Abstract
Interior design has traditionally prioritised human experiences, often neglecting ecological and nonhuman perspectives on interiority. This anthropocentric focus limits the discipline's ability to address the spatial and sensory needs of nonhuman persons, including teleost fishes. It overlooks interiority as a universal and relational phenomenon shared by all living beings. This research challenges these boundaries by proposing a biosemiotic framework that integrates the body, interiority, and inhabitation as interdependent constructs shaped by physiological, mental, and environmental interactions. By developing Jakob von Uexküll's (1982) biosemiotic schema, the study investigates the sentient experiences of teleost fishes to establish interiority as a capability inherent in all life forms. It argues that interiority emerges not from constructed spaces but as an affective state shaped by sensory perceptions, environmental affordances, and the organism’s internal state. The case study on Betta splendens demonstrates that fishes exhibit spatial awareness, sensory agency, and dwelling behaviours, which underscores their capacity for interiority. This research extends the theoretical foundations of interior design by framing interiority as a shared ecological and physiological process rather than an exclusively human construct. It advocates for inclusive design practices that consider the lived experiences of nonhuman persons by challenging designers to create environments that foster well-being across species. By broadening interior design's scope, this study contributes to a more ethical and ecologically attuned approach to designing for inhabitation.
Publication Date
7-31-2025
References
Andrews, K. (2020). The animal mind: An introduction to the philosophy of animal cognition (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Andrews, K. (2024). "All animals are conscious": Shifting the null hypothesis in consciousness science. Mind & Language, 2024, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12498
Ashley, P. J. (2007). Fish welfare: Current issues in aquaculture. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 104(3–4), 199–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.09.001
Atterton, P. (2011). Levinas and our moral responsibility toward other animals. Inquiry, 54(6), 633–649. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2011.628186
Blackett, T., Marsh, S., Groves, G., Morgan, A., Whittaker M., & Morgan, D. (2020). Corefundamental standard of practice for captive wild animals. Wild Welfare.
Brown, C. (2015). Fish intelligence, sentience and ethics. Animal cognition, 18(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-014-0761-0
Cabe, P. A. (2019). All perception engages the tensegrity-based haptic medium. Ecological Psychology, 31(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2018.1526037
Chalmers, D. J. (1996). The conscious mind: In search of fundamental theory. Oxford University Press.
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3328150
Delon, N. (2023). Relational nonhuman personhood. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 61(4), 569–587. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjp.12537
Englund, M. D., & Cronin, K. A. (2023). Choice, control, and animal welfare: Definitions and essential inquiries to advance animal welfare science. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 10, Article 1250251.
Feldenkrais, M. (2010). Bodily expressions (T. Hanna, Trans.). In E. Beringer (Ed.), Embodied wisdom: The collected papers of Moshe Feldenkrais (pp. 3–26).North Atlantic Books. (Original work published 1964)
Fiol, D. F., & Kültz, D. (2007). Osmotic stress sensing and signaling in fishes. The FEBS Journal, 274(22), 5790–5798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-4658.2007.06099.x
Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing (pp. 67–82). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hale, M. E. (2021). Evolution of touch and proprioception of the limbs: Insights from fish and humans. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 71, 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2021.08.009
Haraway, D. (2006). Encounters with companion species: Entangling dogs, baboons, philosophers, and biologists. Configurations, 14(1–2),97–114. https://doi.org/10.1353/con.0.0002
Hardy, A. R., Steinworth, B. M., & Hale, M. E. (2016). Touch sensation by pectoral fins of the catfish Pimelodus pictus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 283(1824), Article 20152652. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.2652
Håstein, T., Scarfe, A. D., & Lund, V. L. (2005). Science-based assessment of welfare: Aquatic animals. Revue Scientifique et Technique-Office International des Epizooties, 24(2), 529–547. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16358506/
Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The social logic of space. Cambridge University Press.
Ionescu, V. (2018). The interior as interiority. Palgrave Communications, 4, Article 33, 1–5.https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0088-6
Jaroš, F., & Brentari, C. (2022). Organisms as subjects: Jakob von Uexküll and Adolf Portmann on the autonomy of living beings and anthropological difference. History and philosophy of the life sciences, 44(3), Article 36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-022-00518-7
Kasumyan, A. O. (2004). The vestibular system and sense of equilibrium in fish. Journal of Ichthyology, 44(2), S224–S268.
Kelly, A. H., & Lezaun, J. (2017). The wild indoors: Room-spaces of scientific inquiry. Cultural Anthropology, 32(3), 367–398. https://doi.org/10.14506/ca32.3.06
Königk, R. (2010). Interior design as architecture's 'Other' [Unpublished master's thesis]. University of Pretoria.
Königk, R. (2015). An imaginal interpretation of interior design's methods of cultural production: towards a strategy for constructing meaning [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Pretoria.
Lambert, H., Cornish, A., Elwin, A., & D'Cruze, N. (2022). A kettle of fish: A review of the scientific literature for evidence of fish sentience. Animals, 12, 1–13, Article 1182. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12091182
Littlewood, K. E., Heslop, M. V., & Cobb, M. L. (2023). The agency domain and behavioural interactions: Assessing positive animal welfare using the Five Domains Model. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 10, Article 1284869. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1284869
Luchiari, A. C. (2016). How Betta splendens finds its way. Behavioural Processes, 124, 47–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.11.021
McCarthy, C. (2005). Toward a definition of interiority. Space and Culture, 8(2), 112–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331205275020
Mellor, D. J., Hunt, S., & Gusset, M. (Eds.). (2015). Caring for wildlife: The world zoo and aquarium animal welfare strategy. World Association of Zoos and Aquariums.
Oldfield, R. G., & Murphy, E. K. (2024). Life in a fishbowl: Space and environmental enrichment affect behaviour of Betta splendens. Animal Welfare, 33. https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2024.1
Parker, A., & Loo, S. (2022). Counterpointing care: Performing with fungi in three (in)different acts. Performance Research: A Journal for the Performing Arts, 27(6–7), 241–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/13528165.2022.2198872
Partan, S., & Marler, P. (2002). The Umwelt and its relevance to animal communication: Introduction to special issue. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 116(2), 116–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.116.2.116
Petit, B. C. (2019). From interior to interiority: Locating key historical moments in the relationship between spaces and individuals. Interiority, 2(2), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v2i2.52
Pimlott, M. (2018). Interiority and the conditions of interior. Interiority, 1(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v1i1.5
Pleeging, C. C. F., & Moons, C. P. H. (2017). Potential welfare issues of the Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens) at the retailer and in the hobbyist aquarium. Vlaams Diergeneeskundig Tijdschrift, 86(4), 213–223.https://doi.org/10.21825/vdt.v86i4.16182
Rodríguez, F., Quintero, B., Amores, L., Madrid, D., Salas-Peña, C., & Salas, C. (2021). Spatial cognition in teleost fish: Strategies and mechanisms. Animals, 11(8), Article 2271. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11082271
Rose, J. D. (2007). Anthropomorphism and 'mental welfare' of fishes. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 75(2), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.3354/dao075139
Safina, C. (2024). Fish farming and beyond: Moral reckoning required. Science Advances, 10, 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adt5436
Sengke, M. C., & Mustikawati, T. (2019). The visual mechanisms of seeing in experiencing the interior. Interiority, 2(2), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v2i2.67
Seth, A. K. (2013). Interoceptive inference, emotion, and the embodied self. Trends in cognitive sciences, 17(11), 565–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.09.007
Sneddon, L. U. (2019). Evolution of nociception and pain: Evidence from fish models. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 374(1785). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0290
Späth, M. (1974). On the processing of the mechanical and thermal Information of the receptors in the fish skin. In Symposium mechanoreception. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-01719-6_18
Sullivan, M. E. (2014). Fishing for answers: Improving welfare for aquarium fish [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Western Australia.
Suryantini, R., Saginatari, D. P., & Yatmo, Y. A. (2022). Deep interior: Sensorial encounters of Orang Suku Laut with the sea. Interiority, 22(2), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v5i2.232
Taylor, M., & Preston, J. (Eds.). (2006). Proximities. In INTIMUS: Interior design theory reader (pp. 6–13). Wiley & Sons.
Timberlake, W. (2002). Constructing animal cognition. In M. Bekoff, C. Allen, & G. M. Burghardt (Eds.), The cognitive animal: Empirical and theoretical perspectives on animal cognition (pp. 105–113). The MIT Press.
Tønnessen, M. (2009). Umwelt transitions: Uexküll and environmental change. Biosemiotics, 2, 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-008-9036-y
Von Uexküll, J. (1982). The theory of meaning. Mouton Publishers.
Watson, C. A., DiMaggio, M., Hill, J. E., Tuckett, Q. M., & Yanong, R. P. (2019). Evolution, culture, and care for Betta splendens. EDIS, 2019(2). https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-fa212-2019
Wheeler, W. (2010). Delectable creatures and the fundamental reality of metaphor: Biosemiotics and animal mind. Biosemiotics, 3,277–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-010-9076-y
Woodruff, M. L. (2018). Sentience in fishes: More on the evidence. Animal Sentience, 13(16).https://doi.org/10.51291/2377-7478.1313
Yessi. (n.d.). Betta fish for sale in small transparent bottle. Also known as ikan cupang. [Photograph]. Adobe Stock.
Young, B. (2023). Interiority and agency: Exploring self in context with others in the act of creation. Interiority, 6(2), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v6i2.272
Yurttaş, N. B., & Altuncu, D. (2022). New possibilities of living together in post-humanist society: Interior and furniture design for pets. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 3(3), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2022.v3i3058
Submitted Date
2024-08-16
Accepted Date
2025-03-09
First Page
153
Last Page
178
Recommended Citation
Königk, R. (2025). Animal Interiority: Sentience and Spatial Perception. Interiority, 8 (2), 153-178. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v8i2.1116
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Author(s) retain the copyright of articles published in this journal, with first publication rights granted to Interiority.
