Mar 31, 2025 09:00 PM
https://aeon.co/essays/how-evolution-fav...nimal-play
EXCERPT: . . . Animals are assumed to be trapped in unequivocal, purely utilitarian relationships with the world. From a biological perspective, especially within evolutionary theory, the traditional approach conceives of nonhuman organisms as genetically programmed machines, their behaviours entirely shaped by natural selection to serve specific functions.
Play, however, disrupts both these assumptions. On one hand, in play, animals use real-world objects and situations to create fictitious ones. On the other hand, this activity stands out for its apparent short-term uselessness and even its potential dangers, the conspicuousness of playful movements exposing animals to predators.
Remarkably, 22 of the 26 seal pups that died during the observation of the biologist Robert Harcourt were attacked by sea lions while playing. This example rebuts the claim that play, such as that between Pippo and Albertine, is confined to domestic animals, shielded from natural pressures and ‘distorted’ by human influence.
Play is widespread among animals, both domestic and wild, across a vast range of species. Several biologists (including Marc Bekoff, Gordon M Burghardt, John A Byers, Robert Fagen and Paul Martin) have proposed criteria for identifying play. In summary:
How can we understand the omnipresence of this seemingly pointless activity? To begin with, we need to rethink our assumptions and consider that animals may be capable of pretence, and therefore, a form of creativity. The use of play-signals, like Albertine’s gesture [a cat] to warn Pippo [a dog] of the falsity of her attack, is common across species and, as in their case, even between species (eg, between dogs and horses).
These signals are metacommunicative: they inform the other player that the situation is only a pretence. Through them, we know that animals actively build these simulated situations rather than being misled by illusion or error. Hence, play also invites us to recognise that animal behaviour may not be entirely dictated by the struggle for existence and the drive for optimisation – ie, for maximising resources while minimising energy expenditure.
If we embrace this shift in perception and revisit Albertine’s game, we can notice something else. Not only was Albertine creative in shaping her scenario, but she was also inventive in her behaviour. Her actions were both exaggerated and versatile: she leapt high, landing on the table in such a theatrical skid that objects scattered to the floor; she seamlessly transitioned from combat to hunting sequences. Albertine seemed to use this make-believe scenario, full of twists and turns, to explore her behavioural flexibility.
This is why some researchers hypothesise that the prevalence of play in many domestic and wild species, despite its apparent frivolity, may be explained not (so much) by its role in training typical behaviours, but rather by its function in fostering flexibility. Play provides opportunities for animals to test new behaviours that could later prove useful in functional contexts. Play, they suggest, prepares animals to perform novel actions in unexpected circumstances.
It is indeed suited for such training, as it suspends the usual practical relationship with the world. Freed from the imperatives of reality, animals do not solely react to environmental stimuli but use them to investigate new potential relationships with their surroundings... (MORE - missing details)
EXCERPT: . . . Animals are assumed to be trapped in unequivocal, purely utilitarian relationships with the world. From a biological perspective, especially within evolutionary theory, the traditional approach conceives of nonhuman organisms as genetically programmed machines, their behaviours entirely shaped by natural selection to serve specific functions.
Play, however, disrupts both these assumptions. On one hand, in play, animals use real-world objects and situations to create fictitious ones. On the other hand, this activity stands out for its apparent short-term uselessness and even its potential dangers, the conspicuousness of playful movements exposing animals to predators.
Remarkably, 22 of the 26 seal pups that died during the observation of the biologist Robert Harcourt were attacked by sea lions while playing. This example rebuts the claim that play, such as that between Pippo and Albertine, is confined to domestic animals, shielded from natural pressures and ‘distorted’ by human influence.
Play is widespread among animals, both domestic and wild, across a vast range of species. Several biologists (including Marc Bekoff, Gordon M Burghardt, John A Byers, Robert Fagen and Paul Martin) have proposed criteria for identifying play. In summary:
- Play lacks apparent short-term benefits.
- It is an activity animals seek for its own sake (it seems pleasurable).
- It involves motor patterns from functional, ‘serious’ contexts used in modified forms (eg, exaggeration, self-handicapping) and altered temporal sequencing.
- Because of its uselessness, play occurs when the animal feels (rightly or wrongly) safe and free from stress.
How can we understand the omnipresence of this seemingly pointless activity? To begin with, we need to rethink our assumptions and consider that animals may be capable of pretence, and therefore, a form of creativity. The use of play-signals, like Albertine’s gesture [a cat] to warn Pippo [a dog] of the falsity of her attack, is common across species and, as in their case, even between species (eg, between dogs and horses).
These signals are metacommunicative: they inform the other player that the situation is only a pretence. Through them, we know that animals actively build these simulated situations rather than being misled by illusion or error. Hence, play also invites us to recognise that animal behaviour may not be entirely dictated by the struggle for existence and the drive for optimisation – ie, for maximising resources while minimising energy expenditure.
If we embrace this shift in perception and revisit Albertine’s game, we can notice something else. Not only was Albertine creative in shaping her scenario, but she was also inventive in her behaviour. Her actions were both exaggerated and versatile: she leapt high, landing on the table in such a theatrical skid that objects scattered to the floor; she seamlessly transitioned from combat to hunting sequences. Albertine seemed to use this make-believe scenario, full of twists and turns, to explore her behavioural flexibility.
This is why some researchers hypothesise that the prevalence of play in many domestic and wild species, despite its apparent frivolity, may be explained not (so much) by its role in training typical behaviours, but rather by its function in fostering flexibility. Play provides opportunities for animals to test new behaviours that could later prove useful in functional contexts. Play, they suggest, prepares animals to perform novel actions in unexpected circumstances.
It is indeed suited for such training, as it suspends the usual practical relationship with the world. Freed from the imperatives of reality, animals do not solely react to environmental stimuli but use them to investigate new potential relationships with their surroundings... (MORE - missing details)
