Primatology between feelings and science: a personal experience perspective

Abstract

The aim of this article is to discuss some aspects of the relationship between feelings and primatological science, and how this relationship can influence this particular scientific practice. This point of view is based on the author's personal experience. A sentimental reason to study primatology in the first place will be discussed, and then the existence of a bond between the observer and the observed will be presented as a possible by-product of primatology. The following question is whether a sentimental attitude toward primates is detrimental for good science or is, alternatively, actually leading to better primatological science. As an example, the practice of naming individual monkeys is considered. It is argued that naming monkeys can help by characterizing individuality, and this is likely to improve planning of behavioural observations and welfare of captive individuals. The relationship between the researcher and study subject in biomedical studies is discussed in terms of hierarchy of moral status. Finally, primatology is not unique in the existence of bonds between the observer and the observed, at least from the point of view of the observer. However, primatology is unique because, more than in other cases, it gives greater opportunity for reasoning about different factors surrounding "doing science with animals." This is most probably owing to the phylogenetic closeness primatologists have with their study subjects. Among the different factors involved in making science using animals, the sentimental bond developing between the researcher and study animal can be very influential.