. Seriously, they are nosy little guys, but I do love them.

 

First off, let me say that some participants of this debate should be lawyers

You say that a fish cannot be bored; consider if an unfortunate layperson was confined to a 6'x6' cell for a week, only looking forward to the bland meal delivered once daily. At first, they may investigate their surroundings. As time wears on, they may lay in a corner seeking rest. When this is no longer possible, one might bite their nails, grind teeth, etc.

Now think... is this an example of boredom? Would you do the same in the above situation? Because this is almost precisely what most bettas go through in pet stores.

 

First off, let me say that some participants of this debate should be lawyers

You say that a fish cannot be bored; consider if an unfortunate layperson was confined to a 6'x6' cell for a week, only looking forward to the bland meal delivered once daily. At first, they may investigate their surroundings. As time wears on, they may lay in a corner seeking rest. When this is no longer possible, one might bite their nails, grind teeth, etc.

Now think... is this an example of boredom? Would you do the same in the above situation? Because this is almost precisely what most bettas go through in pet stores.

This is an interesting question, for sure. I'd ask what evidence leads you to believe that this betta's behavior is a result of boredom, though? Wouldn't it be just as plausible to assume that it could be having issues related to a) poor water quality b)stress,possibly from inadequate quarters.

Tail biting in bettas is not all that uncommon, and it happens in more than just cup bettas, I've seen reports of it time and again, and have experienced it a few times with mine. So that leaves us with: Tail biting is not always a result of 'boredom', so how do we come to the conclusion that it was boredom to begin with?

The prisoner analogy is thought provoking, but again, we are comparing humans to fish. Humans and fish are not even comparable in an analogy because it's apples to orangutans.

Bettas don't always live in hoof-print sized indents in nature like some people want us to believe, but they are quite well adapted to living in very confined areas, hence the reason why we keep them this way (at least many retailers do). So saying that a betta bites his tail because he's bored is equally as plausible as saying he bites his tail because he hates himself and the people that made him into a freak of nature.

 

First off, let me say that some participants of this debate should be lawyers

You say that a fish cannot be bored; consider if an unfortunate layperson was confined to a 6'x6' cell for a week, only looking forward to the bland meal delivered once daily. At first, they may investigate their surroundings. As time wears on, they may lay in a corner seeking rest. When this is no longer possible, one might bite their nails, grind teeth, etc.

Now think... is this an example of boredom? Would you do the same in the above situation? Because this is almost precisely what most bettas go through in pet stores.

Person.
Fish.

Do you honestly mean to equate the boredom of a human being with proposed "boredom" in fish? Like locking up a human being in a 6x6 cell with one meal delivered daily, as you have stated here, is the equivalent of a Betta that is in a tiny tank or a bowl? Really?

I'm sorry, but obvious non sequitur is obvious.

 

Tail biting in bettas is not all that uncommon, and it happens in more than just cup bettas, I've seen reports of it time and again, and have experienced it a few times with mine. So that leaves us with: Tail biting is not always a result of 'boredom', so how do we come to the conclusion that it was boredom to begin with?

Apparently, by what it takes to fix the situation. There are a few causes and also a few solutions, but not every solution will fix every case which is how we know there are different causes in the first place. 1 cause is anxiety, the solution is to move the fish to a more secluded area. Another causes is boredom and the only thing that cures this is interaction through toys and such.

 

Apparently, by what it takes to fix the situation. There are a few causes and also a few solutions, but not every solution will fix every case which is how we know there are different causes in the first place. 1 cause is anxiety, the solution is to move the fish to a more secluded area. Another causes is boredom and the only thing that cures this is interaction through toys and such.

In people, yes. Fish are not people, though. Fish get stressed, to call it anxiety or boredom again starts us on a path that has no basis in evidence.

Although I do sense a wide open market for fish psychiatry and a related pharmaceutical market. I could be the fish Whisperer!