Yerkes demonstrates research without morality

Dr. Frans de Waal, Yerkes National Primate Research Center and Emory University demonstrate research without morality.

The audience demonstrates humanity without morality.

Watch the audience laugh throughout, apparently not understanding that these animals live their lives in captivity just so Dr. de Waal and his colleagues can put together a study where they exercise control over animals, withholding and rewarding with food, for no real benefit.

We did not learn anything from these animals in captivity that we didn’t already know.  Even scientists acknowledge that research on chimpanzees is not necessary.

Dr. de Waal learned how to tell a joke at the expense of animals.

Shame on you.

I don’t believe that I saw Dr. de Waal yawn.

6 responses to “Yerkes demonstrates research without morality

  1. Great post. He is the one that needs to learn about humanity!

  2. I want to watch again, to see what I hear the second full time around. But the laughter and giggling is more than I can bear this afternoon. I do understand it, however. I know that we were taught that dressing our animals up and making them do “funny” things was funny. We were taught that it was acceptable to use animals as laboratory subjects. But no more. We have other ways of acquiring information, and limits to what we “need” to know via experimentation.

    I am totally over researchers “needing” to know this kind of nonsense, useless bullcrap that only does harm to the individual and ensures that the researcher gets his or her tenure. Enough already.

  3. Breakthrough 2011? Yerkes and Dr. de Waal ignore the fact that Dr. Jane Goodall learned all of this about chimpanzees 40 years ago by simply studying them in the wild. Animal researchers created the term “prosocial tendencies” because they dare not use the term “moral choices” when referring to the choices of animals. It just might bring attention to their sadly deficient sense of morality and total lack of fairness. I wish the arrogant Dr. de Waal would study his own heart to see if there is any empathy or fairness within him.

    • Yes, he made a lot of morally questionable decisions and I in no way condone his behaviors, but don’t ignore the fact that Goodall made some questionable decisions as well. Her “wild” studies involved feeding her chimps treats while habituating them. Behaviors cannot really be determined from lab studies or from our “wild” studies. Our presence in the wild and our interactions with the wildlife affect behaviors. Pictures of primatologists holding monkeys or apes is also “morally questionable” in that these scientists are putting primates at risk for many highly transferable diseases, while also giving the general public the idea that it’s ‘okay’ to interact with primates in this way (and then when humans get attacked by wild animals we act shocked and blame the animal, as if the attack is its fault). Many many many research methods that have been used in the past we now know to be ethically unsound. Don’t just blame de Waal for his ignorance. He’s unfortunately just one person who has contributed to our ethical mess in the field

      • I don’t “blame” DeWaal for anything. I hold him to account for it.

        Comparing holding a chimp in the wild to never allowing an animal to a live other than that in a laboratory, a stainless steel cage, existing merely to be the experiment to someone’s observations? That pretty much makes the point that those who justify using animals in laboratories do not, as a fundamental matter, get that animals have a right to not be so used.

  4. Here, here! Amazing lack of empathy in humans.

Leave a Reply