Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Impenitent · Feb 11, 2004, 11:49 pm

that's exactly how white europe justified their conquest of the world... blacks and reds and yellows can't have advanced brains, they don't know european logic and reason or religion

chicagoastronomer · Feb 13, 2004, 03:09 am

What makes us human is our retarded thinking that devrives pleasure from the killing and destruction of another with great glee.

Someone said it best before...Nothing destroys like man can. We are a hemmoroid on the ass of the universe.

We all should be proud of ourselves.

bmaestro · Feb 15, 2004, 04:55 pm

yeah, cynicism...

how can we know that animals can't expand on knowlege? its been shown that dolphins have a more advanced and complex language than humans, meaning that it had to have evolved somehow. (does anyone know if anyone has ever done research into early-childhood development of dolphins? do they learn language, meaning its cultural?)

has anyone here read daniel quinn's book ishmael? he talks about the advent of agriculture and the division of labor that resulted from it. he basically says that the point when we stopped being hunter gatherers and could focus on more than simply surviving was the point that we truely became human. i definitely agree with this. i think our cultures ability to meet the needs of everyone while still having time to develop literature and science is what makes us human.

one weird though on this... quinn points out in his book that agriculture started up worldwide, in many different independent cultures, all at about the same time. what happened? what was in the air that inspired cultures around the world to all divide labor simultaneously? Why were we all infused with our humanity?

-B

Impenitent · Feb 16, 2004, 12:39 pm

ishmael is a great example of the anthropomorphic fallacy...
we already did talking monkeys... Dr. Zira remember?

damnrad · Feb 16, 2004, 01:10 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (makeshiftpatriot,)
This is something I got to thinking about after reading some evolution debates in another forum here. What is that essence that makes us human? do we have some level of higher consciousness than other creatures?

Another thought to ponder: Evolutionary Psychologists (I know, its obscure), say that the enlarged brain was created by sexual selection, that is to say, the brain is an extravagance that was blown out of proportion simply by mate choice ("wow, that dude made a tool, and he can draw shit on the walls...")

Personally i think its this large brain and its capacities for abstraction of everything that makes us human. I mean, we get wrapped up so much in abstractions of reality, (math, economics, to name a couple), and then base our whole culture on it. what do you all think about this?

-b<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I agree that it is the brain and its capacity for sentience that makes the difference. But that raises the question of whether or not the brains of some other organisms are not just as complex, or at least complex enough -- whether their sentience should be respected in the same ways that human sentience is. Should we not just save the whales but also respect their individual rights? If so, what is the limit of such respect -- where do we draw the line? I suspect that at least some species of marine mammals and some species of other apes should be given the benefit of the doubt in this respect.

damnrad · Feb 16, 2004, 01:12 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
I'll say it was the correct sequence of nucleotide chains which makes us human.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Do you mean by the processes they initiate or by definition? Is it the DNA that's important, or what it can lead to?

Sasha · Feb 16, 2004, 01:38 pm

Part of the answer is our hands, being able to manipulate things better than others..eg dolphins, allows us to develop as a society and use our intelect

**Pooeypants** · Feb 16, 2004, 02:37 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (damnrad,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
I'll say it was the correct sequence of nucleotide chains which makes us human.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Do you mean by the processes they initiate or by definition? Is it the DNA that's important, or what it can lead to?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
I mean the instincts and behaviours we inherit. Although I'd like to know how basic instincts are passed on myself as well.

bmaestro · Feb 16, 2004, 05:47 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
ishmael is a great example of the anthropomorphic fallacy...
we already did talking monkeys... Dr. Zira remember?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

could someone briefly explain to me what the anthropomorphic fallacy is? I'm not familiar with the term, and if it involves one of my favorite books and the word fallacy, i think that this greatly concerns me

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
I mean the instincts and behaviours we inherit. Although I'd like to know how basic instincts are passed on myself as well.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I think that a lot of what makes us human is beyond the genetics that dictate instinct and behavior, but this gets into the whole nature vs. nurture debate.

However, at a strict biological definition, members of a species are the only ones that can reproduce with eachother successfully (correct me if this is wrong). Because we can't successfully mate with apes, despite the similarities in their genes, this makes us distinctly different than them. So on this level, it is genetic. If this is true though, why has our definition of human changed over history? indo-europeans took over europe and part of asia because the former inhabitants weren't human to them. whites captured and sold african slaves as "beasts of burden" because they lacked humanity in their eyes. But as thomas jefferson clearly demonstrated, biologically whites and african slaves were of the same species. I guess my question is, is there anything that can explain the essence of that social construct that tells us something is human?

-b

Impenitent · Feb 17, 2004, 12:37 am

an·thro·po·mor·phism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nthr-p-môrfzm)
n.
Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena.

fal·la·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fl-s)
n. pl. fal·la·cies
A false notion.
A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference.
Incorrectness of reasoning or belief; erroneousness.
The quality of being deceptive.

it is committing an error in reasoning by positing human characteristics on non human things, e.g. monkeys

ishmael is fiction based on an error...

bmaestro · Feb 17, 2004, 01:21 am

ok, the whole talking monkey thing is really not what that book is about. It could just as well be a conversation between some guy and an anthropology professor. The fiction of the book is that context, which I agree is unrealistic. However, the conversation that takes place (and frankly I forget that ishmael is even a monkey at points when i read it), is a completely valid explanation for the rise of humans, and it makes some excellent points.

I honestly believe that some sort of humanity came along with that spark that triggered the invention of our current culture. I honestly do not believe that apes can talk to men.

-B

Impenitent · Feb 17, 2004, 01:56 am

the purpose of the book is to devalue humans and elevate the moral status of animals...

Poetic_Justice · Feb 19, 2004, 02:51 am

What makes us human?

How about I stretch this to include, what makes us sentient?

Well, I think it is our ability to use the concept of "Why?" Such a concept is not needed by anything which merely needs survival. It is an extra, something that spurs us on past basic survivaly and on to our sentience.

So what makes us human? why...

shunyadragon · Feb 22, 2004, 06:50 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
the purpose of the book is to devalue humans and elevate the moral status of animals...<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

The devaluing behavior of humans provided ample support for elevating the moral status of animals long before the book was writen.

shunyadragon · Feb 22, 2004, 07:00 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Poetic_Justice,)
What makes us human?

How about I stretch this to include, what makes us sentient?

Well, I think it is our ability to use the concept of "Why?" Such a concept is not needed by anything which merely needs survival. It is an extra, something that spurs us on past basic survivaly and on to our sentience.

So what makes us human? why...<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I think the ability to ask 'Why?' is a valid point, but I think human characteristics can be seen in the more intelligent animals by degree. For example, whales and porpoises have many intelligent abilities including forms of language. They may even ask 'Why?' and we are not able to understand them.

The concept of being able to logically comprehend the past, present and future is important. The earliest known Neanderthals and early humans did have a concept of diviities and the afterlife which may also be an attribute of being human, whether it is true or false. This may be a logical continuation of asking the question 'why?'.

Poetic_Justice · Feb 23, 2004, 02:35 pm

I would say that if any whale, dolhpin, etc. can ask why, we should regard them as sentient...

I would think its virtually unassaultable to say that no other land animals can say why.. .the simple reason being that they dont invent... "why?" leads to invention and innovation, which is measurable even if language is not.

For underwater beings however, their 'invention' may be so different from ours that we cannot recognize it. Because they have no ability to make fire, they are extremely limited in manipulating their environment. So to see their intelligence we may be restricted to language alone. Unless they are able to harness other beings. The harnessing of toher beings would most definitely show intelligence, probably even sentience...

Here's something else I like to say on the what is human topic...

Machines live by logic, animals live by instinct, Humans live by emotion.

So one could also say that irrational, erratic, emotional behaviour is what makes us human

bmaestro · Feb 23, 2004, 04:59 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
I would say that if any whale, dolhpin, etc. can ask why, we should regard them as sentient...<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

On what psychological level should we identify with these animals then? Should we respect sentience even if its not human sentience? Should our definition of what should be respected and brought into our "humanity," if you will, extend to any animal with the capacity for asking why and explaining their world? If not, theres something HUMAN about us that differentiates us from everything else, which brings me to this...

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Machines live by logic, animals live by instinct, Humans live by emotion.

So one could also say that irrational, erratic, emotional behaviour is what makes us human <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

This is an excellent point, I just don't see what excludes other possibly sentient animals from having emotion as well, because technically, dolphins have similar physiologies to us, with homones and so on that could easily replicate human emotion.

Another thought to ponder. Humans communicate verbally and with written word. Dolphins communicate vocally as well, but they can't write, as far as we can tell. Does our ability to keep records and know our history make us human?

B

Impenitent · Feb 23, 2004, 05:32 pm

anthropomorphic fallacy...

humans qualities do not appear in animals...

technically any make believe that a dolphin can talk is make believe...

if you extend human qualities to non humans you commit an error in reasoning...

bmaestro · Feb 23, 2004, 08:30 pm

a dolphin obviously can't pronounce human sounds, but they still have a language and it has been studied quite extensively. Its not a falacy if its scientific fact, and its not anthropomorphic if its not human language with human grammar.

B

Impenitent · Feb 23, 2004, 09:35 pm

it is not a scientific fact

it is a fallacy

Feb 11, 2004, 11:49 pm	#21 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	that's exactly how white europe justified their conquest of the world... blacks and reds and yellows can't have advanced brains, they don't know european logic and reason or religion "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Feb 13, 2004, 03:09 am	#22 (permalink) (top)
chicagoastronomer Sedimentary Rock Posts: 22	What makes us human is our retarded thinking that devrives pleasure from the killing and destruction of another with great glee. Someone said it best before...Nothing destroys like man can. We are a hemmoroid on the ass of the universe. We all should be proud of ourselves. <span style='color:blue'>"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars"...</span> Oscar Wilde 1854-1900

Feb 16, 2004, 12:39 pm	#24 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	ishmael is a great example of the anthropomorphic fallacy... we already did talking monkeys... Dr. Zira remember? "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Feb 16, 2004, 01:10 pm	#25 (permalink) (top)
damnrad Igneous Magma Posts: 264	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (makeshiftpatriot,) This is something I got to thinking about after reading some evolution debates in another forum here. What is that essence that makes us human? do we have some level of higher consciousness than other creatures? Another thought to ponder: Evolutionary Psychologists (I know, its obscure), say that the enlarged brain was created by sexual selection, that is to say, the brain is an extravagance that was blown out of proportion simply by mate choice ("wow, that dude made a tool, and he can draw shit on the walls...") Personally i think its this large brain and its capacities for abstraction of everything that makes us human. I mean, we get wrapped up so much in abstractions of reality, (math, economics, to name a couple), and then base our whole culture on it. what do you all think about this? -b<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I agree that it is the brain and its capacity for sentience that makes the difference. But that raises the question of whether or not the brains of some other organisms are not just as complex, or at least complex enough -- whether their sentience should be respected in the same ways that human sentience is. Should we not just save the whales but also respect their individual rights? If so, what is the limit of such respect -- where do we draw the line? I suspect that at least some species of marine mammals and some species of other apes should be given the benefit of the doubt in this respect.

Feb 16, 2004, 01:12 pm	#26 (permalink) (top)
damnrad Igneous Magma Posts: 264	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,) I'll say it was the correct sequence of nucleotide chains which makes us human.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Do you mean by the processes they initiate or by definition? Is it the DNA that's important, or what it can lead to?

Feb 15, 2004, 04:55 pm	#23 (permalink) (top)
bmaestro Molten Ash Posts: 61	yeah, cynicism... how can we know that animals can't expand on knowlege? its been shown that dolphins have a more advanced and complex language than humans, meaning that it had to have evolved somehow. (does anyone know if anyone has ever done research into early-childhood development of dolphins? do they learn language, meaning its cultural?) has anyone here read daniel quinn's book ishmael? he talks about the advent of agriculture and the division of labor that resulted from it. he basically says that the point when we stopped being hunter gatherers and could focus on more than simply surviving was the point that we truely became human. i definitely agree with this. i think our cultures ability to meet the needs of everyone while still having time to develop literature and science is what makes us human. one weird though on this... quinn points out in his book that agriculture started up worldwide, in many different independent cultures, all at about the same time. what happened? what was in the air that inspired cultures around the world to all divide labor simultaneously? Why were we all infused with our humanity? -B

Feb 16, 2004, 01:38 pm	#27 (permalink) (top)
Sasha Molten Ash Posts: 47	Part of the answer is our hands, being able to manipulate things better than others..eg dolphins, allows us to develop as a society and use our intelect

Feb 16, 2004, 02:37 pm	#28 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,609	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (damnrad,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,) I'll say it was the correct sequence of nucleotide chains which makes us human.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Do you mean by the processes they initiate or by definition? Is it the DNA that's important, or what it can lead to?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I mean the instincts and behaviours we inherit. Although I'd like to know how basic instincts are passed on myself as well. War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 16, 2004, 05:47 pm	#29 (permalink) (top)
bmaestro Molten Ash Posts: 61	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,) ishmael is a great example of the anthropomorphic fallacy... we already did talking monkeys... Dr. Zira remember?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> could someone briefly explain to me what the anthropomorphic fallacy is? I'm not familiar with the term, and if it involves one of my favorite books and the word fallacy, i think that this greatly concerns me </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by I mean the instincts and behaviours we inherit. Although I'd like to know how basic instincts are passed on myself as well.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I think that a lot of what makes us human is beyond the genetics that dictate instinct and behavior, but this gets into the whole nature vs. nurture debate. However, at a strict biological definition, members of a species are the only ones that can reproduce with eachother successfully (correct me if this is wrong). Because we can't successfully mate with apes, despite the similarities in their genes, this makes us distinctly different than them. So on this level, it is genetic. If this is true though, why has our definition of human changed over history? indo-europeans took over europe and part of asia because the former inhabitants weren't human to them. whites captured and sold african slaves as "beasts of burden" because they lacked humanity in their eyes. But as thomas jefferson clearly demonstrated, biologically whites and african slaves were of the same species. I guess my question is, is there anything that can explain the essence of that social construct that tells us something is human? -b

Feb 17, 2004, 12:37 am	#30 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	an·thro·po·mor·phism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nthr-p-môrfzm) n. Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena. fal·la·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fl-s) n. pl. fal·la·cies A false notion. A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference. Incorrectness of reasoning or belief; erroneousness. The quality of being deceptive. it is committing an error in reasoning by positing human characteristics on non human things, e.g. monkeys ishmael is fiction based on an error... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Feb 17, 2004, 01:21 am	#31 (permalink) (top)
bmaestro Molten Ash Posts: 61	ok, the whole talking monkey thing is really not what that book is about. It could just as well be a conversation between some guy and an anthropology professor. The fiction of the book is that context, which I agree is unrealistic. However, the conversation that takes place (and frankly I forget that ishmael is even a monkey at points when i read it), is a completely valid explanation for the rise of humans, and it makes some excellent points. I honestly believe that some sort of humanity came along with that spark that triggered the invention of our current culture. I honestly do not believe that apes can talk to men. -B

Feb 17, 2004, 01:56 am	#32 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	the purpose of the book is to devalue humans and elevate the moral status of animals... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Feb 19, 2004, 02:51 am	#33 (permalink) (top)
Poetic_Justice Igneous Magma Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 209	What makes us human? How about I stretch this to include, what makes us sentient? Well, I think it is our ability to use the concept of "Why?" Such a concept is not needed by anything which merely needs survival. It is an extra, something that spurs us on past basic survivaly and on to our sentience. So what makes us human? why...

Feb 22, 2004, 06:50 pm	#34 (permalink) (top)
shunyadragon Hot Lava Location: Hillsborough, NC Posts: 940	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,) the purpose of the book is to devalue humans and elevate the moral status of animals...<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> The devaluing behavior of humans provided ample support for elevating the moral status of animals long before the book was writen. The empty cup contains the most Frank A Doonan Turn weapons into peace and friendship with gifts of jade-silk www.shunyadragon.com I do not know, therefore I think . . .

Feb 22, 2004, 07:00 pm	#35 (permalink) (top)
shunyadragon Hot Lava Location: Hillsborough, NC Posts: 940	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Poetic_Justice,) What makes us human? How about I stretch this to include, what makes us sentient? Well, I think it is our ability to use the concept of "Why?" Such a concept is not needed by anything which merely needs survival. It is an extra, something that spurs us on past basic survivaly and on to our sentience. So what makes us human? why...<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I think the ability to ask 'Why?' is a valid point, but I think human characteristics can be seen in the more intelligent animals by degree. For example, whales and porpoises have many intelligent abilities including forms of language. They may even ask 'Why?' and we are not able to understand them. The concept of being able to logically comprehend the past, present and future is important. The earliest known Neanderthals and early humans did have a concept of diviities and the afterlife which may also be an attribute of being human, whether it is true or false. This may be a logical continuation of asking the question 'why?'. The empty cup contains the most Frank A Doonan Turn weapons into peace and friendship with gifts of jade-silk www.shunyadragon.com I do not know, therefore I think . . .

Feb 23, 2004, 02:35 pm	#36 (permalink) (top)
Poetic_Justice Igneous Magma Location: Edmonton, Canada Posts: 209	I would say that if any whale, dolhpin, etc. can ask why, we should regard them as sentient... I would think its virtually unassaultable to say that no other land animals can say why.. .the simple reason being that they dont invent... "why?" leads to invention and innovation, which is measurable even if language is not. For underwater beings however, their 'invention' may be so different from ours that we cannot recognize it. Because they have no ability to make fire, they are extremely limited in manipulating their environment. So to see their intelligence we may be restricted to language alone. Unless they are able to harness other beings. The harnessing of toher beings would most definitely show intelligence, probably even sentience... Here's something else I like to say on the what is human topic... Machines live by logic, animals live by instinct, Humans live by emotion. So one could also say that irrational, erratic, emotional behaviour is what makes us human

Feb 23, 2004, 04:59 pm	#37 (permalink) (top)
bmaestro Molten Ash Posts: 61	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by I would say that if any whale, dolhpin, etc. can ask why, we should regard them as sentient...<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> On what psychological level should we identify with these animals then? Should we respect sentience even if its not human sentience? Should our definition of what should be respected and brought into our "humanity," if you will, extend to any animal with the capacity for asking why and explaining their world? If not, theres something HUMAN about us that differentiates us from everything else, which brings me to this... </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by Machines live by logic, animals live by instinct, Humans live by emotion. So one could also say that irrational, erratic, emotional behaviour is what makes us human <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> This is an excellent point, I just don't see what excludes other possibly sentient animals from having emotion as well, because technically, dolphins have similar physiologies to us, with homones and so on that could easily replicate human emotion. Another thought to ponder. Humans communicate verbally and with written word. Dolphins communicate vocally as well, but they can't write, as far as we can tell. Does our ability to keep records and know our history make us human? B

Feb 23, 2004, 05:32 pm	#38 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	anthropomorphic fallacy... humans qualities do not appear in animals... technically any make believe that a dolphin can talk is make believe... if you extend human qualities to non humans you commit an error in reasoning... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Feb 23, 2004, 08:30 pm	#39 (permalink) (top)
bmaestro Molten Ash Posts: 61	a dolphin obviously can't pronounce human sounds, but they still have a language and it has been studied quite extensively. Its not a falacy if its scientific fact, and its not anthropomorphic if its not human language with human grammar. B

Feb 23, 2004, 09:35 pm	#40 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	it is not a scientific fact it is a fallacy "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...