I've seen a lot of people debate this, so i want to hear your opinions.
also...are humans the most intelligent species on earth? what do you think?
-
Biologically, most definitely yes.30% Voted for by ennoia, cosmosis, Stand In Girl.
Before exploring whether humans are animals, you have to understand what is meant by the terms you're using.
'Animal' is a word with a certain biological definition. Dictionary.com describes an animal to be "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."
For the bio-linguistically inept amongst us (myself included) a human adheres to all the qualities that are demanded for a thing to be termed an 'animal'. Almost all sensible dictionaries, encyclopaedias and biology text books agree in this aspect of the debate.
However, although, overwhelmingly, a human is most definitely an animal in biological terms, I have come across definitions which loosely claim the biological requirements, then fumblingly tack on the end..."excluding humans."
Linguistically, we often use "animal" to term a creature that is not human, and the definition is exclusively not human because it's easier in conversation. For example, you don't see "Animal Hospital, Excluding Humans" or the RSPCA(EH) "Royal society for the Protection of Animals (Excluding Humans)". (Being British and severely narrow minded I apologise that my analogies are confined to one side of the Atlantic) But yeah.
In spiritual terms, humans are quite often considered not animals, and somehow elevated in this position. This is fair enough, and I can see how someone can be lead to believe this.
What is wrong, however, is mixing the definitions. For example;
Saying that "because, SPIRITUALLY humans are NOT animals, they are therefore BIOLOGICALLY different to animals" (e.g. "for some animals (fruit flies, I think) a natural/human introduced genetic variation causes homosexual behaviour. But genetic homosexuality cannot be true for humans, because ‘they are not animals." You hear this sort of thing a lot. Of course, you cannot claim that *biological* conditions can be different from human to animal, after accepting that biologically; humans are animals, solely because *spiritually/ethically* humans are not animals. (Besides, just because there is reason to believe the "gay gene" exists in other animals, this is NOT reason enough to believe it does not exist in humans, whether they are animals or not. The bad logic being:
A) Homosexuality is genetic in animals
B ) Humans are not animals
C) Therefore homosexuality is not genetic in humans.
(There is no reason to suggest that, even though human's aren't animals, the Gay Gene could be present in us, too.)
But alas, I digress.
The most important thing i want to say is that humans are definitely animals in scientific terms. Definitely.
And whilst there are other definitions too, spiritual, ethical, for example, it is important not to make a biological claim with an ethical/religious reasoning.
That's just about that, then!
-
..20% Voted for by IiYiIiIzage, Artanis.
Didnt we learn this in first grade?
Please login or register to comment.Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
-
Adding your comment: -
u would be suprised at how many people out there do not think we are animals and that we have no connections to them whatsoever. so even though most people learn we are animals in school, a lot of people think we are superior.
-
Humans are superior, we're at the top of the food chain. We are an animal, but we are also the most advanced animal. We can think, we're self aware, and we have posable thumbs;).
-
-
*"Humans are superior"* Why? In what way? *"we’re at the top of the food chain"* Which is, of course, why we often get eaten by lions and snakes and such like. *"We are an animal, but we are also the most advanced animal."* Why? Dolphins, it has been suggested, have equal or even superior intelligence to humans, yet because of the way they have evolved physically (i.e. no hands) they might not express this in a way humans can recognise - like, they haven't develloped advanced nuclear weapons to kill each other off etc... Who is to say that a human's intelligence is superior to a dolphins, when the we measure intelligence, only in human terms? Surely, it's a self justifying piece of logic? I think the most advanced animal is a virus. They thrive by scrounging off others, do no work for themselves, and by evolving at such astonishing rates, make sure we never make antidotes. Now _that's_ advanced. *"We can think."* Scientists have proven that animals think, in so far as most understand "think" to mean. _"Thinking involves manipulation of information, as when we form concepts, engage in problem solving, reason and make decisions"_ Pigs and monkeys have been taught to play complex computer games, involving congitive decision making, with scraps of food for reward. Animals certainly think, in this sense. *"we’re self aware"* Ah, now this is an interesting one. We (or, I)know I am self aware. What I do not know is whether you are self aware, whether he is, whether she is. But, on the grounds that I cannot say whether or not animals are self aware, this is certainly not enough to assume, that because I cannot prove it, that they are not. (_ad ignoratum_... my old friend!) *"we have posable thumbs"* I assume you mean _opposing_ thumbs. In fact, all primates have opposing thumbs. _http://urbansemiotic.com/2005/12/19/from-ape-to-man-to-god/_ What differentiates us, is that our hands have something called _"Ulnar Opposition"_. Fold all your fingers down, in turn, from the index finger, to the little finger. Do that now. See how they all seem to point towards the thumb? That reflex, known as "Ulnar Opposition": _Contrary to popular opinion, humans - homo sapiens - are not the only primates posessing opposable thumbs. Chimanzees and monkees can oppose the thumb to the index digit. What makes the human hand unique in the animal kingdom is the ability of the small and ring fingers to rotate across the palm to meet the thumb, owing to a unique flexibility of the carpometacarpal joints of these fingers, down in the middle of the palm. This is referred to as "ulnar opposition" and adds unparalleled grip, grasp, and torque capability to the human hand. This feature developed after the time of Lucy, a direct human ancestor, who lived about 3.2 million years ago._ However, just because humans have cool hands, the best hands, in my opinion, (because they make me lots of money) ...just because humans have a cool hands, hands like no other animals _this does not mean they are not animals_ Eagles have cool wings. In fact eagles wings are so cool they're not like any other bird's wings. But this surely doesn't mean that eagles _aren't_ animals does it? Anyway, I had fun. Let me know. Enn.
-
-
Ok, look at it this way, no dolphin or ape can communicate or think on a level that a human can. When you have an intelligent conversation with a dolphin or an ape you let me know. Also, a human getting eaten or attacked by a lion doesn't make the lion superior, just lucky.
-
-
*"Ok, look at it this way, no dolphin or ape can communicate or think on a level that a human can."* That's a pretty heady biological claim. Now prove it.
-
-
how do you know a dolphin or ape can't communicate on the same level we do? dolphins are extremely intelligent and are capable of having conversations with their own species with their own language that humans can't understand since we can't even hear half of it since it is so high pitched. also, people have sign language conversations with chimps all the time. chimps' vocal cords can't make the same sounds as a human so the next best thing to communicate is sign language. and a lion could possibly outsmart a human to eat it. not all humans are smart.
-
You're missing the big picture which is that humans are the most advanced. You keep saying that all these animals are intelligent but you have no reasoning as to how they are more advanced or intelligent execpt to say that "Dolphins, *it has been suggested*, have equal or even superior intelligence to humans" If they had superior intelligence than us then don't you think maybe they'd have little dolphin homes in the ocean or invented a way so they can live on land? They aren't even close to being superior in intelligence. The dolphins are still swimming in the ocean while humans have already been in space. There's no way a dolphin has more intelligence than a human.
-
dolphins are as intelligent as us, it is just that they are not physically capable of doing things like we are. do you think that if humans had little tiny fins instead of arms we would have been able to do what we have done? dolphins have been recorded to do math, problem solving, etc. if humans are superior to dolphins, its not by a lot. and we are animals. the ancient greeks knew of dolphins intelligence and thought that dolphins were really humans who turned into fish. they thought this because they were so smart. dolphins even sometimes help fishermen catch fish. so they are extremely intelligent.
-
Yes they are intelligent but they aren't on the same level, intelligently speaking, as humans.
-
-
Elisa, I am not suggesting definitely that dolphins are more intelligent than humans. I am merely saying, at present, most of us have no way of knowing, because, alike you, we measure the *intelligence of a _species_* in terms of *_human_ intelligence*. _Smellest thou a fault, Kent?_ Just because we have no conclusive scientific evidence to suggest dolphins *are* 'cleverer' than humans (although, by studying thier brains, we do know that they have quite suitable physical and mental faculties to be) neither do you have any proof that they *aren't*. See what I mean? Therefore, because there's no evidence to prove you're point, it is not necessarily true. Alike, neither mine is true...yet! But you cannot make the claim that humans are the most intelligent creatures. As Kazrith once reminded me _"If a million people say a stupid thing...it's *still* a stupid thing."_ Now, can prove to me that humans _are_ the most intelligent creatures? I await your thesis eagerly
-
Excuse this little hiccough, my computer (who inturn, probably believes *itself* to be the most intelligent being!) got all excited and posted it twice.
-
-
I can't even say how many times I've said it, humans have such an advanced brain that even the best of scientists can't fathom it. Our minds are so complex, we have so many dimensions to us. It really is a simple statement that I'm trying to make and you keep missing the whole point, which is, humans are at the top of the food chain, humans have learned to harness their environment, not control, mind you. Humans can successfully communicate, and yes I know animals communicate as well, no need to tell me, just not on a level as humans, not as efficient. We can write our thoughts down, what other animal can do that? We have invented technology to allow us into space, somewhere that is completely uninhabitable without the technology that humans invented. Tell me another animal that can go into space, without being sent there by a human.
-
-
Perhaps dolphins are so advanced _they don't need_ to write things down. Perhaps they're so advanced, they're way beyond building things, and blowing each other up with bombs and stuff (wow, humans are such an intelligent species.) I'd like to point out how circular you argument is. You appear to be measuring "intelligence" in how humans are so great at building rockets and using pens a paper and communicating (communicating??! and animals don't??) Why do you suppose that the intelligence of another species is going to be manifested in the same way? _You use seem to be measuring another *species'* intelligence...in the terms of how you imagine *human* intelligence._ A bit self justifying, no? _http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro98/202s98-paper3/Ball3.html_ Have a skim through this. Perhaps you'll change your mind.
-
-
scientists can't fathom a dolphins brain either. also, they are mentally possibly equal to us, but physically they are not. if we had stubs instead of arms and hands, we couldn't have done what we have done. the same goes with dolphins. if they had hands, they could probably do stuff that we do.
-
Wow, ok, great, but the fact is they *DON'T* have arms and hands, they *AREN'T* equal to us, possibly doesn't a fact make.
-
Wow, ok, great, but the fact is they *DON'T* have arms and hands, they *AREN'T* equal to us, possibly doesn't a fact make.
-
-
"Not Equal" does *not* necessarily mean lesser. _All_ you have managed to demonstrate is that humans and dolphins _are not the same thing._ Well done. And that's no grounds to suggest that either species is greater.
-
-
Ennoia, you are so self-righteous its impossible to debate with you. Come down from your high horse. You don't know my arguement, it isn't self-justifying, if you actually took the time to read what I said you wouldn't have said that. My arguement isn't circular, you just can't seem to grasp it. I'm saying that if a dolphin were more intelligent, don't you think they'd be doing more than swimming in the water or even living in aquariums? Wouldn't they have used their superior minds to better themselves. That's what superior or leading species do, they become the most powerful of their land or ocean. (One more thing, try not to contradict yourself, first you say, quote, "I am not suggesting definitely that dolphins are more intelligent than humans." then you say "Perhaps dolphins are so advanced they dont need to write things down" At least my circular arguement wasn't contradicting)
-
-
*"Ennoia, you are so self-righteous its impossible to debate with you. Come down from your high horse."* Thank you, Elisa. Check the _ad hominem_ fallacy?? "*I’m saying that if a dolphin were more intelligent, don’t you think they’d be doing more than swimming in the water or even living in aquariums?"* Like what? It's not illogical to suggest that a dolphin (or any other species) is advanced in a way which we cannot recognise or appriciate. You seem to be implying that you expect dolphins to be walking around building skyscrapers or dropping technologically advanced bombs on each other, or other ways in which we presume intelligence (_bombs...intelligence??_) to be manifested. Why expect this? They could be so advanced, that they _don't need_ to build skyscrapers, or drop bombs on each other, so advanced that they are telepathic, or communicate in ways _we cannot comprehend_. *"Wouldn’t they have used their superior minds to better themselves"* Can you prove they're not doing/have done this? *"That’s what superior or leading species do, they become the most powerful of their land or ocean."* _Ahh_, the good old human brain - _aspire to power_. Perhaps "power" isn't the dolphins' primary virtue or aspiration, as you seem to infer it is the humans' (and we all know *power corrupts*... don't we?) Perhaps they are so advanced, they don't _need_ to be physically domineering. *"One more thing, try not to contradict yourself"* I'm listening; *"first you say, quote, _I am not suggesting definitely that dolphins are more intelligent than humans._ then you say _Perhaps dolphins are so advanced they don’t need to write things down_"* What's contradictory about that?? Both use _hypothetical reasoning._ They're conditional tense suggestions. (as in..._"not suggesting definitely"_ and _"perhaps"_) I think, crucially, you misunderstand my point. I am saying, that I *cannot* prove that dolphins are more intelligent than humans. No solid proof. Lets establish that now. But you; on the other hand, by this same logic _*cannot* claim that humans are more intelligent than dolphins_. This is why my suggestions were just that: suggestions. I'm saying "Perhaps" and "if" and you're saying; *"Humans are superior"* Period. I think our main problem is our different understandings of the word "intelligence". In a human context, we probably take intelligence to mean exactly the same thing. _But we're not talking about a *solely human* case, are we?_ So, if we're looking at intelligence, in a _pan-species context_ *why do you insist our method of measurement be in terms of _human_ intelligence?* It's like saying; lets measure how clever a bunch of people are. Now, we'll take an English man, a Frenchman, a German and a Japanese. (Each person speaks and understands his own language only) So, to test how clever they are, we give them all an IQ test. But this IQ test is *in English*. _Isn't it a little strange that we should then proclaim that the English man is the cleverest?_ I think so too. Which is why I find your argument unacceptably circular. This isn't an attack - please, correct me where I am wrong, and show me it isn't. I'm all eyes...
-
-
You can't compare four people who speak a different language taking a test in only one language to the intelligence of different species. I understand what you are trying to say, but I think you are just over-complicating a simple thing. On earth and all of earth's creatures the humans are the most intelligent. I'm not basing this on human intelligence, just intelligence in and of itself. Intelligence is defined as the capacity to acquire and apply knowlegde. So, going by that defination, a dolphin is not more intelligent than a human. If dolphins even were intelligent, don't you think they'd use it in their environment, to make themselves better, make their lives better? I've only been saying this 80 times. Do you even have a definitive opinion on this or are you just trying to find every flaw you can in my arguement?
-
-
The Story of Cat, and other musings.
I suspect this debate is going to regress to being a difference of opinion. However, I haven’t brought out the Big Guns just yet. Could you, perhaps, answer at least a few of the questions I've raised above? *"You can’t compare four people who speak a different language taking a test in only one language to the intelligence of different species."* Why? It's an analogy using your same logic. What's wrong with it? "*I’m not basing this on human intelligence, just intelligence in and of itself..._Intelligence is defined as the capacity to acquire and apply knowlegde._*" I'd agree, in simplistic terms. "*So, going by that defination, a dolphin is not more intelligent than a human*" Hmm, I think there's a bit of a jump between premise and conclusion there. So, basically, your argument is; A) _Intelligence is defined as the capacity to acquire and apply knowledge_ B ) _Therefore, a dolphin is not more intelligent than a human_. I don't see how you've reached that conclusion from that one premise. How do you know the dolphin, or any other species for that matter, has no acquired and applied knowledge, *_to an extent greater than a human?_* Even if you answer none of my other questions, please at least answer this one. *"If dolphins even were intelligent, don’t you think they’d use it in their environment, to make themselves better, make their lives better"* Why assume this? Or, better still, why assume (_if_, (hypothetical reasoning!) a human is less intelligent than a dolphin, _then_ why assume a human would be able to understand how a dolphin lives?) Let me indulge in a little _Thought Experiment_. I think it’s time, as we are both writers, that we have a story. The story I am going to tell is about two species. We'll call species A) _Sapien_, and species B ) _Feline_. Now, a Sapien called "Human" lives with a Feline called "Cat". One afternoon, Cat comes downstairs and sees Human sitting in her armchair. Human is looking down at a heavy rectangular thing. Cat watches Human with interest. "What's _is_ she doing?" he thinks, because he is a great thinker, and he is on an assignment. Cat sits down, and observes human very carefully. (Cat is Feline Psychology student, studying at the Feline University of London) ”My species is very clever,” he thinks, “in fact, we’re the most intelligent species in the world. Because I am a scientist of sorts, I shall observe Human, watch her very carefully, and discern what primitive form of behaviour she is indulging in as she stares at this rectangle thing.” So Cat sits. And Human stares, occasionally making a grunting sound, and prodding the rectangle. Still Cat watches her. He watches and watches, and Human stares and stares, and finally, Cat ends the experiment. “Human, you’re useless,” he meows. “All you do, is sit and stare moronically. I thought you were doing something *clever*. I thought you might be *acquiring and applying knowledge!* all be it, in a primitive sort of way. But you’re just sitting there!” He gets up, pads out of the room, and reports his findings to the Feline School of Comparative Intelligence Studies, the branch of the university where he is studying this semester. In light of Human’s inexplicable moronic staring, in the opinion of Felines, Felines themselves remain the most intelligent species on Earth. Case closed. … Now, you might find it interesting, that Human was a philosophy student. When Cat saw her staring down at a large heavy rectangle thing, prodding it occasionally, and grunting, she _wasn’t_, as he thought, and _as far as he could see_, doing nothing. What she was doing was; *acquiring and applying knowledge.* The heavy rectangle thing was a book, called _Meditations_ by a man called Descartes. She was reading it, understanding it, learning it, then testing herself, with her new understanding. That’s *acquiring and applying knowledge* isn’t it? … A few days later, in the School of Comparative Intelligence Studies, at the Feline University of London, one of the professors is listening to Cat’s findings. “This is interesting, Cat,” he says. “So you claim Sapiens are less intelligent than us Felines?” “Of course,” Cat says earnestly, crossing his paws. “From my investigation, all Human was doing, was sitting, staring down at the rectangle thing in her lap. She can’t meow, or purr, she just sometimes makes a funny, primitive sort of grunting noise. She washes only twice a day, if that! Talk about _Cave-Felines_! I’ve seen her staring at a box of moving pictures, for hours on end, just _staring_, and to top it all, my investigation shows she sits in a mindless stupor, gazing down, _doing nothing at all_!” The professor smiles “And you’d have thought,” he says, “That the Sapien is exhibiting characteristics of the normal, unintelligent animal, by doing all these things, as you have observed in your study?” “Precisely,” Cat says. “You agree with me, of course?” “Well,” the professor says, twirling a piece of string between his paws, “my _instinct_ tells me yes. My _reason_ tells me no.” “What in _Bast’s_ name do you mean?” Cat hisses crossly. “Well, _The greatest minds are capable of the greatest vices as well as of the greatest virtues_ ,” the proffessor says mysteriously. “With the most intelligent mind, comes of course, the greatest aptitude for deception and trickery. Do not be fooled into thinking what you would like to believe…” “I don’t understand what you mean.” Cat says. “Now then, even though it is, as far as you or I see, _highly improbable_ that when human was staring down at this rectangular object that you describe, she was doing, or understanding anything in the least bit “intelligent”, it is not implausible to suggest that she was.” Cat looks very lost now. “You see, it is quite possible that when Human was sitting in a stupor, as you so claim, staring down at the rectangle, that she was doing something so intelligent, our brains could not comprehend it. Perhaps she really was _thinking_; perhaps she understands this strange rectangular slab in a way you or I cannot.” Cat’s whiskers spread slightly. “I see,” he says. “So, if Human really was more intelligent than you or I, then we probably wouldn’t be able to appreciate it, because whatever she was doing that day, would in fact be…_far beyond our comprehension_…” “Exactly!” the professor says. “Now, most felines think they’re quite safe when they claim the Feline is the most intelligent species on Earth, and rationally, it is quite possible, even probable, that it is true. But always remember, as we do not understand exactly what is going on in the Sapien’s brain, we are in no position to suggest to say for sure that we are right. For, _if a species is less intelligent than the species it is observing – is it not absurd to suggest that the less intelligent species will completely understand the actions and thoughts of the more intelligent?”_ “Ah ha,” cat says. “I do understand. So…I may doubt that Human is cleverer than me, but on the grounds that I shouldn’t expect her to behave in a way I would understand, or could possibly comprehend, if she were, I will not say for sure, that she isn’t. In fact…it is quite probable, that she is _far more intelligent_ than me!” The professor beams. “You may look and look for a thing and never find it. Conversely, if you think very carefully, you might just realise that merely _looking_ will not expose truth anymore than turning a blind eye. You know, I once heard it said that _“In order to improve the mind, we ought less to learn, than to contemplate.”_ “I suppose you’ll tell me next this is what Human was doing.” The old cat smiled. “I think you might just be surprised…” … Cat, by the way, graduated with a First Class Honours Degree in Psychology Theoretics, and went on to pursue his career investigating Sapiens in America. How the professor had such a studied knowledge of Descartes, I’ve no idea. But just because he was a cat, I’ll not assume he’s stupid… … *“Do you even have a definitive opinion on this?”* Interesting you expect me to have a _definitive_ opinion! I’m quite flattered! (I’ll assume, for the benefit of the doubt, that you mean ‘definite’!) The answer to that is no, of course not. I’d like to think that I make my decisions in what to believe, on a falsifiable basis – after I’ve considered all the options, and there is no other possible way a thing could be otherwise. However, there is _far to little_ evidence to have any conclusive opinion on this topic at all. So whilst I believe that it’s possible that humans are more intelligent that dolphins, _it is also equally as possible that dolphins are more intelligent than humans_. Therefore, I completely disagree with you, because I do not believe, that based on the examples we have discussed, or what I have read and learned, that it is enough to make the unfounded statements that you do.
-
-
that was a cool story. did you come up with it yourself? it made me smile :)
-
-
Yeah I quite enjoy writing, and I'm afraid I have a rather irrepressible tendancy to wander off into the wistful realms of the little philosophical tale... (Plus, I do live with three rather 'know it all' cats - or so they would like me to believe...) :)
-
-
Ennoia, since definitive means conclusive or to be sure, I have no idea why you're flattered. Your story was good and insightful but I realized that you are looking at the problem in a completely different POV than me. I like to look at the facts that are right infront of me and see where it leads me, you, it seems to me, like to look at a problem and see the what ifs. Neither way is better, just different, and we'll never agree and I'm tired of saying the same thing over and over so how about we just agree to disagree.
-
-
For the third time, I'd still like to know why you haven't answered any of my questions. I would find your arguments very interesting. *"so how about we just agree to disagree"* Now, I am a very peaceful person. But when it comes to reason subordinating to the apologetic, pasifistic tendancy to lower the weapons of good debate, I'm afraid my logic factulties won't shut down so easily. I see it as a failiure, or even the easy way out of having to understand the logic of someone else's argument. Can you not pursuade me the logical reasons to support yours? *"I like to look at the facts that are right infront of me "* Yeah, I get what you're saying, but don't you think (or, so I must assume from all you've said) that this disadvantages you somewhat, for refusing to see (or hypothetically imagine) a universal conjecture, outside our own perception? It's easy to be decieved by what is right in front of you. But aren't _What Ifs?_ what Philosophy is all about? Please can you explain to me how it's conceivably possible to have a situation, from a human perspective, where it is absolutely certain that humans are the most intelligent of all the fauna and flora? I think this is really what we all want to hear, even if you answer no other questions I have posed to you. I'm trying to be reasonable, and I hope you don't find this threatening or offensive in anyway. I appriciate your offer of _detente_, if you will, but since Descartes, Nietszche, Russell and all the rest never played stalemate in the deep and rocky waters of the logic debate, then why should you or I?
-
I suppose, in times like this, I always remember when I once heard it said: _"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it."_ I suppose it was your absolute pronouncement and unfounded, unsupported biological and psychological claims that put me off, and drove me to question your reasons.
-
-
You cant base intelligence on technology.. Dolphins have 0 arms 0 legs.. so its kind of hard for them to create a microprocessor. Honestly humans are one of the DUMBEST animals to exist, period. We are full of so much BULLSHIT its not even funny. Making your own life better is selfish.. maybe the dolphins arent selfish.
-
-
Thanks. This is as true as it is entertaining, and I'm still giggling at the frankness. _"Let thy speech be short, comprehending much in a few words."_ the Apocrypha advise. No wonder the Christians hid them away... I usually fail miserably to do this, as I am Chief Babble-er...(as I am now demonstrating...) but I enjoyed that short, if brief, moment of enlightenment.
-
-
"If dolphins even were intelligent, dont you think theyd use it in their environment, to make themselves better, make their lives better?" Why do their lives need bettering? They don't have to worry about a job, paying taxes, politics, etc... Humans are obsessed with wealth, power, and possessions. Perhaps dolphins have evolved passed the need for these things. They already have everything they need. You see this from the eyes of a human, look in another direction. Think of this from another prospective, a dolphins. They see us fighting over money, power, race, and countless other stupid things. We obsess over material wealth. And destroy our own environment. Now, who is the more intelligant one? You say that an intelligent species would better their environment. If we were truly intelligent as you say, we would better our environment instead of destroying it like we are.
-
-
I'll drink to that! Well said.
-
-
Elisa Rose:
I know dogs that are smarter than you... They know when they are wrong and stop barking. -
.
-
and you have evidence supporting that dogs know when they are wrong? Have you been using fMRI on dogs or something? I wish we would do that with humans.
-
Come on people we already know the answer to this question The hitch hikers guide to the galaxy tells us that Humans are less intelligent than dolphins. Humans like to think they are more intelligent because we do things like politics, banking and warfare and dolphins are more clever because they DONT have them. But both species pale in intelligence compared to rats...
-
I think that what seperates us from the animals (dolphins inluded) is our free will and imagination. Dolphins cannot override nurture with a choice; humans can. Animals use instinct to base their decisions on; humans (at least the smart ones) use logic and reasoning. Imagination is another critical point. We have the ability to hypothesize and problem solve. Knowing a situation we can use our past experiences to base a decision on and act accordingly. A dolfin can't do that. Now we can suppose all we want about a dolfins intelligence, but there is no real proof that they are anywhere near as intelligent (on the human scale what other scale is there) as we are.
-
.
-
.
-
doplins actually got knocked down on the intelligence chain.
-
-
Yes and No20% Voted for by looking4realtruth, Makessenseright.
Biologically? We are built in the same manner as an animal. Psychologically? No. We have a free will. That's what seperates us from our animal neighbors. If an animal kills something, it's acting out of pure instinct. If a human kills something, they have made a choice to kill that thing, even if the choice itself is based on instinct.
Please login or register to comment.Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
-
Adding your comment:
-
Free WIll?
You don't have free will, you only think you do. Free will is the gap between the brains' Cause and Effect that we haven't explained, but someday we will. Didn't that big killer whale have free will? The one they made a movie about? -
-
Free will does exist. While enviromental forces turn us into forever-changing function machines, we always have the power to override nurture with our own choices. Please don't use a movie to prove that a killer whale had a free will.
-
-
yes, but the mechanisms that control our choices *are* predetermined and based on our memories (which were acquired via mechanisms). certainly we don't understand how all of it works, and that's what we call 'free will'. the illusion of free will is most important, to keep us out of what Nitzsche called 'the swamps of nothingness'. the allusion to the killer whale movie was a joke. remember 'free willy'?
-
-
Ok. So as I understand it, we make choices based on the past to create our future. If we have no actual choice in the matter, then why do we jail criminals? You're saying that their actions just a consequence of their enviroment and have nothing to do with their own decisions? Also, I should have been more specific when I said "free will". I meant the desire to make ourselves more than we are. Dolphins do not have this. Humans do.
-
-
We jail criminals either to 1) make the victims and their loved ones have revenge, 2) to teach them a lesson. 2 doesn't relaly work, so it's really just1. We do have control over our actions, but only to a limited extent. Our minds have the ability to reflect on their actions and make decisons internally before we act on them, so in that regard, we do have a 'choice'... but it is ultimately physical and there is nothing magic about it.
-
-
You forgot the primary purpose of jailing criminals: to protect others from them. As long as they're in jail, they can't hurt anyone on the outside. Also, I never said there was anything "magical" about free will.
-
-
Good point.
-
-
-
anything that kills something kills makes a concious decision to do so. we kill to eat - slaying animals for meat? so is that not instinct? even wild animals have to hunt and pick out what their going to kill so in essence they are choosing.
-
-
Animals do not choose. A carnivore cannot choose to starve themselves rather than eat meat. A human can.
-
-
WRONG!!!!!!
When you just assume humans are different than animals because they have free will -- because of your religious beliefs; that is wrong. An animals can kill by free will just as we can. I can recall documentaries on the nature channel etc regarding animals such as certain monkey's that kill in such a brutal way that is not dictated by instinct. You should look for examples to prove yourself wrong before you assume you are right due to lack of evidence IMHO... -
no
Just because it's brutal and merciless doesn't mean it isn't instinct. And I don't believe that because of "religious beliefs". To assume that is ridiculous. Humans have a capacity for mercy. Animals do not because it's a concious decision based on personal morality. A mother lion who feels her cubs are threatened by a hyena isn't going to stop chasing it away because she thinks that they learned their lesson. She'll stop because her instincts tell her that it's no longer a threat. It's an instictual decision; not one based on free will.
-
-
-Voted for by Axelle Black.
Yes. Simply put, we have animal cells.
-
Of course we're animalsVoted for by Chuck Star.
Oh we're animals we've just forgotten our place in the whole circle of life, food chain thing. Like when someone gets eaten by a shark we have to find the shark and avenge the person. We are not on top of the food chain everywhere. We need to remember that.
Please login or register to comment.Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
-
Adding your comment:
-
i am so with you
we are so far out of line it's not even funny anymore!!! we think we own this planet and everything on it when really we are destroying it everyday killing everything for no reason. like sharks so they kill people get ova it they need to eat right. if you dont want them to eat you dont swim its that easy.
-
-
dolphins can do cool things!Voted for by cosmosis.
if you go by size...a dolphins brain is 20% bigger than an adult humans. but this doesn't necissarily mean it is more advanced. it could mean that though.
dolphins have such cool brains that they are capable of locating fish/prey up to several miles away and they are able to form a mental 3d picture in their head of what it actually looks like. they do this by using sound waves. also dolphins have incredibly acute hearing which is far more advanced then a humans hearing and more advanced then a dogs or a bats. they also have incredible eyesight.
Dolphins even invented games of their own just like humans have invented soccer. dolphins also have been recorded to help fishermen catch fish and in return fishermen give them some of their catch. almost like a business. they can swim at speeds of up to 60 miles per hour and can do cool tricks and flips.
dolphin language is incredibly advanced and humans have a hard time deciphering it and scientist suspect they might communicate in complete sentences.
so dolphins are more advanced then humans in certain aspects, humans are better than dolphins at other things. intelligence comes in many different forms.
Please login or register to comment.Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
-
Adding your comment:
-
they recently knocked dolphins under humans in the intelligence chain. it was in the news. http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=155664
-
Common Sense
This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. We dont have a clue as to what a dolphin is trying to say or think. For that matter any other animal in this world. That is what is wrong with us today. We take the oppinion of scientist and treat it as fact when it is some ones best guess. Just like carbon dating and global warming. Pull you heads out of your a** and think for yourself. Common sense is what sets us apart from the other animals.
-
Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
January 9, 2006
Edit | Reply
r humans animals?
not all humans r animals... like a Cop is a pig... animal 2 manNovember 13
Edit | Reply
No.
Just because it's brutal and merciless doesn't mean it isn't instinct. And I don't believe that because of "religious beliefs". To assume that is ridiculous. Humans have a capacity for mercy. Animals do not because it's a concious decision based on personal morality. A mother lion who feels her cubs are threatened by a hyena isn't going to stop chasing it away because she thinks that they learned their lesson. She'll stop because her instincts tell her that it's no longer a threat.November 13
Edit | Reply
no
Just because it's brutal and merciless doesn't mean it isn't instinct. And I don't believe that because of "religious beliefs". To assume that is ridiculous. Humans have a capacity for mercy. Animals do not because it's a concious decision based on personal morality. A mother lion who feels her cubs are threatened by a hyena isn't going to stop chasing it away because she thinks that they learned their lesson. She'll stop because her instincts tell her that it's no longer a threat.November 13
Edit | Reply
no
Just because it's brutal and merciless doesn't mean it isn't instinct. And I don't believe that because of "religious beliefs". To assume that is ridiculous. Humans have a capacity for mercy. Animals do not because it's a concious decision based on personal morality. A mother lion who feels her cubs are threatened by a hyena isn't going to stop chasing it away because she thinks that they learned their lesson. She'll stop because her instincts tell her that it's no longer a threat.November 13
Edit | Reply
no
Just because it's brutal and merciless doesn't mean it isn't instinct. And I don't believe that because of "religious beliefs". To assume that is ridiculous. Humans have a capacity for mercy. Animals do not because it's a concious decision based on personal morality. A mother lion who feels her cubs are threatened by a hyena isn't going to stop chasing it away because she thinks that they learned their lesson. She'll stop because her instincts tell her that it's no longer a threat.November 13
Edit | Reply
no
Just because it's brutal and merciless doesn't mean it isn't instinct. And I don't believe that because of "religious beliefs". To assume that is ridiculous. Humans have a capacity for mercy. Animals do not because it's a concious decision based on personal morality. A mother lion who feels her cubs are threatened by a hyena isn't going to stop chasing it away because she thinks that they learned their lesson. She'll stop because her instincts tell her that it's no longer a threat.Please register or login to comment! It's totally free