Horses, Orcas and Morality

By Désirée Braganza and Robert Anderson

The fair breeze blew, the white foam flew,
The furrow followed free;
We were the first that ever burst
Into that silent sea.

- from The Rime of the Ancient Mariner by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, 1798

Introduction: Bridging Species Through Ethics

Robert Anderson first contacted me after reading one of our Everyday Ethology articles. An astrophysicist by education, Robert had the rare experience of closely encountering orcas at SeaWorld San Diego between 1979 and 1980. He also has a long-standing relationship with horses, beginning on a ranch where he came to know thirty-two individuals, each with their own personality, preferences and social roles. At the time, I didn’t realize Robert had contributed to several major NASA missions, including Galileo, Magellan, Mars Observer, and Cassini. His background in astrophysics naturally led to an interest in exobiology and the evolution of life and intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. That curiosity drew him to dolphin intelligence, which he saw as one of the most compelling examples of non-human intelligence available on Earth.

My own background lies in ethology and education, shaped by years of close, daily observation of horses across ecosystems. My work is guided by the belief that ethical consideration should not be reserved for humans alone, but extended to all beings capable of relationship. That belief has sometimes drawn skepticism. Critics often argue that morality requires abstract reasoning, language, or law - traits they claim only humans possess. But I have found again and again that relational intelligence, emotional resonance and the ability to offer or withhold care are not uniquely human. They are distributed across species and expressed in ways we may miss if we expect them to look like ours.

As we corresponded, Robert and I began to notice shared themes across species: how horses navigate herd life, how orcas maintain cohesion in pods, and how humans, too, form and fracture groups. What began as an exchange of observations grew into a shared inquiry: do non-humans possess a form of morality? If so, how is it expressed, and what might it teach us about our own behavior?

In this article, we explore interspecies morality, not by comparing non-human animals to human standards, but by examining how moral codes, those unwritten rules that facilitate coexistence, emerge among highly social mammals like horses and orcas. Robert shares the moral codes he has observed over the years, not as a definitive list, but as a clear call to not only engage with this content but to shape the conversation with your own insights. Combining Robert’s background in astrophysics with my own in ethology opened up a unique vantage point that considers social behavior and moral codes as possible outcomes of complex life, whether on Earth or elsewhere. And like Coleridge’s mariner, who emerges from his journey transformed by unexpected kinships, we, too, return with a revised understanding of what it means to live alongside others, human and not.

Photos courtesy of Robyn Waayers: at SeaWorld San Diego (1979-1980), orcas Kotar and Kasatka rise from the water at the petting pool, perhaps seeking fish, perhaps human contact. Between two worlds - one of trained routine and limited space and the other a distant memory of the vast, free ocean they were meant to roam.

Understanding Orca Classification: More Dolphin Than Whale

Orcas, commonly known as "killer whales," are often mistaken for true whales. In fact, they are more closely related to dolphins. Both orcas and dolphins belong to the Odontoceti group, also known as toothed whales , while the larger, filter-feeding whales like the blue whale fall under Mysticeti, the baleen whale group. This distinction is key to understanding orcas’ behavior, biology, and evolutionary history.

*Familial orcas by photographer, Kevin Marks*

Morality in the Wild and in Domestic Life

While humans often divide ethics (the rules we agree on) from morality (the values we carry inside) here, we use ‘morality’ to refer to behaviors that support group cohesion, fairness and mutual recognition - not as rigid rules, but as lived values.

In the wild, morality is expressed through consistency and clarity: sharing food among pack members, caring for the injured and respecting territorial boundaries. These aren’t codified rules but behaviors that evolve to preserve social integrity, prevent injury and support survival. Among free-living horses and wild orca pods, such systems arise naturally.

Domestic life is more complicated. Horses confined in stables or paddocks, separated from familiar herds, or subjected to inconsistent human interaction may appear to “violate” these codes. A sudden kick, a refusal to cooperate, or a shutdown response is often labeled as rude, difficult, or even immoral.

The truth is usually the opposite. These behaviors often reflect trauma, confusion, or unmet needs. What we interpret as a violation of moral codes may instead signal that the systems meant to support morality or relational stability have broken down.

To understand morality in horses and orcas, we must recognize that context is everything. Moral behavior does not emerge in a vacuum. It reflects not only the individual’s choices, but the system’s conditions.

*By anthrozoology researcher, Irene Perrett: another glimpse of freely living Exmoor ponies in Exmoor, UK*

Deconstructing the Human Monopoly on Morality

To ask whether non-humans are moral beings is to challenge a foundational human assumption: that morality belongs solely to our species.

This belief often rests on our claims to uniqueness: our capacity for abstract thought, language, empathy, and spirituality. But as David Neiwert writes in Of Orcas and Men: What Killer Whales Can Teach Us, we rarely invert the comparison. If we feel protective of our families, why not compare that to the mare who positions herself between a foal and danger? If we experience awe or sensory awareness, why not compare that to an orca’s echolocation, so precise that it can detect a fetus inside another whale?

What we call morality may be an evolved expression of relationship. In that domain, we are not alone.

Video: horses in a domestic setting in Northern California, USA. First day at a new stable for mom and daughter and an opportunity to teach ‘stranger danger’. By the second day, after vetting the gelding, mom confidently left her daughter in his watchful care for a few moments to eat her hay undisturbed.

Image courtesy of Harvey Windle of Forest Gems Gallery, Port Hadlock, Washington, USA: orca pod carving by artist and carver, Neil Baker, Salish band member of the Squamish First Nation Reserve in British Columbia, Canada.

Equanimity Across Species

Some Indigenous knowledge systems have long recognized the moral presence of non-human beings. Among Coast Salish, Makah, and Lummi communities, orcas are not simply animals; they are persons, even ancestors. Maria Pascua, a culture teacher and researcher at the Makah Cultural & Research Center Museum, shares an origin story in which wolves entered the water and transformed into orcas. These species were revered as great hunters and their social cohesion was respected: to harm one was the equivalent of harming a human. Lummi Elder, Squil-le-he-le, affirms this bond in the documentary Resident Orca and Her Relatives Beneath the Waves, where she refers to orcas directly as “relatives.” These beliefs were not metaphorical alone; they reflected a lived ethic of restraint and reciprocity, grounded in an understanding that orcas, like wolves - and like horses- live in tightly bonded social groups where each individual matters. Such perspectives challenge mainstream cultural thought, which often assumes morality requires language or law. Instead, they ask: what if morality begins with recognizing another as a being with whom we are in relationship?

*Fin-to-fin with a passing pod by photographer René Leubert*

How Do We Know What Another is Thinking?

One common argument against non-human animal morality is we cannot know what non-human beings are thinking. But that standard doesn’t hold among humans either. As Robert and his collaborator, biologist Robyn Waayers note in their publication:

“For most people there is an absolutely automatic assumption that what goes on inside other people’s heads is similar to what goes on inside their own. This assumption is a rational analogy based on observations of other human behaviors and intuition of their emotions to one’s self, but it is not fundamentally provable.”

They continue to add:

In truth, we do not directly experience anyone’s mind. We rely on:

Observation: I saw you pull your hand away from a flame.
Rational inference: You likely felt pain, because I’ve done the same.
Intuition: I felt a twinge of sympathy watching you.

These same tools: observation, inference and intuition, are available to us in our relationships with non-humans. A horse’s pinned ears, an orca’s calming signal, the softening of breath or gaze: these are readable expressions of internal states, available to anyone who chooses to be receptive.

As Thích Nhất Hạnh teaches, presence is not a matter of language. It is a decision to inter-be with another.

Photo courtesy of The Liberty Barn Horse and Farm Animal Sanctuary, Palm City, Florida, USA:
Volunteer Astrid Krause shares a meaningful moment of mutual connection with a resident. Both human and non-human express care through their focused attention on one another, a two-way feedback loop of presence and trust.

Scientific Rigor and the Limits of Proof

The Cartesian framework that shaped Enlightenment science emphasized objectivity, measurement, and mechanism. Descartes envisioned the world as a clock: understandable by isolating its parts and reducing its complexities.

This view brought many advances, but also created a disconnect. As physicist Fritjof Capra explains in The Turning Point, a book later adapted into the film Mindwalk, we lost sight of ourselves as part of the natural world. Once, our existence was seen as interwoven with that of plants, other animals, fungi, etc.… and whole ecosystems. That wholeness was eroded when living knowledge became dissected knowledge.

Anecdotal accounts are often dismissed as unscientific, yet qualitative research has long been recognized as a rigorous and valid form of inquiry. Rigor, however, does not stem from the method alone; it arises from the depth, clarity and reproducibility of the insights gained. This is what scientists refer to as surety - the degree to which we can be confident in a finding. That question of confidence applies not only to data but also to interpretation. In his work as an astrophysicist, Robert engaged with the concept of uncertainty - a measure of how much a result might deviate from a calculated value. A familiar example is the margin of error in polling data, often expressed as ±%, which quantifies the expected range of variation. Similarly, margins of uncertainty can be applied to qualitative observations, where absolute proof is rarely possible but patterns still hold. In this way, margins offer a way to frame subjective insight through a quantitative perspective, acknowledging ambiguity without discarding meaning.

Photo by anthrozoology researcher Irene Perrett: A closely bonded black stallion and bright bay yearling, members of a free-living Dartmoor pony herd in Dartmoor, UK. Unlike domesticated stallions who are often isolated, experience trauma and struggle to reintegrate with herds after gelding; free-living stallions commonly take on nurturing, parental roles within their groups.

The Horses’ Moral Code: Robert’s Observations

Over years of observation, Robert identified recurring patterns in horse behavior that seemed to reflect a shared moral logic. These were not trained responses, but spontaneous and consistent expressions of social understanding. It's important to note that context played a crucial role: the horses he observed and interacted with had many of their basic needs met, reducing the likelihood that their behavior was driven by stress, fear, or resource scarcity. He observed that responses were often disproportionately strong when a) the interacting horses were less than friendly, or b) the responding horse was negotiating position, even over a familiar companion. While these observations suggest a form of social reasoning, they remain interpretations based on consistent patterns. As with any qualitative research, these findings should be considered in light of the observer’s relationship to the subjects, the specific context of the setting, and the extent to which interpretation shapes the conclusions. We encourage you to reflect on your own observations. How might you see these patterns playing out in the non-humans you’ve encountered? We invite you to share your thoughts. Your insights are essential to deepening this conversation.

Warnings before action: Horses often give symbolic cues like air bites or stomped hooves before engaging physically.
Proportionate response: Force typically matches the level of offense with consideration to context.
Defense of the group: Horses orient to potential threats together when alerted by one of their own.
Non-harm to the young: Foals are granted tolerance that gradually shifts with age. This tolerance by the herd comes with protection.
Repair after conflict: Some horses seek reconnection after tension or separation.
Bonding through affection: Mutual grooming serves as both care and connection. Particularly on warm afternoons, the horses all gather close around, drifting in and out of dozing standing up. Generally, friends are close, but even horses with strained relationships often tolerate close proximity. Sometimes mutual grooming sessions start up.
Complex social preferences: Horses form selective friendships and avoidances within herds.

Each behavior supports coexistence. While individual personalities vary, the underlying code is widely shared: a quiet agreement on how to live together.

Photo courtesy of The Liberty Barn Horse and Farm Animal Sanctuary in Palm City, Florida, USA: after enduring profound adversity prior to arrival, resident equines work in partnership with humans to ensure each newcomer is welcomed with care and compassion.

Conclusion: What We Owe Each Other

If horses live by a moral code, then our responsibility is to support, not disrupt, that code. This may mean offering warning before sudden contact, respecting herd bonds rather than overriding them, and reinterpreting “bad” behavior as a possible response to harm or confusion.

It means leaving room for repair after conflict. It means offering the same tolerance, patience and curiosity that we ask of them.

To live ethically among other species is not to manage them but to meet them - where they are, who they are. Horses remind us that fairness isn’t enforced: it’s lived. Orcas remind us that family is not merely blood but bond. If these beings show us a path toward coexistence, then perhaps the real question is not whether they are moral, but whether we are listening.

In recognizing their moral presence, we return to our own.

*Strait of Georgia, Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada by photographer Alan Gay*

Coda

We return to Coleridge.

He went like one that hath been stunned,

And is of sense forlorn:

A sadder and a wiser man,

He rose the morrow morn.

- From The Rime of the Ancient Mariner (last stanza) by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, 1834

Acknowledgements

Désirée and Robert would like to thank those who generously shared their insights and support for this article: Maria Pascua (culture teacher and researcher at the Makah Cultural & Research Center Museum), Robyn Waayers (biologist), Irene Perrett (anthrozoologist), Shannon McBride (cultural anthropologist), Mike Parker (equine veterinarian, member of the Makah tribe) and The Liberty Barn Horse and Farm Animal Sanctuary. Your contributions were invaluable.

We are deeply grateful to the orcas and the horses - those who move between worlds to interbe with us. Your presence is a true gift.

Share Your Insights

Reading is a conversation. What would you say back to the article right now? Click here.

RESOURCES

Academic Articles and Essays

Anderson, R.; Waayers, R.; Knight, A. (2016). Orca Behavior and Subsequent Aggression Associated with Oceanarium Confinement. Animals, 6(8), 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6080049

Anderson, R.; Waayers, R. Center For Humans and Nature: The Other Moral Species

Books (Nonfiction)

Bekoff, M. (2007). The Emotional Lives of Animals: A Leading Scientist Explores Animal Joy, Sorrow, and Empathy—and Why They Matter. New World Library.

Bekoff, M. (2010). The Animal Manifesto: Six Reasons for Expanding Our Compassion Footprint. New World Library.

Bekoff, M. (2002). Minding Animals: Awareness, Emotions, and Heart. Oxford University Press.

Capra, F. (1982). The Turning Point: Science, Society, and the Rising Culture.

Neiwert, D. (2017). Of Orcas and Men: What Killer Whales Can Teach Us. Duckworth Overlook

Books (Fiction)

Adams, Douglas. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. London: Pan Books, 1979.

Personal Communication

Anderson, R.; Waayers, R., Personal Communication

Cultural and Historical Resources

Makah Cultural & Research Center Museum

Essay about Whale Hunting by the Makah Tribe

Neil Baker, artist and carver