Are humans special or are we nothing more the mere rabbits

[cuppajoe_9]

It seems clear that it is possible that the human brain, its consciousness, separates the human from the animal.

Humans are animals, friend. There is nothing to separate us. Yes, we have much bigger and more powerfull brains than any other animal, but brain size is not what determines kingdom. One could just as easily say that elephants are clearly separated from animals becuase they have much bigger and more powerful noses than any other.

“Surely”? Why? I believe you are speaking genetically. Are we thus limited in responsive form?

Take any category you like. Humans and great apes have much in common in terms of cognative ability, but dolphins and tapeworms have very little in common in that area. Dolphins and tapeworms are, in fact, evolving in oposite directions in that respect (it's to the tapeworm's advantage to be as simple as possible).

The mind is what separates us so dramatically, rather than anything genetic.

P.S. Isn't this a philosophical discussion?

The human mind (or at least the organ that makes it possible) is built by genetics, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. And yes it is a philosophical discussion. We're off topic. It happens.

[byquist]

While animals often naturally care for each other (wasn't there a giant turtle who cared for a baby rhino during the Indonesian tidal wave?), humans additionally have that word "unselfishness" in the dictionary. When people grow in maturity they sometimes enter a phase of life where they direct attention to others, not their own wants and wishes. Charlotte Joko Beck touchs on this "otherness," who, assuming she's still alive, must be over 100. This quest towards yielding self in the service of others in no easy task. Chances are they went through a selfish hellishness on the route to getting there. Don't know that animals strive towards character-transformation, but pets certainly aim to please, are devoted, enjoy treats, and know how to be happy, often more than some of the crabby and complaining humans I've crossed paths with.

[Turk]

If someone can say human is just an animal, then it means they don't believe in anything. Isn't it? No moral, no God because we are animal ha?

I don't believe human is just an animal. That's why i believe in moral, goodness and justice.

Animals can go to jungles.

[Bluebiird]

Many humans have a distinct lack of morals these days. Actually, thet always have. Always fighting over this and that and stealing from each other

[lit_dork]

I think one thing people do too often is try to separate themselves from nature, meaning that they think they are somehow very different or better than animals. It is true that one of humanity's greatest advantages is our higher brain power. We have a written language and we can communicate abstract ideas, like we're doing now. But is this so much better than a cat's ability to see well at night, or a dog's superior senses of hearing and smell? I personally think that humans are only another species of animal, even though we may be at the top of the chain. I mean, if we were so much greater, would we be destroying the world around us?

[optimisticnad]

i have a problem with the title of this thread! why 'mere rabbits?'

[cuppajoe_9]

If someone can say human is just an animal, then it means they don't believe in anything. Isn't it? No moral, no God because we are animal ha?

Oh, non sequiter. Where would philosophical discussion be without you?

[ShoutGrace]

Aside from the obvious logical fallacies, there is no sound argument whatsoever other than the personal inability to research scientific facts, evolutionary trends, genetic information and many of the other types of data that answer the question asked in the thread.

The question asked in the thread was faulty, quite obviously. The title of the thread, “Are humans special or are we nothing more than mere rabbits,” is, in my opinion, and easily answered question, and one that Virgil nailed perfectly.

Special:

- Distinguished by some unusual quality.

- Of a distinct or particular kind or character.
- Being a particular one; particular, individual, or certain.

Human beings are distinct and separate from rabbits, and this is a conclusion I am only to happy to defend.

I can only hope that the ignorance that is presented by the refusal to educate the mass public with facts instead of personal opinions and "divine" ignorance can be curbed and redirected in a scientific and logical direction.

What are you on about? Who said anything about the mass public? Or is Virgil the mass public spokesperson? What does your comment here have to do with the opening question?

I also point out the innate superior humanity complex that is used in the last line of the post.

I’m glad you're doing that, because that was my favourite part.

It is a classic example of a basic logical fallacy and should not even be considered as an intelligent attempt at an argument.

Well, ignoring the monstrous fact that Virgil may not have intended that statement to be an argumentative piece, what exactly is the fallacy?

Moreover, I will be more than happy to entertain any of the authors ideas as to why he/she thinks that humans deserve to be put upon a pedestal when being compared to other animals (as long as they are intelligent and not based on the inability for the person to see a different lateral perspective).

I suppose I’ll have to wait for Virgil on this one. Prithee, where did they say that mankind should be put on a pedestal? That could be where they will go with it, but as it stands didn’t Virgil simply differentiate between mankind and animals?

Fantastic job of anticipating Virgil's inabilities, by the way.

So please tell us your reasons for being led to believe that man is the pinnacle of earthly creation.

More words you’re putting in somebody else’s mouth. I can tell you are an adept, critical reader, and not one to easily project your own thoughts onto another’s.

[Turk]

Oh, non sequiter. Where would philosophical discussion be without you?

My style is not philosophic (because i'm honest and i like to talk clear) but the thing i've told is completely philosophic (because i'm a philosopher from the inside) .

Seriously, as Dostoevski told: "If there's no God everything is permissible". If you say "Humans are just animals" then what's moral? What's law? What's goodness? Every good thing we believe is completely leans on idealistic stuff and God. And your point of view is not so different than Nazi point of view. If you think human is animal then you mean human life has no worth. And as we know from the history this kind of mentality just brought death, famine and vanish to the mankind.

[Scheherazade]

I guess, to be able to answer this question, we need to agree on the definition of 'animal' (which is, I am well aware, something almost impossible).

American Heritage Dictionary states that an animal is 'A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.'. If we agree on this definition, then, no doubt, we are animals.

However, the same dictionary also adds that an animal can be 'An animal organism other than a human, especially a mammal.' So it seems like we are not the only ones who are struggling to decide whether we are animals or not.

I am not sure if human intelligence is enough to declare our species different from other animals. It is also possible to claim that humans were forced to develop intelligence and invent certain things because they were/are so inferior to most animals physically; they would have been extinct by now without those, maybe? Eg, we do not have a fur to protect us from cold so we had to find a way to warm ourselves (hence fire); we are no way good runners compared to many in the animal kingdom so we had to find ways to transport ourselves etc...

As for morality... I think it is good to keep in mind that morality is learned; not something we are born with (still so after thousands of years interestingly) and when left to our devices, we can turn into ugly 'creatures'. I am not an expert, however, I don't think there are many species in the animal kingdom which would kill, conspire, back-stab out of jealousy, greed or simple desire for obtaining pleasure. When 'animals' kill, it is mostly out of a survivial instinct, is it not?

Personaly speaking, by and large, I find 'animals' far more superior to humans, both physically and 'morally', and, there are some rare cases when I would much rather compared to an 'animal' than a 'humanbeing' and would consider it an honour.

[Orionsbelt]

Seriously, as Dostoevski told: "If there's no God everything is permissible". If you say "Humans are just animals" then what's moral? What's law? What's goodness? Every good thing we believe is completely leans on idealistic stuff and God.

I don't think morality is dependant on God. God is mostly just a big club used to beat on those who have not developed some notion of compassion. Interestingly eternal rewards are the same one available here on earth only delayed until a time where you have demonstrated the ablity to go without them. SOmewhat like getting a loan! Certainly Confucius would not agree nor do I doubt anyone in ancient Greece that God is required for morality.

Having said that, you may have something here. The idea of morality, defined as the notion that I should check my biological satisfaction on my own in favor of an ideal, may be one of the clinchers. Mathematics may be another. In the sense that humans have the ability to formulate an ideal. Birds and beavers build. Apes use simple tools and have a social structure. Elephants grieve so some typical "human" behaviors are shared to some degree. No way to test that I can think of. Thanks for all the fish.

[Taliesin]

Humans have the power of abstract thinking. Other animals don't.

[Turk]

I don't think morality is dependant on God. God is mostly just a big club used to beat on those who have not developed some notion of compassion. Interestingly eternal rewards are the same one available here on earth only delayed until a time where you have demonstrated the ablity to go without them. SOmewhat like getting a loan! Certainly Confucius would not agree nor do I doubt anyone in ancient Greece that God is required for morality.

I believe it's certainly dependant to God. If you think opposite then i would like to know your thoughts about morality, goodness and law.

American Heritage Dictionary states that an animal is 'A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.'. If we agree on this definition, then, no doubt, we are animals

This is over-simplisizying the ideas and things. Like Aristo logic. If i would say; "we have 2 arms and monkeys have two arms too then we are monkeys" would it be sensible? You'r doing that right now. We have biological specialities so animals have too, so we are same. Is this logical?

As for morality... I think it is good to keep in mind that morality is learned; not something we are born with (still so after thousands of years interestingly) and when left to our devices, we can turn into ugly 'creatures'. I am not an expert, however, I don't think there are many species in the animal kingdom which would kill, conspire, back-stab out of jealousy, greed or simple desire for obtaining pleasure. When 'animals' kill, it is mostly out of a survivial instinct, is it not?

You clash with urself here, you say we have greed, conspire, we kill, back-stab out of jealousy etc. SO WE HAVE RIGHT OF CHOOSE. But you forget saying we have free will too. An animal have to kill unconsicously. But a human doesn't have to kill, isn't have to be jealous or greedy. If you have strong moral and if you are a true believer it'll protect from this kind od manners. And i really don't understand how we can have stronger moral values if we accept "we are animal"?

At the end, i can clearly say if there's no God there's no meaning in this life too. There's no good and no bad. So racism, killing, thievery etc. shouldn't be crime.

I wonder if since you say you believe we are animal, do you believe in evolution? If you believe it, can you say white race is supreme than black race?

[Virgil]

Wow, this thread has taken off parabolically since I last checked.

I'm not sure I know where to start and I probably won't be able to respond to everyone.

I again I repeat, it depends on how you set up the definitions. You can look at man as being made up of predominantly of carbon and water and yet we are not classified as a rock or a puddle. I will concede that man shares many qualities with animals. But the distinction between man and it's closest similar animal is so vast that we are certainly separate from them. I know I go against the grain of common thinking. So be it. I'm not a common person. The last several hundred years have been an attack on the nobility and genious of man, and perhaps that's what insults me. Perhaps man is not the center of the universe, and perhaps he is. We have yet to find any life form that compares with man, in his ability to think, to create, to build, and to establish systems. I make my living designing and using my human ingenuity, I entertain myself by reading literature created by other men (not animals), and I pass my time by attempting to create myself. I know no other animal that can do any of that. You want to consider yourself an animal, I choose to see you as you truly are, a jackass.

To the person who thought he understood the ancient Greeks, Socrates was condemned and executed on charges he violated the morality established by the gods.

As to those who bring up evolution, it took the wolf, one of the most enduring and crafty of species, 48 million years from where it originally separated from its previos species, and around 13 million years to arrive at its current form. Man at it's origin is perhaps just two million years and homo sapiens, man in its current form, a few hundred thousand years. These are orders of magnitude different, not subtle differences. And when you consider what man has done in the last several thousand years, it is quite evident (mass cities, buildings, airplanes, governments, even go out into space and the moon) to anyone who is not a jackass that we are dealing with something different altogether.

The question asked in the thread was faulty, quite obviously. The title of the thread, “Are humans special or are we nothing more than mere rabbits,” is, in my opinion, and easily answered question, and one that Virgil nailed perfectly.

Yes, that was the question and the implication imbedded in the question is that man is no more than a rabbit.

Aside from the obvious logical fallacies, there is no sound argument whatsoever other than the personal inability to research scientific facts, evolutionary trends, genetic information and many of the other types of data that answer the question asked in the thread.

I maintain your reasoning is illogical by its refusal to see the world in front of your eyes. Do you live in a house with walls and paint or do you live in a rat hole? Do you cook your dinner or do tear at it with mouth? Open your eyes. Education is more than some dumb professor's lectures.

I proudly put man on a pedestal.

[miss tenderness]

Why rabbit?why not ape! Though I think it's inappropriate to compare human,who eats and have sex like animals but also they think,create,build,worship,discover ….etc ,to animals.