What Can Animals Teach Us About Being Present?

There's a moment I keep returning to. A cat, sitting on a windowsill, watching sunlight move across the floor. Not waiting for anything. Not remembering yesterday. Just... there. And I catch myself wondering: when was the last time I did that? When was the last time I simply was, without a plan, without a phone, without a running commentary in my head about what I should be doing next?

I don't have an answer, and maybe that's the point of this whole inquiry. I'm not writing this because I've figured something out. I'm writing because I've been sitting with questions I can't quite shake, and perhaps you've been sitting with them too.

Three Questions I Keep Returning To

• What if animals aren't "less conscious" than us, but conscious in a way we've forgotten how to be?
• How did we come to believe that thinking about life is the same as living it?
• Could the presence we chase in meditation apps be something a sparrow already knows?

The Deer That Stopped Me

A few months ago, I was walking through a forest early in the morning. My head was noisy — planning, rehearsing conversations, drafting emails I hadn't yet been asked to write. Then I saw a deer, maybe fifteen meters away. It looked at me. I looked at it. For what might have been ten seconds or ten minutes — I honestly can't say — nothing else existed.

The deer wasn't performing presence. It wasn't practicing mindfulness. It wasn't reminding itself to breathe. It was simply aware, in a way that felt almost embarrassing to witness, because I realized how rarely I inhabit my own awareness like that.

And then the strangest thought arrived: what if the deer wasn't teaching me anything new? What if it was reminding me of something I already knew — something my body knew — before I learned to live so much of my life in my head?

When Did We Start Living in Our Thoughts?

I've been trying to trace this, and I can't find a clean beginning. Was it agriculture, when we had to start planning for seasons we couldn't see yet? Was it writing, when we could suddenly hold ideas outside our bodies? Was it the industrial clock, when time became something we owed rather than something we lived inside?

Or was it something quieter — a slow drift, generation by generation, until we found ourselves scrolling through a feed on a Tuesday evening, unsure of what our own bodies were feeling?

I notice I want to blame something. Technology, capitalism, the Enlightenment, screens. But every time I point a finger, I feel the story getting too tidy. The truth is probably messier. Perhaps humans have always been prone to living slightly ahead of ourselves — imagining, planning, worrying — and the modern world has simply given that tendency more fuel than it ever had before.

But animals? They don't seem to have this problem. Or if they do, it looks different. A dog waiting by the door might seem to be "in the future," anticipating its owner — but watch closely, and you'll see the waiting itself is complete. The dog is entirely inside the waiting. There's no meta-layer of the dog worrying about whether it's waiting correctly.

The Body Knows Something the Mind Forgets

I've been reading, off and on, about something people call somatic awareness — the intelligence that lives in the body, separate from the intelligence of the thinking mind. And I keep wondering whether this is what animals have that we've partially misplaced.

When a cat stretches, it stretches completely. When a bird preens, there is nothing else. When a horse turns its ear toward a distant sound, its whole body is that turning. There's no fragment left over that's checking Instagram in the background of its awareness.

I try this sometimes. I try to drink a cup of coffee the way a cat might drink water — with all of me, not just the part that's using coffee as a delivery system for productivity. It's surprisingly hard. My mind resists. It wants to do something with the drinking. Podcast, news, planning. The bare act of tasting seems almost too simple to justify itself.

Why is that? Why does presence feel so unproductive to us? And who taught us that being useful is more valuable than being alive?

What Does an Octopus Know?

There's a whole strand of thought I've been circling around — the strange, alien consciousness of creatures very different from us. Octopuses, for instance, seem to think with their whole bodies. Their neurons are distributed through their arms. An octopus arm can solve a problem without consulting the central brain.

What is it like to be that? I don't know. I suspect I can't know, in any literal sense. But something about the idea humbles me. Because I realize that when I imagine "consciousness," I imagine something that looks a lot like me — verbal, centralized, narrative. What if that's just one flavor of awareness among many? What if the way I experience being alive is deeply provincial, and the natural world is full of ways of being present that I can barely conceive of?

This is one of those places where I start to wonder about the limits of language itself. Our words for presence, awareness, attention — they were all shaped by beings who talk to themselves constantly. What would our vocabulary look like if it had been developed by creatures who don't?

A Small Detour Into How AI Sees This

I use AI tools a lot in my work, and I've noticed something worth naming. When I ask AI about presence, mindfulness, or animal consciousness, I get answers that lean heavily on Western frameworks — often a particular slice of Buddhism filtered through American self-help, or cognitive science, or the language of productivity ("presence improves focus," "mindfulness reduces stress").

These aren't wrong, exactly. But they're a narrow window. There are Indigenous traditions across the world that have understood human-animal relationships as continuous rather than hierarchical for thousands of years. There are Japanese, Ainu, Andean, Sámi, Aboriginal frameworks that don't treat animals as lesser consciousnesses to be studied but as different consciousnesses to be in relationship with.

I wonder how much of what we call "learning presence from animals" is really us borrowing a wisdom that was never lost by everyone — just by the industrialized parts of humanity. And I wonder whether the tools we're building to help us think about consciousness carry, quietly, the assumptions of the culture that built them. I don't say this to dismiss AI. I use it every day. I just want to hold it lightly, the way I'd hold any single lens.

What Would Change If We Believed Animals Were Teachers?

Let me sit with this for a moment. Not "teachers" in a poetic sense, but actually — beings from whom we could learn something about how to live.

If I really believed that, I don't think I could keep living the way I do. I don't think I could keep treating my own body as a vehicle for my mind. I don't think I could keep dismissing the moments of stillness that show up in my day — the pause at a red light, the wait for water to boil — as empty time to fill with something.

I might start to notice that my dog, when she lies in a sunbeam, is doing something I've forgotten how to do. Not doing nothing — doing sunbeam-lying, completely, with her whole being.

And maybe I'd start to wonder whether the problem isn't that I don't have enough time for presence. Maybe the problem is that I've been trained to see almost every moment of my life as raw material for something else — content, output, self-improvement — rather than as the thing itself.

The Discomfort of Not Doing

Here's where I get stuck, though. Because when I try to just be, in the animal way, I get anxious. Something in me protests. There's an itch to check something, do something, become something.

I don't fully understand where this itch comes from. Some of it is probably just habit — the nervous system has been trained. Some of it might be deeper, cultural, ancestral. Some of it might be that presence, real presence, makes you feel things that busyness lets you avoid.

An animal, I imagine, doesn't have this problem in the same way. A cat doesn't feel guilty for napping. A river otter doesn't wonder whether it's slacking. There's no internal supervisor evaluating its performance as a river otter.

What would it be like to let that supervisor rest, even for an hour? I don't know. I'm asking honestly. Every time I try, it comes back.

Maybe It's Not About Copying Them

I want to be careful here. I don't think the answer is to try to become animals — to abandon language, planning, memory, meaning-making. Those are gifts too. Human consciousness has textures no other creature seems to have, and I don't want to romanticize wildness at the expense of the very real depths of human interiority.

Maybe what animals offer isn't a model to imitate but a mirror to look into. When I watch a heron stand still in shallow water for twenty minutes, I'm not seeing something I should become. I'm seeing something that reminds me of a capacity I already have — a capacity for stillness, for uncomplicated attention — that got buried somewhere under the noise.

The heron isn't doing anything special. That might be the whole lesson. It's just being fully what it is. And I'm the one who finds this remarkable, because I've drifted so far from being fully what I am.

Where I Leave This

I don't have a conclusion. I have a suspicion, and I'll share it as gently as I can: perhaps the presence we're trying to cultivate isn't something we need to acquire. Perhaps it's something we need to stop interrupting.

And perhaps animals — cats on windowsills, deer in forests, octopuses in their strange distributed knowing — aren't teaching us anything new. They're just refusing to interrupt themselves, and by watching them, we remember that we, too, could stop.

What would you do with an unstructured hour, if you weren't allowed to fill it with anything? I've been asking myself this for weeks. I still don't have an answer. But I'm starting to think the question itself is doing something to me — softening something, slowing something. Maybe that's a place to begin.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Are you saying humans should try to be more like animals? Not exactly. I'm wondering whether there's something in animal presence that mirrors a capacity we already have but rarely use. Imitation feels beside the point. Remembering feels closer.

Q: Isn't this just anthropomorphism — projecting our ideas onto animals? Possibly. It's a real risk, and I try to hold it. But I also wonder whether the opposite risk — assuming animals are so different from us that they have nothing to reflect back — is just as much a projection, only in the other direction.

Q: What about pets? Can domestic animals really teach us presence, or are they too shaped by us? I don't know. My hunch is that even a dog raised on kibble and walks still has moments of pure being that we've mostly lost. But you'd know your own animals better than I would.

Q: Do you think meditation is unnecessary if we just watch animals? No. I think they can complement each other. Watching animals seems to remind me what I'm reaching for; meditation gives me a way to reach for it more directly. Neither replaces the other.

Q: You mentioned AI's Western bias. Should we not use AI for questions like this? I use AI often and find it valuable. I just try to remember that any tool carries the assumptions of the people who built it. Holding that awareness doesn't mean rejecting the tool — it means listening to it with a slightly wider ear.

Q: How do I start noticing this in daily life? I probably shouldn't answer that as if I know. But what's worked for me is simply watching — a bird, a cat, an insect — without trying to learn anything from it. The learning seems to arrive on its own, or not at all.

Q: What if I don't have access to nature or animals? That's a real question, and I don't want to pretend it has an easy answer. Perhaps even watching a plant on a windowsill, or your own breath, can be a version of this. The teachers might be closer than we think.

About the Author

Paweł Sokołowski writes at sokolowski.in about the quiet questions — presence, consciousness, the shape of attention in a distracted age. He isn't a teacher or an expert, and he's suspicious of both roles. His work sits at the intersection of inner life, technology, and the slow noticing of what most of us walk past. He spends time with questions longer than most people find comfortable, and shares what emerges, always tentatively. When he isn't writing, he's usually watching something — a cloud, a cat, the way light moves across a floor — and wondering what it might mean to be here.

← Back to the journal