Animal Minds (Animals)

by David Turell @, Sunday, June 26, 2011, 06:03 (4682 days ago) @ dhw

I do not agree that the basic animal instincts are a tiny portion of what we humans are. On the contrary, I believe they are a huge portion of what we are, and are fundamental to our existence and our behaviour. Can you honestly claim that sex, family life, social relationships, education, home, the need for food, protection against climate, other species and our own species are "tiny" matters? -You are a romantic at heart. This of course drives what you have written as an author. The paragraph above anthropomorphizes animals. Yes, they worry about food to eat, shelter against enemies and storms. But 'family'. My dog just tried to have sex with his Mother the other day. Animals worry about education, social relationships and other human concerns. No! We do have their basic instincts, but they are very basic in us. Our lives are much more involved. Food and shelter are easy today for us. Not for the hunter-gatherers, but we are way beyond that due to our huge brain and its capacities. 
 
> The question that really intrigues me, however, is exactly WHY it is so important to you to establish that humans are different in kind from other animals. You believe that evolution happened ... in other words, that we are directly descended from other animals. You acknowledge, though you minimalize, the common ground between us and them. You use terms like "more complex" and "more capable" ... both of which are comparatives, and hence terms of degree and not of kind. So why does the question of kind v. degree actually matter?-Because I believe that we are different in kind, not degree, and that is one of my concepts of a proof of God. There is no reason we developed as we have in our cognitive ability. Chimps and other apes have survived in evolution without those extra abilities for six million years since we split off. Why should our line have progressed as we have? It was not required as an adaptation to the pressures of survival. We have gone way beyond survival. If we accept the idea that threatened survival drives the adaptations of evolution, then why US? There is no good reason under Darwinian concepts. Or any other theories for that matter. I'll agree that we differe in degree, but it is such a huge degree, and not a required degree, that I must conclude that we are different in kind.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum