Different in degree or kind (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, November 01, 2013, 04:39 (3821 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw;There is scarcely anything in the above paragraph that can't be applied to our fellow creatures. They can certainly think beyond what their senses perceive, because they plan for the future, remember the past, and can work out strategies for coping with their enemies. Our own imagination of course stretches way beyond our needs, but I would say that our art, philosophy, literature, music etc. are the result of our self-awareness, which is unquestionably a degree of consciousness far, far beyond that of other beings.-I cannot understand that your statement has any depth of understanding. You must be trying to needle me. What a preposterous argument. Sure squirrels plan instinctively for the future by storing nuts. My horses remember the past because they have learned their training. Who trained them? Not themselves. And then to propose that selfawareness leads to aesthetics and artistic presentation is based on what reearch?-
> dhw: However, I'd hesitate to draw any conclusions from this ... I still see no reason to assume that we are anything but descendants from earlier primates. -There is no conclusion you can draw. We are similar to the earlier hominins, but they are light years in advance from the apes and monkeys. In tool use we may be closer to corvids.-
> dhw: If we take language to be a means of communication, then we can say that ours is far more complex than those of our fellow creatures ... but that means degree, not kind. It could only be kind if we insisted on a definition of language that restricted it to human language!-Our language capacity is not duplicated in any way by animals. It allows us the complicated thought and philosophy we practice. And to what language of animals do your refer that in any way is like ours? Horses nicker, neigh and snort. Please interpret. I can interpret nicker. It means notice me, I'm noticing you. That thought is really deep isn't it?-> dhw: Memory into planning is essential if non-humans are to survive. Does anyone seriously think that adults don't teach their young in the animal world?-Of course they do. We call it instinct. Very rudimentary-> dhw: Empathy into morality is tricky, since it's difficult to separate morality from what is deemed to be good for society ... whether human or animal. But there are many cases of "love" and sacrifice between members of the same species, and even between domestic animals and their owners.-Of course there is. I don't see where that thought goes. -> dhw: In my view we take far too much for granted, and the approach that emphasizes difference in kind risks engendering the same insensitivity (lack of empathy) towards our fellow animals as towards fellow humans who are also in some way "different" from ourselves.-I always knew you were a bleeding heart liberal. I am very sensitive toward all animals even though, perish the thought, I know I am different in kind. The Bible carefully tells me I have a responsibility having dominion over all animals and plants. I never kill lightly, but I must kill all copperheads around the ranch to protect my dog. I kill hornet nests. Susan is very sensitive to their sting. I kill scorpions. Their sting is 24 hours of hurt. I have the human ability to undertstnd and make those choices. I imagine you do also, but that makes you a killer like I am.-You are not an african ape like Dawkins proclaimed, but you are sounding like Dawkins, and your real brain deserves better than that.