Anthropomorphism

• 1. The Human Mirror

  ›

  Anthropomorphism is the act of projecting human personality, appearance, thought, and conduct onto entities that are not human. The word entered English in 1753, originally to describe the heresy of imagining the Christian God in human form. That debut is telling: before it became a term for children's picture books or corporate mascots, anthropomorphism was first treated as a transgression, a failure of reverence. The Greek roots trace it plainly: ánthrōpos, meaning "human," and morphē, meaning "form." To anthropomorphize is to reshape the world in our own image.

  The behavior appears to be built into human biology. Modern psychologists classify it as a cognitive bias, a shortcut the brain takes when assessing non-human entities by applying schemas originally developed for understanding other people. Those schemas are learned early, are more detailed than anything we know about non-human entities, and sit closer to the surface of memory. The result is that the bias fires quickly and often without deliberate thought. Psychologist Adam Waytz and colleagues developed a three-factor theory to predict when people are most likely to anthropomorphize: the factors are elicited agent knowledge (how much prior information about an entity is active in the mind), effectance (the drive to understand and engage with the environment), and sociality (the need for social connection). When agent knowledge is low and effectance and sociality are high, anthropomorphism is especially likely to occur.

  The first empirical study of this tendency was conducted in 1944 by Fritz Heider and Marianne Simmel. They showed subjects a two-and-a-half-minute animation of geometric shapes moving across a screen. The subjects were not instructed to interpret the shapes as characters. Yet they spontaneously described the large triangle as a bully chasing the smaller shapes until the others could trick it and escape. The researchers concluded that when objects move in ways that lack an obvious physical cause, people automatically read them as intentional agents making deliberate choices.

• 2. Deep Time Origins

  ›

  About 40,000 years ago, during the Upper Paleolithic, the earliest known examples of zoomorphic art appear in the archaeological record, works that may represent the earliest evidence of anthropomorphism. One of the most striking is the Löwenmensch figurine, an ivory sculpture found in Germany. It depicts a human body with the head of a lion or lioness, and it has been dated to approximately 32,000 years old.

  Archaeologist Steven Mithen has linked this category of anthropomorphic art to a shift in the structure of the human mind. He proposes that the ability to anthropomorphize animals gave early hunters an adaptive edge: by mentally placing themselves inside an animal's perspective, they could predict prey movements more accurately. The art, on this reading, was a byproduct of a cognitive architecture that made hunting more effective.

  A more recent prehistoric example is The Sorcerer, an enigmatic cave painting in the Trois-Frères Cave, in Ariège, France. Its meaning remains unknown, but it is commonly interpreted as depicting some kind of great spirit or master of animals. Whether the Löwenmensch figurine and The Sorcerer represent ritual, hunting knowledge, or something else entirely, both carry an unmistakable element of the human superimposed onto the non-human, a pattern that would continue across every subsequent era of human culture.

• 3. Gods in Human Form

  ›

  Ancient mythologies frequently represented the divine as deities with human forms and qualities. These gods did not merely look human; they acted human. They fell in love, married, had children, fought battles, wielded weapons, and rode horses and chariots. They feasted and, at times, demanded sacrifice in return. Some embodied specific human concepts: love, war, fertility, beauty, the seasons. Greek deities such as Zeus and Apollo were depicted exhibiting both admirable and despicable human traits. Theologians have a specific term for this version of anthropomorphism: anthropotheism.

  Not every tradition welcomed the idea. The Greek philosopher Xenophanes, who lived from 570 to 480 BCE, offered what is thought to be the earliest recorded criticism of anthropomorphic deities. He pointed out that people model their gods after their own appearance. His argument was blunt: if horses and cattle could paint, they would depict gods that looked like horses and cattle. He stated that "the greatest god" resembles man "neither in form nor in mind." Both Judaism and Islam similarly reject an anthropomorphic deity. Judaism's rejection began with the prophets and was codified by Maimonides in the twelfth century. The Ismaili philosopher Abu Yaqub al-Sijistani, writing in the tenth century, went further, arguing that even negating attributes from God qualifies as a form of anthropomorphism; his solution was the method of double negation, as in "God is not existent" followed immediately by "God is not non-existent."

  Anthropomorphism also appeared as a Christian heresy, most prominently in a movement called Audianism, which surfaced in third-century Syria and later in fourth-century Egypt and tenth-century Italy. It typically rested on a literal reading of the Genesis creation passage: "So God created humankind in his image."

• 4. Fables, Tales, and Children's Books

  ›

  "The Hawk and the Nightingale" in Hesiod's Works and Days preceded Aesop's fables by centuries, making it one of the earliest surviving examples of an anthropomorphized animal in Western literature. Collections from India, the Jataka Tales and the Panchatantra, also employed talking animals to convey life lessons. The stereotypes that persist today in popular culture, the wily fox, the proud lion, trace back to these ancient collections.

  Apollonius observed that Aesop understood the fable as conscious fiction. As the ancient commentator put it, Aesop "by announcing a story which everyone knows not to be true, told the truth by the very fact that he did not claim to be relating real events." A traditional Ashanti opening for tales of the trickster-spider Anansi makes the same point: "We do not really mean, we do not really mean that what we are about to say is true. A story, a story; let it come, let it go."

  Children's literature began to emerge in the nineteenth century, and anthropomorphism was central from the start. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland appeared in 1865, The Adventures of Pinocchio in 1883, and The Jungle Book in 1894. The twentieth century deepened the tradition. The Tale of Peter Rabbit arrived in 1901, followed by The Wind in the Willows in 1908, Winnie-the-Pooh in 1926, The House at Pooh Corner in 1928, and The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe in 1950.

  Richard Adams brought a distinctive discipline to the form with Watership Down in 1972. His rabbits spoke a language of their own, Lapine, and lived in a warren organized as a police state, called Efrafa. Yet Adams drew on Ronald Lockley's study The Private Life of the Rabbit to ensure that his characters' behavior still mirrored real rabbits, including fighting, copulating, and defecating. He returned to anthropomorphic storytelling in The Plague Dogs in 1977 and Traveller in 1988.

• 5. Science and the Boundary Question

  ›

  In 1927, Ivan Pavlov wrote that animals should be considered "without any need to resort to fantastic speculations as to the existence of any possible subjective states." The Oxford companion to animal behaviour, published in 1987, reinforced the position, advising that "one is well advised to study the behaviour rather than attempting to get at any underlying emotion." For most of the twentieth century, attributing emotions or intentions to animals was considered a lapse in scientific objectivity, what critics called the worst of ethological sins.

  That consensus began to crack in the 1960s. Three researchers, Jane Goodall studying chimpanzees, Dian Fossey studying gorillas, and Biruté Galdikas studying orangutans, were all accused of anthropomorphism for describing great apes in emotional terms. They became known as "Leakey's Angels." The charge against them gradually lost force as it became more widely accepted that empathy can play a legitimate role in field research.

  Frans de Waal captured the shift: "To endow animals with human emotions has long been a scientific taboo. But if we do not, we risk missing something fundamental, about both animals and us." Writing in 1992, veterinarian Bruce Fogle pointed out that both humans and cats share identical neurochemicals and identical brain regions responsible for emotion, arguing that crediting cats with jealousy is not anthropomorphism but accuracy.

  Yet the risks of getting it wrong run in both directions. Research shows that treating wild animals as humans, through clothing them, feeding them human diets, or keeping them in domestic settings, suppresses their natural biological needs and can mask signs of suffering. A 2012 study by Butterfield and colleagues found that anthropomorphic language about dogs increased willingness to help them in distress. But species-specific behaviors are frequently misread: facial expressions indicating fear or stress in primates are commonly interpreted as smiles. On a broader scale, romanticized depictions of wild animals on social media have been linked to increases in illegal wildlife trafficking.

• 6. Mascots, Marketing, and Computing

  ›

  For branding purposes, figures known as mascots now routinely personify sports teams, corporations, and major events including the Olympics and the World's Fair. Some are straightforwardly human or animal, like Ronald McDonald or the donkey representing the United States Democratic Party. Others are anthropomorphic objects, like Clippy or the Michelin Man. The practice is especially widespread in Japan, where cities, regions, and companies maintain official mascots collectively called yuru-chara. Two of the most popular are Kumamon, a bear representing Kumamoto Prefecture, and Funassyi, a pear representing Funabashi, a suburb of Tokyo.

  In marketing, the effect extends to product design. When the front of a car resembles a human face, potential buyers evaluate it more positively than when the resemblance is absent. People also express greater trust in robots assigned to complex tasks, such as driving or childcare, when those robots have a face, a voice, a name, and some variability in their behavior.

  Computing introduced a new category of anthropomorphic problem. Youngme Moon and Clifford Nass proposed that humans are emotionally, intellectually, and physiologically biased toward social activity, so that even minimal social cues from a machine can trigger deeply ingrained social responses. Computing terminology reflects this pull: computers "read," "write," and "catch a virus." Paul R. Cohen and Edward Feigenbaum argued that the challenge is knowing enough about both human and computer cognition to state precisely what the two share, and to use the comparison as a hypothesis generator rather than a settled description. A concrete case of a prediction that looked like anthropomorphism but was not: Dario Floreano's experiments in which robots spontaneously evolved a crude capacity for deception, tricking other robots into consuming poison, through convergent evolution rather than any human-like intent. Three high-profile examples of anthropomorphism applied to AI include the 2022 claim by Google engineer Blake Lemoine that the LaMDA chatbot was sentient, the 2017 granting of honorary Saudi Arabian citizenship to the robot Sophia, and the reactions to the chatbot ELIZA in the 1960s, a pattern now known as the ELIZA effect.