Proof that humans are not animals

[Rambozo]

Kingdom
Phylum
Class
Order
Family
Genus
Species


Sound familiar?

I'm saying the categorization is wrong and outdated. Not that complicated.

 

[iguanaman]

I'm saying the categorization is wrong and outdated. Not that complicated.

And what would you replace it with? The 2000 year old Bible and a cosmic muffin that no one has ever seen?

 

[Rambozo]

And what would you replace it with? The 2000 year old Bible and a cosmic muffin that no one has ever seen?

I made it pretty simple.

Human consciousness is the defining trait of being human. Human consciousness allows humans to create supercomputers, arts, sciences, and philosophy.

It's distinct enough that it merits its own separate category from the animals.

 

[Helix]

Again, i've already demonstrated that it's not.

So I don't know if the issue is that you're dumb and simply aren't able to comprehend the explanation, or if you're just being obstinate and in denial.

But you're going to have do better than saying that it's "true" because your biology class told you so or yada yada. Because your biology class is wrong.

Something isn't true because an outdated class "told you so". Just as if you'd been born in the Middle Ages, you'd be saying that it's "true" that the earth is the center of the universe, because that's what you learned in class. I think you're epistemologically confused.

So, now that we're in agreement that humans are not animals, maybe we can more onto something else.

This is boring. Peace.

 

[Gordy327]

I'm saying the categorization is wrong and outdated. Not that complicated.

Your assessment means absolutely nothing!

 

[Rambozo]

Your assessment means absolutely nothing!

No, my assessment means everything.

The assessment of archaic scientists who developed an outdated system of categorization hundreds of years ago means nothing.

 

[Michael Cole]

Well, I've already proven that

...your debate skills are lacking. You've proven that beyond a reasonable doubt with the fact that your posting is tentative. In such a short time.

classifications such as "ape" are arbitrary and incorrect, since those classifications are based merely on biological traits and behaviors, rather than on more essential things that make up a person's identity, such as thoughts, feelings, beliefs, life experience, and consciousness in general.

But, even if we use "making tools" as a criteria, we can see that humans invent supercomputers, arts, sciences, and philosophies. Something which is far more significant than whatever "tools" apes my like to create.

And, if we want to look at an example of creation in the animal world, then ants are arguably more remarkable than apes, despite having such tiny brains - given that they build mounds comparable to human cities, complete with plumbing and irrigation systems.

Bunch o' babble. Not interested in babble.

Try #221

 

[The Brad Dad]

AI Overview

View attachment 67585601
Male chimpanzees frequently use physical aggression and violence to sexually coerce females, with studies showing this behavior increases their chances of mating and siring offspring. This aggression can involve brutal attacks, hair pulling, and forceful separation to control female sexuality and limit their mating options with other males. While female chimpanzees try to mitigate this by mating with multiple males to create paternal uncertainty, male coercion can significantly influence female choice and reproductive success.

While we may share 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees, chimpanzees engage in mating behavior which would be consider "rape" if humans engaged in it, and rightfully be viewed as repulsive, even if it allowed someone to reproduce.

If humans were animals, then we would not have a problem with rape if it allowed a member of the species to reproduce and succeed at natural selection.

The fact that we value moral sentiments, such as "rape being wrong" more than we value biological impulses, such as the drive to reproduce, proves that humans are not animals.

So the fact that we elected a rapist means we are *worse* than animals.

 

[Gordy327]

No, my assessment means everything.

Only to yourself. Not to anyone else!

The assessment of archaic scientists who developed an outdated system of categorization hundreds of years ago means nothing.

Meanwhile their system is still used globally and yours is just laughable nonsense to be quickly forgotten. I'll stick with actual science and scientists.

 

[Michael Cole]

I made it pretty simple.

Human consciousness is the defining trait of being human. Human consciousness allows humans to create supercomputers, arts, sciences, and philosophy.

It's distinct enough that it merits its own separate category from the animals.

Ape consciousness allows chimpanzees to create tools essential to survival.

This is distinct enough that fish should not be classified as animals. Fish deserve a category separate from the animals.

 

[Rambozo]

So the fact that we elected a rapist means we are *worse* than animals.

Please, rape is normal behavior in the animal kingdom.

Male Sexual Aggression: What Chimps Can Reveal About People

Male chimpanzees who are more violent toward females tend to sire more offspring, which may provide insights into human sexual aggression.

www.livescience.com

The fact that we can morally object to rape, even if it allowed them to reproduce, shows a distinction from the animals.

 

[Rambozo]

Only to yourself. Not to anyone else!

Meanwhile their system is still used globally and yours is just laughable nonsense to be quickly forgotten. I'll stick with actual science and scientists.

Give it a few centuries and it will be as outdated as alchemy or any other system which was once contemporary but is now archaic.

So there's no reason to care about it now.

 

[BirdinHand]

I made it pretty simple.

Human consciousness is the defining trait of being human. Human consciousness allows humans to create supercomputers, arts, sciences, and philosophy.

It's distinct enough that it merits its own separate category from the animals.

Why do you think that humans are the only animal species with consciousness?


Do you live under a rock or in a box or something where you don’t interact with other species?


And…AI can write philosophy, create art, do science…give it a bit and probably will be building other supercomputers.

Is AI human?

 

[The Brad Dad]

Please, rape is normal behavior in the animal kingdom.

Male Sexual Aggression: What Chimps Can Reveal About People

Male chimpanzees who are more violent toward females tend to sire more offspring, which may provide insights into human sexual aggression.

www.livescience.com

The fact that we can morally object to rape, even if it allowed them to reproduce, shows a distinction from the animals.

Correct, which means that since we *choose* to elect rapists, we are worse than animals.

 

[Gordy327]

Give it a few centuries and it will be as outdated as alchemy or any other system which was once contemporary but is now archaic.

So there's no reason to care about it now.

It will certainly last longer than your "system."

 

[Rambozo]

Correct, which means that since we *choose* to elect rapists, we are worse than animals.

No, if we were animals, we wouldn't find rape to be a bad thing to begin with.

To animals, rape is often just natural selection at work.

 

[The Brad Dad]

No, if we were animals, we wouldn't find rape to be a bad thing to begin with.

To animals, rape is often just natural selection at work.

78m people in the country outright support it.

 

[Michael Cole]

No, my assessment means everything.

The assessment of archaic scientists who developed an outdated system of categorization hundreds of years ago means nothing.

The archaic system you speak of was changed by the research of Jane Goodall and others. What you want is a return to this archaic system which elevated humans above the other great apes.

Your argument is backwards. Makes no sense.

We can categorize organisms by intelligence. I'm sure there are thousands of such lists available at your fingertip. That's not how life is related, though. That a raven may be more intelligent than a cow doesn't mean humans are more closely related to birds than cattle.

You've created a system of classification based on nothing at all. And you just can't stop.

 

[BirdinHand]

Please, rape is normal behavior in the animal kingdom.

Male Sexual Aggression: What Chimps Can Reveal About People

Male chimpanzees who are more violent toward females tend to sire more offspring, which may provide insights into human sexual aggression.

www.livescience.com

The fact that we can morally object to rape, even if it allowed them to reproduce, shows a distinction from the animals.

Genesis has this story about Lot and his daughters…might want to go rethink this angle you’re trying to take

 

[Gordy327]

No, if we were animals, we wouldn't find rape to be a bad thing to begin with.

To animals, rape is often just natural selection at work.

Your understanding of zoology is as lacking as your understanding of science in general.

 

[Michael Cole]

No, if we were animals, we wouldn't find rape to be a bad thing to begin with.

To animals, rape is often just natural selection at work.

Yeah, rape. Taxonomy's number one mystery.

Study these images.

The left image is a painting of the pet dog on the right. The dog's name is Apple. The piece was named Apple Chase by the artist.

Good job. Hand-eye coordination needs work, but the dog's head, fur, eye, ear and nose are clearly expressed.

Wha'cha think? A young child artist not yet adept at hand-to-brush-to-canvas? Someone with Parkinson's? A blind artist? Wha'cha think?




















Here's the artist.

That's Michael. I wonder what he's painting there.

Homo sapiens is not the only cognizant species. Michael is not only capable, but talented in expressing what's in his mind by putting it on canvas.

We, sir, are apes.

 

[Rambozo]

Your understanding of zoology is as lacking as your understanding of science in general.

It's been more than documented that sexual coercion exists in the animal kingdom:

Male Sexual Aggression: What Chimps Can Reveal About People

Male chimpanzees who are more violent toward females tend to sire more offspring, which may provide insights into human sexual aggression.

www.livescience.com

People, on the other hand, are able to find moral objections to rape even if it could theoretically serve a reproductive purpose.

And no, the goal isn't to understand something outdated anymore than one absolutely has to, it's to render it obsolete.

 

[bomberfox]

Again, i've already demonstrated that it's not.

So I don't know if the issue is that you're dumb and simply aren't able to comprehend the explanation, or if you're just being obstinate and in denial.

But you're going to have do better than saying that it's "true" because your biology class told you so or yada yada. Because your biology class is wrong.

Something isn't true because an outdated class "told you so". Just as if you'd been born in the Middle Ages, you'd be saying that it's "true" that the earth is the center of the universe, because that's what you learned in class. I think you're epistemologically confused.

So, now that we're in agreement that humans are not animals, maybe we can more onto something else.

We are part of the kingdom animalia so yes we are animals, taxonomically and definitionally so.

 

[Rambozo]

Yeah, rape. Taxonomy's number one mystery.

Study these images.

The left image is a painting of the pet dog on the right. The dog's name is Apple. The piece was named Apple Chase by the artist.

Good job. Hand-eye coordination needs work, but the dog's head, fur, eye, ear and nose are clearly expressed.

Wha'cha think? A young child artist not yet adept at hand-to-brush-to-canvas? Someone with Parkinson's? A blind artist? Wha'cha think?




















Here's the artist.

That's Michael. I wonder what he's painting there.

Homo sapiens is not the only cognizant species. Michael is not only capable, but talented in expressing what's in his mind by putting it on canvas.

We, sir, are apes.

Whatever capabilities animals have are quite limited in comparison to human capabilities.

No animal could produce the works of Michelangelo, for example.

What you're doing is simply finding similarities between humans and animals, and putting them into the same category based on similarities, while negating the differences. The categorization is arbitrary and a human construction, but you insist on categorizing things in a very specific way for some reason you may not even know yourself.

Again, we can reference Maslow's hierarchy of needs, if we need another example. If we assume that animals only have philological needs, such as survival and reproduction, then it's more than established that humans have much higher levels of needs, such as self-actualization. So unless you want to argue that animals also have those higher levels of needs as well, and aren't motivated merely by survival and reproduction, then I'm not sure what you're getting at.

 

[bomberfox]

It's been more than documented that sexual coercion exists in the animal kingdom:

Male Sexual Aggression: What Chimps Can Reveal About People

Male chimpanzees who are more violent toward females tend to sire more offspring, which may provide insights into human sexual aggression.

www.livescience.com

People, on the other hand, are able to find moral objections to rape even if it could theoretically serve a reproductive purpose.

And no, the goal isn't to understand something outdated anymore than one absolutely has to, it's to render it obsolete.

Moral objections or not has nothing to do with the biological classification of animal.