The position of a &#x27;skeptic&#x27; that you adopt is frequently adopted for things related to animal emotion, empathy, intelligence etc. It is often couched in a higher &#x27;we have higher standards for a scientific method&#x27;. But it is somewhat misguided.<p>I find these inferential questions no more fraught than the question that a fellow human, for example, you are capable of intelligence, empathy, emotion. All we can do is make external observations and not get into your psyche and feel what you feel. If the basis of assigning emotions etc to a second person is the fact that I am aware of my own emotions, then it is structurally very limited. It is incapable of making inferences beyond the human kind, and even then it is quite suspect.<p>I am fine as long as the same standards are used for animals and as is used for humans, without resorting to arguments mirroring &#x27;I know I feel therefore I know you do&#x27; or &#x27;I know you feel because you told me so&#x27;.