Translation:The animal does not think, the animal eats.
In the US, this phrasing would only be used by a philosopher. In ordinary discourse, one would say "animals don't think, animals eat". If, in Italy, one would make that statement in the singular, referring to "the animal" then a proper translation is to switch it to the plural when translating to English.
I'd agree that the... is it indefinite?... version in English is more correct, except if we're talking about a specific animal, e.g. in a book. Even then, it would be weird to say "animal" unless in certain circumstances: "The wolf comes to the clearing. It looks around for threats. Seeing none, the animal does not think, but starts to eat." That kind of thing. So both versions should be allowed for this, since by stating the natural English version (with plurals) you show that you understand the sense of the sentence.