Final answer:
The contrast between idealist/mentalist and materialist perspectives is one of belief in spiritual substance versus solely material substance. Without specific details on Harris' study of pigs, one can only speculate the alignment with either perspective, but a strictly physical analysis of pigs would be materialistic.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question asks to contrast the perspectives of idealist/mentalist and materialist. Idealists, such as Plato and Descartes, believe in the primacy of the mind or spirit, asserting that reality fundamentally consists of mental substances or is entirely spiritual. Materialists like Thomas Hobbes, on the other hand, hold that only physical matter exists and denies the existence of any kind of spirit or mind separate from the material world. Materialism is further explained by philosophers like Charles Hartshorne, who states that pervasive processes in nature do not involve psychical functions. This aligns with Marxist empirical philosophy, too, which puts emphasis on the physical reality that can be sensed without emotional interference. In the case of Harris' study of pigs, without knowing the details of the study, it would be difficult to ascertain whether his approach is materialistic or idealist. However, if his study treats pigs as purely physical entities without attributing mental or emotional processes to them, it would align with a materialistic perspective.