Different in degree or kind (Introduction)

by David Turell , Sunday, November 10, 2013, 19:31 (4031 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw:I began reading, then skimmed, and am now commenting on this muddled argument only out of respect for you, David. Not having read Sullivan, I can only go by what Dr Tovey tells us, but he explicitly condemns Sullivan for his "scientific failings", -I wanted you to see his discussion to see how problematic the animal studies are. I should have warned you to skim. I admit I skimmed alot also. I think some of his reinterpretation of studies I have seen such as orangutan travel warnings shows how much anthropomorphizing thought goes into the analyses by the scientists who have trouble clearing our their humanizing tendencies in there analyses. This consideration is key in determining 'degree or kind'. -We both know the gap is vast. Torley's (correct spelling) analyses try to correct the overly optimistic interpretations of mental capacity.-> 
> dhw: Does that mean that Sullivan and the dozen prominent neuroscientists are guilty of "scientific failings"?-We must interpret Torley as a theist. He is on my side of the debate, but as I analyze his interpretations they made me see the possible way of interpretating animal behavior in a 'less mental' way.
> 
> dhw: TOVEY: neuroscientists customarily distinguish between two distinct kinds of consciousness: primary consciousness (or the moment-to-moment awareness of sensory experiences and internal feelings such as emotions) and higher-order consciousness (also called "self-awareness")[/i] ...]
> 
> dhw: His "discontinuity" is two extreme levels. We humans operate on both, but that doesn't mean there's nothing in between! Even Tovey later admits that some organisms (he restricts them to mammals and birds) have a degree of "higher order consciousness".-The key is not the discontinuity but the emphasis on self-awareness, something you have continuously heard from me. That intrapective aspect of humans, the animals do not have at all. That alone is a major gap. Adler makes much of it.-> dhw: Torley: Nevertheless, a good case can be made for the view that mentally speaking, the human being is an animal like no other. [/i]
> 
> dhw: Yes of course, and a good case can be made for the view that mentally speaking the human being has many degrees more consciousness than the organisms from which he is descended, and that is what makes him an animal like no other. We are getting nowhere.-We are somewhere. How many degrees of difference do you need before 'man is an animal like no other' to then iterpret as a difference in kind? Since we know the vast degrees of difference, I think your position is untenable.