Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Some people like to think that human beings are unique and special especially according to religon, but this seems like a narrow minded point of view.

First of all it could be argued that there are other creatures on this planet that are superior to humans, for example (correct me if im wrong) cockroaches are very adaptable, have been around longer than humans and can apparently survive without its head.

Superority just seems to be a relative term, after all if humans were to be wiped out the world would go on without us.

Now heres the thing it does seem to me that human beings are superior due to our potential. It seems that we could have more power over all other creatures than they do on us. Sure if all the insects got together they could probably destroy us, look at what locusts do.

Well lets put it this way humans have the ability to be more than human the other creatures on this planet cannot. Sure some creatures can change sex but a wolf cant be more than a wolf, an ant cant be more than an ant but if you look where genetic engineering and cybernetics is going humans will be able to be more than human. Also we are dependent on other creatures on this planet but in the future we could probably survive without them ie instead of having to eat food we could sustain ourselves through electricity.

From an evolutionary perspective, the ability of a human to be more then a human could be mimicked by other species overtime.

Originally posted by Quark_666
From an evolutionary perspective, the ability of a human to be more then a human could be mimicked by other species overtime.

Thats true but they dont have it at the moment we do.

I don't think so but this does depend on what basis we are trying to answer from: logic, theology, science.

What basis are using here?

EVERYTHING IS SPECIAL..

One of the very few things that is different between humans and animals is that humans have the ability to not adept themselfs to their surroundings. Animals always do. Which I think makes them 'better' in some way. Most of humanity will fall if all our own made surroundings would dissapear.

It depends on what you mean by special.I think all humans are special in there own way.That is how we were created in the likes and goodness of the lord.jm

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
It depends on what you mean by special.I think all humans are special in there own way.That is how we were created in the likes and goodness of the lord.jm

Would you say all "animals" are special?

Sure... were the most egotistically based species there is... though we shouldn't be... as this is what many of the... "tree huggers" think we should live in harmony with nature... yet even many of them live in apartments or housing of some sort rather than sleeping out in the middle of the woods naked with only trees, leaves and things they would obtain directly from nature... we don't adapt... we adapt our surroundings to us... as stated above... i think, of course other animals may think us to also be inferior... we may never know

It is impossible to overlook the extent to which civilization is built upon a renunciation of instinct.
-Sigmund Freud

Originally posted by chithappens
I don't think so but this does depend on what basis we are trying to answer from: logic, theology, science.

What basis are using here?

Logical and scientific I guess, not theological. Here are my reasons:

1. Humans can become more than human. In the future we could alter our genetics so that we could live underwater or even in outerspace. All other creatures eventhough they may have special abilities they cannot become more than they are for example a cockroah is supposed to be very adaptable but cannot become more than a cockroach. A chameleon can change colour but cannot grow wings.

2. Power if we wanted to we could have the potential to destroy all life on earth.

3. All other creature are dependent on the ecosystem, humans potentially could become independent if for example they evolved into machines and fed off electricity. (I can see some flaws in this argument).

Originally posted by Alfheim
Logical and scientific I guess, not theological. Here are my reasons:

1. Humans can become more than human. In the future we could alter our genetics so that we could live underwater or even in outerspace. All other creatures eventhough they may have special abilities they cannot become more than they are for example a cockroah is supposed to be very adaptable but cannot become more than a cockroach. A chameleon can change colour but cannot grow wings.

So basically you're arguing for intelligence as the main thing that makes us "special"? It does but not any more special than that cockroach or chameleon since thier abilities are inherent while ours are not.

Originally posted by Alfheim
2. Power if we wanted to we could have the potential to destroy all life on earth.

And? Birds probably could too. We would just do it faster and with more "pizzaz".

Originally posted by Alfheim
3. All other creature are dependent on the ecosystem, humans potentially could become independent if for example they evolved into machines and fed off electricity. (I can see some flaws in this argument).

Yeah, like the difficulty in evolving into something inorganic.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So basically you're arguing for intelligence as the main thing that makes us "special"? It does but not any more special than that cockroach or chameleon since thier abilities are inherent while ours are not.

What exactly do you mean by not inherent?


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

And? Birds probably could too. We would just do it faster and with more "pizzaz".

I dont think they could destroy everything. Im pretty sure we could potentiallly do more damage and we could destroy all life. It could also be argued that its not in the birds nature to destroy all life. By the way im also thinking about what technology we could have in the future as well.


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

Yeah, like the difficulty in evolving into something inorganic.

Dont understand how thats a flaw because I can see human beings having the ability to evolve into something inorganic

Humans are both unique and special. Humans are clearly more important than any other species on this planet.

QUOTE=9640275]Originally posted by inimalist
Humans are both unique and special. Humans are clearly more important than any other species on this planet.

Throw any "civil" man into a jungle with just a sash and a knife and I'll see how special man is.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Logical and scientific I guess, not theological. Here are my reasons:

1. Humans can become more than human. In the future we could alter our genetics so that we could live underwater or even in outerspace. All other creatures eventhough they may have special abilities they cannot become more than they are for example a cockroah is supposed to be very adaptable but cannot become more than a cockroach. A chameleon can change colour but cannot grow wings.



A cockroach can become more than a cockroach - evident by the fact they are still around. Adaptability, evolution are enhancements.

Originally posted by Alfheim

2. Power if we wanted to we could have the potential to destroy all life on earth.



This is a sketchy point. The "we" is too broad for various reasons.



Originally posted by Alfheim


3. All other creature are dependent on the ecosystem, humans potentially could become independent if for example they evolved into machines and fed off electricity. (I can see some flaws in this argument).

Humans can not evolve into machines. They can add attachments and become bionic but that is a totally different topic. Humans are actually still dependent on ecosystems, but technologies are put in place in different areas to adjust to those places.

Potentially, humans could adapt to any enviornment on Earth but we all know it does not generally work like that in application.

Originally posted by inimalist
Humans are clearly more important than any other species on this planet.

Well I guess thats what im trying to say in a complicated way.


Originally posted by chithappens


A cockroach can become more than a cockroach - evident by the fact they are still around. Adaptability, evolution are enhancements.


No its not more than a cockroach its still a cockroach it doesnt become caterpillar does it?

Originally posted by chithappens

This is a sketchy point. The "we" is too broad for various reasons.


Bare in mind im refering to what humans could possibly do in the future. Obvoulsy though when im talking about humans im talking about a hypothetical situation where humans got together to destroy the earth.

Originally posted by chithappens

Humans can not evolve into machines. They can add attachments and become bionic but that is a totally different topic.

No its not. One of my criteria for humans being special is their intelligence in the fact they can use their intelligence to become more than human. Humans in the future could become robots or completely change their DNA. I guess its not evolution in the literal sense of the word.

Originally posted by chithappens

Humans are actually still dependent on ecosystems, but technologies are put in place in different areas to adjust to those places.

Potentially, humans could adapt to any enviornment on Earth but we all know it does not generally work like that in application.

Also bare in mind im refering to the future. Yes humans can adapt to an extent to the envinronment but its not absurd to think that humans can actually become robots where they would really be able to adapt to any envinronment.

no

I'm certainly special! Just ask the people who love me. They'll tell you what makes me special.

Do you have anyone who loves you?

Our ability to learn is what makes us special. No other creature on the planet is as intelligent and that is a trait we can thank evolution for. We are not born smart but we learn at an amazing rate during our child hood. We have a great ability to retain knowledge and pass it down through generations. Technology and any thing else you can think of are just by products of our one special ability.

Originally posted by chithappens
Throw any "civil" man into a jungle with just a sash and a knife and I'll see how special man is.


What does this have to do with anything?

Ok, so a man in a sash with a knige in the jungle is special. Very special in fact. The fact that this man might die is redundant. Take a fish out of the water and then critisize it for not being able to breathe.

You only have to take one look at a big city from a few miles away, say New York to get your answer to "are we special?".

What do you mean by special?

Are humans more "deserving" of peace and love than other animals? I don't think so. Are we unique as metacognitive symbol users? Apparently so (though, IMO, this does not necessarily make us more deserving). We're the tip of consciousness, able to ask the biggest questions.

OH YOU ARE SPECIAL

SPECIAL


EVERYONE IS SPECIAL


EVERYONE IN HIS OR HER OWN WAYY



OH YOU ARE SPECIAL


SPECIAL


EVERYONE IS SPECIAL !!!!


EVERYONE IN HIS OR HER OWN WAYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Is everyone being special the same as no one being special??

Ok lets rephrase the question. Does the intelligence of the human race make it the most mportant species?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok lets rephrase the question. Does the intelligence of the human race make it the most mportant species?

From our PoV? Hellz yeah!

From anything elses? No, not at all.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok lets rephrase the question. Does the intelligence of the human race make it the most mportant species?

lol

I'd say its our civilizations and culture, not our "intelligence". They are closely related, but I find intelligence a bad word to use in this. Don't want those Green-os to think you are calling animals stupid

haha, in reality its just that "intelligence" is very difficult to define.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
From our PoV? Hellz yeah!

From anything elses? No, not at all.

Well like i've been saying our intellignce can enable us to "evolve" into highier lifeforms such as robots and its not completely illogical to think we could find a way to become living energy. Other creatures and animals cannot.

I dunno people say everything is subjective but you got to draw the line somewhere.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol

I'd say its our civilizations and culture, not our "intelligence". They are closely related, but I find intelligence a bad word to use in this. Don't want those Green-os to think you are calling animals stupid

haha, in reality its just that "intelligence" is very difficult to define.

Argh!

Originally posted by Alfheim
Well like i've been saying our intellignce can enable us to "evolve" into highier lifeforms such as robots and its not completely illogical to think we could find a way to become living energy. Other creatures and animals cannot.


wow, I missed that part of the thread....


maybe look up what "energy" is... It cannot have substance in the way you think it can. It's not the X-Men, Energy isn't this pink or blue substance that just permiates everything.

Originally posted by inimalist
wow, I missed that part of the thread....


maybe look up what "energy" is... It cannot have substance in the way you think it can. It's not the X-Men, Energy isn't this pink or blue substance that just permiates everything.


Ok.....but energy can be controlled can't it?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok.....but energy can be controlled can't it?

not in the way I believe you are phrasing it. In physics "energy" refers to the potential for something to interact with something.

For instance, "heat" is the transmitter of potential action from a chemical reaction to other matter. There is no "energy" in a tangible sense.

Originally posted by inimalist
not in the way I believe you are phrasing it. In physics "energy" refers to the potential for something to interact with something.

For instance, "heat" is the transmitter of potential action from a chemical reaction to other matter. There is no "energy" in a tangible sense.

Well anyway i'll look it up.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Well anyway i'll look it up.



/sigh

or we can be like a superhero and channel mystic extra-dimensional energies through our fingertips on quantum wavelength fluctuations, tapping into the supersymmetry of the meta cognitive universe.

Originally posted by inimalist
What does this have to do with anything?

Ok, so a man in a sash with a knige in the jungle is special. Very special in fact. The fact that this man might die is redundant. Take a fish out of the water and then critisize it for not being able to breathe.

This is point: everyone speaks as if men can do anything and everything. We are just animals if you take into account one man. It would be the civilizations that set men apart but that does not make them special though.

What the hell do we mean by special? Better than other creatures?

Originally posted by chithappens
This is point: everyone speaks as if men can do anything and everything. We are just animals if you take into account one man. It would be the civilizations that set men apart but that does not make them special though.

What the hell do we mean by special? Better than other creatures?

ya, I'd agree with you. I took special to mean unique. And importance to be more of a universiality, such as, it is more important if another intelligent life form found us on this planet than a tree or zebra, given the complexity of the interactions that would follow.

I wouldn't say humans are better than other creatures without specifying what I think they are better at.

That is more what I meant. I just think we are speaking in terms too broad.

Originally posted by inimalist


/sigh

or we can be like a superhero and channel mystic extra-dimensional energies through our fingertips on quantum wavelength fluctuations, tapping into the supersymmetry of the meta cognitive universe.

I don't know what that was all about. I said I would look into it.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I don't know what that was all about. I said I would look into it.

im just being an ass

Originally posted by inimalist
im just being an ass

Ok nevermind.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok lets rephrase the question. Does the intelligence of the human race make it the most mportant species? Important in terms of what? Searching for meaning? Conceptualizing as to what may lie behind the phenomenal world? We seek the Big Picture, one way or another. As far as we know, no other creature is like this.

Originally posted by inimalist
or we can be like a superhero and channel mystic extra-dimensional energies through our fingertips on quantum wavelength fluctuations, tapping into the supersymmetry of the meta cognitive universe. That sounds pretty cool, actually.

Take out religious overtones, and we're just animals. And there's definitely some people who don't accomplish anything or do harm to others. So on an inidividual level, no, we're not all special.

As a species, also no. We have by far the highest intelligence and level of consciousness, but that doesn't confer some special place in the hierarchy of the cosmos. Most dominant species on Earth? Sure. So if you're talking about physical or mental superiority, we're >> them. But the definition of "special" is crucial, because any other way we're no more important than any other species.

Originally posted by inimalist
or we can be like a superhero and channel mystic extra-dimensional energies through our fingertips on quantum wavelength fluctuations, tapping into the supersymmetry of the meta cognitive universe.

Rock!

there is no "special" species. none are better than any others.

All species have different attributes that make them more/less likely to survive and flourish in any particular environment/ecosystem.

human intelligence is grand at the moment, but not in all environments. Take two posters of this thread and drop them off in the arctic circle with a polar bear. Who do you think is going to survive and flourish? Human intelligence is worth jack shit unless in an environment supplying tools for the humans to use by putting that intelligence to use.

our intelligence is actually working against the longevity of our species. As our societies get more technological, fundamental survival skills are lost. If a global catastrophe were to render our technology moot, our species would dwindle to extremely low numbers. Even if the environments and ecosystems remained the same, humans have lost survival skills. We still have the instincts...eat...drink....reproduce. The problem arises when the human doesn't know how to hunt food to eat......or find fresh, uncontaminated water to drink to keep them alive to reproduce. In that scenerio, the members of undeveloped countries would be the most likely survivors. The people who's idea of eating dinner is going out and killing something, not going to Kroger with a debit card.

when it comes to survival of a species......the simpler the better.

LOL @ people saying people aren't special on a computer over the internet in language

how does that make them special? what good does the existence of language, computers or the interweb do you if you're in the forest of Kodiak island? You seem to think that technological tools define the human species when it is merely the intelligence that allowed them to create that technology. I assure you, that intelligence is no match for hordes of grizzly bears. What are you going to do to survive.....eat your dsl cable? Are you going to fend off grizzly after grizzly with your mouse pad?

LOL @ Word Salad

"word salad", never heard of it. must be a canadian thing......eh?

It is a schizophrenic thing

Originally posted by Alfheim
Thats true but they dont have it at the moment we do.

So lets drive them all to extinction before they do!!!


...

Originally posted by inimalist
LOL @ people saying people aren't special on a computer over the internet in language

On the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much - the wheel, New York, wars and so on - whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man - for precisely the same reasons.

- Douglas Adams

Originally posted by inimalist
LOL @ people saying people aren't special on a computer over the internet in language

Still depends on the definition of "special", which this thread has yet to accurately define. So we're forced to qualify our statements based on our own interpretations of the word.

I don't think any real dissection of "special" is needed.

By humans being special it does not mean that other animals are not, and special does not necessarily mean "best" or even "good".

And yes, humans do get to define what "special" is. Might not a complex system of abstract symbolic representation that allows for such philosophical discussion surrounding the nature of that representation be special?

I don't see the label "special" as being a matter of worth, nor do I think there is any real value in arguing about the subjective interpretation of the "worth" of humanity as a species vs other species.

Originally posted by inimalist
I don't think any real dissection of "special" is needed.

By humans being special it does not mean that other animals are not, and special does not necessarily mean "best" or even "good".

And yes, humans do get to define what "special" is. Might not a complex system of abstract symbolic representation that allows for such philosophical discussion surrounding the nature of that representation be special?

I don't see the label "special" as being a matter of worth, nor do I think there is any real value in arguing about the subjective interpretation of the "worth" of humanity as a species vs other species.

Hence the utter lack of specialness. Everything has unique or "special" qualities about it, the fact that our specialness lets us recognize that is meaningless. Paradoxical I suppose, the only way to be unique is not not be unique.

Originally posted by inimalist
By humans being special it does not mean that other animals are not, and special does not necessarily mean "best" or even "good".

And yes, humans do get to define what "special" is. Might not a complex system of abstract symbolic representation that allows for such philosophical discussion surrounding the nature of that representation be special?
I think so. As I mentioned in prior posts, while human beings may not inherently be more deserving of peace, love and freedom from suffering than other creatures, we are able to see the universe in a unique manner, a manner which allows us to ask the big questions regarding existence and our place in it, allows us to find (or at least, impart) meaning and understanding beyond what our senses tell us.

wew're just animals.. one of our main problems is our egotism and smugness.... we name ourselves homo sapiens sapiens, wisest of wise men, assuming that we are already at the top of the tree.... for all we know we'rejust the latest top of the tree... for instance, at the time of the dinosaurs, it is very possible that there was a spexcies with the same reasoning capacity as us, thinking it too was the best species there could ever be... if we had been less influenced by the whole judaeo christian "image of god" thing, we would have named our species diffewrently.. personally i would favour Jack Cohen's "Pan Narrans".... the story telling chimp....

Everything has special qualities. We are human yet we don't do what's best for our own planet. Guess we're special in a more stupid and unintelligent way. In fact, we're greedy, well most of us.

Originally posted by big gay kirk
for instance, at the time of the dinosaurs, it is very possible that there was a spexcies with the same reasoning capacity as us, thinking it too was the best species there could ever be... if we had been less influenced by the whole judaeo christian "image of god" thing, we would have named our species diffewrently.. personally i would favour Jack Cohen's "Pan Narrans".... the story telling chimp....

LOL

omfg

Originally posted by debbiejo
Everything has special qualities. We are human yet we don't do what's best for our own planet. Guess we're special in a more stupid and unintelligent way. In fact, we're greedy, well most of us.

...

I guess if the measure of intelligence to you is the health of the planet...

Especially considering how difficult it is to learn things about the planet and how far our technology had to come for us to have these concerns...

No, it's greed in all areas. Money, power..etc. The powerful squash the small and exploit them. People waste resources, people cheat companies so that insurance goes up, Companies cheat people and the society which makes some want to cheat back. No, integrity with many people, and it all spirals back down to "Can't you see the bigger picture, or are we all that dumb." thing. And we are the intelligent ones?????

Originally posted by debbiejo
No, it's greed in all areas. Money, power..etc. The powerful squash the small and exploit them. People waste resources, people cheat companies so that insurance goes up, Companies cheat people and the society which makes some want to cheat back. No, integrity with many people, and it all spirals back down to "Can't you see the bigger picture, or are we all that dumb." thing. And we are the intelligent ones?????

ok...

so how does a complex system of insurance and banking make us unintelligent?

I agree that humans are "selfish" (Randian) but like, we aren't asking whether or not human intellect lets us be used as pawns by mega corporations, but in fact, if that intellect makes us special when compared to other terrestrial animals.

Using the definition Evil Dead posted, human intelligence satisfies 3 of the 4 possible uses of "special".

Saying people are special is not saying people are perfect. Get over the fact that you are more intelligent that the idiot who spends his entire week waiting for the next American Idol vote.

Oh, and if you think humans are greedy and easily manipulated, I think you might be overlooking all of the research done on animal behaviour. You want greed? look at something with a small pre-frontal cortex. You want easily manipulated, look at the work by Skinner.

Oh, I've read Skinner, but what I am getting at is that people feel we are MORE SPECIAL than anything else. We aren't.

If you looked at it from a different view, we are pretty stupid with all that we use our minds for. We are supposed to be leaders of this world, well we're doing a smash up job, eh?

Originally posted by debbiejo
Oh, I've read Skinner, but what I am getting at is that people feel we are MORE SPECIAL than anything else. We aren't.

I think the word you are looking for is superior or better, or something like that, which I would agree with you on. We don't have any "human" quality that makes us morally or universally better than animals. We are special though

Originally posted by debbiejo
If you looked at it from a different view, we are pretty stupid with all that we use our minds for. We are supposed to be leaders of this world, well we're doing a smash up job, eh?

lol, im not so much of a pessimist

compared to even 100 years ago, the world is a much better place. Maybe not in africa....

I am not such a pessimist's either, but see the reality of Mindful powers at play. I believe that WE ARE ALL SPECIAL...Damn the hypocrisy, damn the religious, damn the institutions, damn the socialized or not governments, damn everything that doesn't sat we ARE.

Originally posted by inimalist
I don't think any real dissection of "special" is needed.

By humans being special it does not mean that other animals are not, and special does not necessarily mean "best" or even "good".

And yes, humans do get to define what "special" is. Might not a complex system of abstract symbolic representation that allows for such philosophical discussion surrounding the nature of that representation be special?

I don't see the label "special" as being a matter of worth, nor do I think there is any real value in arguing about the subjective interpretation of the "worth" of humanity as a species vs other species.

I agree, actually. Though again, this sentence: Might not a complex system of abstract symbolic representation that allows for such philosophical discussion surrounding the nature of that representation be special? ....is again having to define the term before answering the question. I could easily define it so that the answer is "no" (and did, earlier). So this is almost a moot discussion.

But yes, by that criteria (and most criteria, if we use a suitably vague premise for the word) we're all quite special due to our advanced cognitive capabilities.

Be specific... SPECIAL could mean a variation of things.

All humans are special. We're unique and determinate. That's special.

Ok people forget the word "special". Special was too broad a term to use. I am sticking with does our intelligence make us the most important?

Obvoulsy other creatures are important as well and without some creatures we would die, but I dont see how other creatures on this planet are important as us when we have the potential power to destroy life on earth, advance life on earth (genetic egineeering) and have the power to become independent from earth.

Cool. Now we can dicker over "important."

Originally posted by Mindship
Cool. Now we can dicker over "important."

Well I think its better than the term "special", I think there are clear raesons that you could give that could indicate this.

It's a subjective question regardless of definition.

important is much less useful than special. Special does not necessarily have a value judgement (it can mean unique, different, ect). However, for important, each one of us will have such massivly differant interpretations of what characteristics are analyzed when determining importance that there is pretty much no chance of a consensus.

My personal opinion is that we are the most important, but that simply comes from the fact that, should another sentient lifeform arrive on earth, all things being equal, we are likely the most important discovery on the planet, and certainly the most important species to interact with. But then, I may be anthropomorphizing aliens a little too much.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Ok people forget the word "special". Special was too broad a term to use. I am sticking with does our intelligence make us the most important? Ermm, we'll have to take everything else into contxt first. Then draw up a conclusion.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
It's a subjective question regardless of definition.

Yes...but this reminds me of when you said that selfish and unselfish were subjective terms as well. True but....

Humans have the potential power to destroy earth or make it better, we even have the power to advance other lifeforms if that doesnt make us more important I dont know what does.....

Originally posted by Alfheim
Humans have the potential power to destroy earth or make it better, we even have the power to advance other lifeforms if that doesnt make us more important I dont know what does.....

the terms:

potential power
destroy
better
power
advance
other lifeforms
more
important

are all subjective terms.

Originally posted by inimalist
the terms:

potential power
destroy
better
power
advance
other lifeforms
more
important

are all subjective terms.

Yes I know, but if your going to use that argument the answer to every single discussion is its "subjective".

A: Do you think the Turkey are wrong to deny commiting Genocide?
B: Its subjective.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Yes I know, but if your going to use that argument the answer to every single discussion is its "subjective".

A: Do you think the Turkey are wrong to deny commiting Genocide?
B: Its subjective.


well, ya, for people who want to spend their time arguing about what is right or wrong.

Personally, i don't care if it is right for Turkey to deny genocide, since it is a subjective question. Did they commit genocide? Well, for that question it is possible to draw conclusions based on previous evidence. You can be like, "oh, genocide is subjective", but I would say no more than any other specific terms in language, and it can be very easily defined in an operational sense.

It's also why experiments are so important

Originally posted by Alfheim
Yes...but this reminds me of when you said that selfish and unselfish were subjective terms as well. True but....

Humans have the potential power to destroy earth or make it better, we even have the power to advance other lifeforms if that doesnt make us more important I dont know what does.....

Then you just answered your own question. But the answer is yours, not an objective fact.

And keep in mind alter does not really mean advance.

The Romantics thought we were special. The Realist and Naturalist however did not.

It's all in the eye of the beholder.

Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....

humans are special in sense that,

of all the creatures in creation, humans are the only ones capable of actually destroying the earth

sorry if someone else posted a response like this i didnt quite read al the posts but in my opinion superiority is like racism.. its not natural its something that taught and passed down. humans seem to think there superioir because of really two things..ability to use and make technology

basically if we couldnt do that we'd be food for predator animals and thats it..

Originally posted by stickman618
humans are special in sense that,

of all the creatures in creation, humans are the only ones capable of actually destroying the earth

with current technology we probably could not destroy the planet. Altering the ecosystem is way different from destroying the earth.

Originally posted by shaynebmxxx
sorry if someone else posted a response like this i didnt quite read al the posts but in my opinion superiority is like racism.. its not natural its something that taught and passed down. humans seem to think there superioir because of really two things..ability to use and make technology

special =/= superior

racism likely is natural, and so is our ability to make and use technology

Originally posted by shaynebmxxx
basically if we couldnt do that we'd be food for predator animals and thats it..

we could handicap animals by removing their natural abilities as well. Man without technology probably kicks the ass of tiger without teeth, fangs, or muscles.

Originally posted by inimalist
with current technology we probably could not destroy the planet. Altering the ecosystem is way different from destroying the earth.



special =/= superior

racism likely is natural, and so is our ability to make and use technology



we could handicap animals by removing their natural abilities as well. Man without technology probably kicks the ass of tiger without teeth, fangs, or muscles.

hah umm im pretty sure man would beat anythings ass without muscles teeth or claws. and no racism is not natural.. you dont naturally grow hating people just like you dont naturally grow up thinking your superior. its all taught. its just sad that the most intelligent species on the planet is in a sense the worst thing to ever happen to it. we are destroying themselves and taking everyone down with them. we have the power to stop it but we just keep digging deeper and deeper. i dont care what you say or how you try to justify this, weve destroyed the earth and its only getting worse

Originally posted by Alfheim
Some people like to think that human beings are unique and special especially according to religon, but this seems like a narrow minded point of view.

First of all it could be argued that there are other creatures on this planet that are superior to humans, for example (correct me if im wrong) cockroaches are very adaptable, have been around longer than humans and can apparently survive without its head.

Superority just seems to be a relative term, after all if humans were to be wiped out the world would go on without us.

Now heres the thing it does seem to me that human beings are superior due to our potential. It seems that we could have more power over all other creatures than they do on us. Sure if all the insects got together they could probably destroy us, look at what locusts do.

Well lets put it this way humans have the ability to be more than human the other creatures on this planet cannot. Sure some creatures can change sex but a wolf cant be more than a wolf, an ant cant be more than an ant but if you look where genetic engineering and cybernetics is going humans will be able to be more than human. Also we are dependent on other creatures on this planet but in the future we could probably survive without them ie instead of having to eat food we could sustain ourselves through electricity.

Humans are special and superior to other life due to our consciousness, ability to reason and adapt to anything.

right.. in that respect yes. but the superiority people think of now is not of that. its that nothing else has feelings, nothing else can think, and that nothing else matters. no one thinks that by reducing rainforests to rubble that it will do anything. why? because we think it wont affect us.. due to the fact that we think we are "superior"..

I think that human beings are special in that everything is special. Composition, relation to the ecosystem of the planet, etc. However the Earth would survive if extinction were to occur. So humans are not essential, just present.

Originally posted by shaynebmxxx
no one thinks that by reducing rainforests to rubble that it will do anything. why? because we think it wont affect us.. due to the fact that we think we are "superior"..


I highly doubt most people thinks that. Especially the people respobsible for clearing the rainforests. We just dont care. When humanity needlessly disposes of animals and elements in nature from extreme pollution. I Think some of that comes from being self consumed in a sense of superiority over nature. I think for the most part, however, we just dont care and do not do it with a sense of superior.

The rain forest issue is certainly a major problem. As far as slaughtering animals and harvesting of tree's for luxory and necessasity. We farm animals and tree's for this.

Originally posted by shaynebmxxx
i dont care what you say or how you try to justify this

you are a fascist

and dumb, but the ignorance trumped that....

You lot suck. Stop the arguing and the backchat and just agree with me because you know im right.

I believe that human being are the super being .Just the simplest way to argue that we have brain unlimited and other species can not do beyond their limits or instinct.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
I highly doubt most people thinks that. Especially the people respobsible for clearing the rainforests. We just dont care. When humanity needlessly disposes of animals and elements in nature from extreme pollution. I Think some of that comes from being self consumed in a sense of superiority over nature. I think for the most part, however, we just dont care and do not do it with a sense of superior.

The rain forest issue is certainly a major problem. As far as slaughtering animals and harvesting of tree's for luxory and necessasity. We farm animals and tree's for this.



thats what im talking about, we dont think anything we do to earth will affect us. we only care about the present and how it will benefit us, and not worry about the impact it will have on everything around the decision made

hey inimalist i jsut realized youwere quoting me from your last post. how the hell does that make me a fascist?

Originally posted by Alfheim
Some people like to think that human beings are unique and special especially according to religon, but this seems like a narrow minded point of view.

First of all it could be argued that there are other creatures on this planet that are superior to humans, for example (correct me if im wrong) cockroaches are very adaptable, have been around longer than humans and can apparently survive without its head.

Superority just seems to be a relative term, after all if humans were to be wiped out the world would go on without us.

Now heres the thing it does seem to me that human beings are superior due to our potential. It seems that we could have more power over all other creatures than they do on us. Sure if all the insects got together they could probably destroy us, look at what locusts do.

Well lets put it this way humans have the ability to be more than human the other creatures on this planet cannot. Sure some creatures can change sex but a wolf cant be more than a wolf, an ant cant be more than an ant but if you look where genetic engineering and cybernetics is going humans will be able to be more than human. Also we are dependent on other creatures on this planet but in the future we could probably survive without them ie instead of having to eat food we could sustain ourselves through electricity.


What you say makes a lot of sense, cockroaches have been around before us and I do believe that the world can survive without us, no I do not want to die for a long, but this is what I believe.

Peace,
Amanda

well of course the earth would live on without us, if anything it would be in better condition without us.

Originally posted by shaynebmxxx
well of course the earth would live on without us, if anything it would be in better condition without us.

Sadly, because a lot of us pollute the Earth.

Peace,
Amanda

Are humans special? An interesting debate.

However, when we talk about humans in general, we are talking about six and a half billion different individuals.

Not to put too fine a point on it, that means there are six and a half billion individuals who are indeed special - at least to themselves.

But is the species special? Yes and no. It is special because it has incredible potential - masked only by generations if not milennia of ignorance.

It is NOT special, at least as far as Mother Nature is concerned - because the species as a collective has turned the planet into a garbage dump...in other words, we are somewhat like blood sucking leeches; fleas; or perhaps a virus.

I consider it interesting that A cockroach can apparently survive a nuclear blast.

A salamander may have most of its body cut off - leaving only the neck and head - and it will regrow the body.

A caterpillar can become a butterfly.

The occasional human goes through the ascension process (and leaves the rest of us scratching our heads...because most of us haven't got much of a clue as to where we came from, why we are here, or where we'll be going to....

Originally posted by Startrekka
Are humans special? An interesting debate.

However, when we talk about humans in general, we are talking about six and a half billion different individuals.

Not to put too fine a point on it, that means there are six and a half billion individuals who are indeed special - at least to themselves.

But is the species special? Yes and no. It is special because it has incredible potential - masked only by generations if not milennia of ignorance.

It is NOT special, at least as far as Mother Nature is concerned - because the species as a collective has turned the planet into a garbage dump...in other words, we are somewhat like blood sucking leeches; fleas; or perhaps a virus.

I consider it interesting that A cockroach can apparently survive a nuclear blast.

A salamander may have most of its body cut off - leaving only the neck and head - and it will regrow the body.

A caterpillar can become a butterfly.

The occasional human goes through the ascension process (and leaves the rest of us scratching our heads...because most of us haven't got much of a clue as to where we came from, why we are here, or where we'll be going to....

A lot of people are like, "Why was I put on this Earth?"

Peace,
Amanda

Hopefully I'm not stepping outside the thrust of this thread...into another area of philsophy so to speak...

But the answer to "why was I put on this planet" is not that we were put here..we reincarnated here...frequently.

Yes, some humans ARE special. So special in fact, that they get their very own Olympics, and are allowed to ride to school in their very own special bus.
If you mean, are human beings special in proportion to the planets other lifeforms (sorry, I didn't read your whole intro), then the answer is yes.
We are the smartest and we fought our way to the top of the food chain. Like so many other creatures on this planet, human beings, in large measure, survive by eating other animals. Kind of ugly, but there it is.

Originally posted by Cap'n Happy
Yes, some humans ARE special. So special in fact, that they get their very own Olympics, and are allowed to ride to school in their very own special bus.
If you mean, are human beings special in proportion to the planets other lifeforms (sorry, I didn't read your whole intro), then the answer is yes.
We are the smartest and we fought our way to the top of the food chain. Like so many other creatures on this planet, human beings, in large measure, survive by eating other animals. Kind of ugly, but there it is.

The top of the food chain is detritus eating bacteria. I don't see us unseating them . . . ever.

Originally posted by Evil Dead
how does that make them special? what good does the existence of language, computers or the interweb do you if you're in the forest of Kodiak island? You seem to think that technological tools define the human species when it is merely the intelligence that allowed them to create that technology. I assure you, that intelligence is no match for hordes of grizzly bears. What are you going to do to survive.....eat your dsl cable? Are you going to fend off grizzly after grizzly with your mouse pad?

My friend...
Stop.
Clear your mind and listen for just a second, ok?
HUMAN"S GOT OUT OF THE JUNGLE USING THE VERY INTELLIGENCE YOU DISMISS! That's why man went on to form societies and build cities and why bears are still roaming the forest. Our 'mere INTELLIGENCE' and 'mere technolngy' allowed man to make weapons which kill bears. And also to build ships that take us into space, and to comprehend the secrets of the universe itself. Man has learned to touch the mind of God... bears are still eating fish in the forest.
Look, humans can be awful, no question about it, and there is much we can learn from our fellow animals about harmony and all that.
But humans are special (including you), so accept it.

Originally posted by Cap'n Happy
My friend...
Stop.
Clear your mind and listen for just a second, ok?
HUMAN"S GOT OUT OF THE JUNGLE USING THE VERY INTELLIGENCE YOU DISMISS! That's why man went on to form societies and build cities and why bears are still roaming the forest. Our 'mere INTELLIGENCE' and 'mere technolngy' allowed man to make weapons which kill bears. And also to build ships that take us into space, and to comprehend the secrets of the universe itself. Man has learned to touch the mind of God... bears are still eating fish in the forest.
Look, humans can be awful, no question about it, and there is much we can learn from our fellow animals about harmony and all that.
But humans are special (including you), so accept it.

Ant's developed civilization, warfare, farming, slavery, eugenics and specialized labor before humans did.

Being special is not actually that special.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The top of the food chain is detritus eating bacteria. I don't see us unseating them . . . ever.

Really? You don't see humans unseating bacteria, ever? I had a little bacteria on my scraped knee the other day. A little squirt of Bactine wiped it right out.
Friend, do you really not think you are superior to a bacteria, which can not reason, feel or express emotions, cannot grow in any meaningful way? I don't think you actually think this.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Ant's developed civilization, warfare, farming, slavery, eugenics and specialized labor before humans did.

Being special is not actually that special.

Once again, it is a matter of degrees. Ants, after hundreds of thousands (millions?) of years are still living in their ant hills. We have come a thousand time farther in just a few thousand years. Ants do not have humor, art, music. They have sex to reproduce, we do as well, but we also love. I'm quite sure you wouldn't trade places w/ an ant.

Originally posted by Cap'n Happy
Once again, it is a matter of degrees. Ants, after hundreds of thousands (millions?) of years are still living in their ant hills. We have come a thousand time farther in just a few thousand years. Ants do not have humor, art, music. They have sex to reproduce, we do as well, but we also love. I'm quite sure you wouldn't trade places w/ an ant.

They still live in anthills because anthills are awesome. Not to mention we still live in towns and cities, far less efficiently than ants do.

I've never felt love srug

Depends on the ant.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
They still live in anthills because anthills are awesome. Not to mention we still live in towns and cities, far less efficiently than ants do.

I've never felt love srug

Depends on the ant.

Ah, you're being funny, I get you now. It's hard to tell sometimes. Yes, ants ARE awesome. And you hang in there- that special... someone... will come along and make you feel loved. Twice, if you're lucky.

Originally posted by Cap'n Happy
Really? You don't see humans unseating bacteria, ever? I had a little bacteria on my scraped knee the other day. A little squirt of Bactine wiped it right out.
Friend, do you really not think you are superior to a bacteria, which can not reason, feel or express emotions, cannot grow in any meaningful way? I don't think you actually think this.

lol

superior isn't defined by the human condition. For instance, from a bacteria-eye-view, the fact you cannot reproduce through division, steal DNA from other organisms, or motor around with a flagellum far outweigh the petty buildings and whatever that humans needed to build to survive, or their abstract, yet truly meaningless, art and philosophy which they only produce to compensate for their depressing existance (intelligence as a curse).

bacteria, as far as well adapted and survival is concerned, outshine us. Unless you define superiority in terms of being human, you can't really say you are superior to them. The fact that your life is dependent upon harmonious symbiotic living between you and numerious species of bacteria. Soil is dependant on bacteria. Human civilization and everything we take to be monuments of human invention, are dependent on bacteria.

We share this planet with a number of other species all of whom are as valuable as we are.

Originally posted by Storm
We share this planet with a number of other species all of whom are as valuable as we are.

actually, more valuable. Many other species, I'd dare say most, contribute more to the harmony of their ecosystems than we do......allowing other species to not only flourish but to survive at all by creating a niche for them to fill.

Originally posted by Evil Dead
actually, more valuable. Many other species, I'd dare say most, contribute more to the harmony of their ecosystems than we do......allowing other species to not only flourish but to survive at all by creating a niche for them to fill. If valuable is defined by contributing to the harmony of the ecosystem then yeah. If valuable is defined by the ability, as a species, to produce plastic, then humans are doing pretty ****ing well on this planet.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol

superior isn't defined by the human condition. For instance, from a bacteria-eye-view, the fact you cannot reproduce through division, steal DNA from other organisms, or motor around with a flagellum far outweigh the petty buildings and whatever that humans needed to build to survive, or their abstract, yet truly meaningless, art and philosophy which they only produce to compensate for their depressing existance (intelligence as a curse).

bacteria, as far as well adapted and survival is concerned, outshine us. Unless you define superiority in terms of being human, you can't really say you are superior to them. The fact that your life is dependent upon harmonious symbiotic living between you and numerious species of bacteria. Soil is dependant on bacteria. Human civilization and everything we take to be monuments of human invention, are dependent on bacteria.

Arent scientists on the verge of creating artificial life? Well ok then if were going to use bacteria as our benchmark for superioity we can say we humans can create artficial life, bacteria cant. We have tha ability in the not so far future to become independent from bactaria and have the power to control bacteria while bacteria does not.

Come to think of it though alot of creatures when it come down to it have similar values to that of humans. An ant has a sense of community etc, so to an extent we can compare human values to that of other creatures.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Arent scientists on the verge of creating artificial life? Well ok then if were going to use bacteria as our benchmark for superioity we can say we humans can create artficial life, bacteria cant. We have tha ability in the not so far future to become independent from bactaria and have the power to control bacteria while bacteria does not.

Come to think of it though alot of creatures when it come down to it have similar values to that of humans. An ant has a sense of community etc, so to an extent we can compare human values to that of other creatures.

the ability to create artificial life is only relevant if the ability to create artificial life is a quality by which you are defining "superior". This would again be the taking of what is the pinnacle of human achievement and saying "being human the best is the most superior".

and yes, many of the morals that we consider "human" are really just behavioural patterns that turned out best for genetics in many species.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Arent scientists on the verge of creating artificial life? Well ok then if were going to use bacteria as our benchmark for superioity we can say we humans can create artficial life, bacteria cant. We have tha ability in the not so far future to become independent from bactaria and have the power to control bacteria while bacteria does not.

Come to think of it though alot of creatures when it come down to it have similar values to that of humans. An ant has a sense of community etc, so to an extent we can compare human values to that of other creatures.

Way to completely miss the point. Sure we might make artificial life or travel to the moon but we'll never be capable of traveling in a bloodstream or metabolizing nylon or surviving at ridiculously cold temperatures without help from something. There are many many ways to define "special" or "superior" and at least one of them will apply to anything you care to imagine.

We were plasced upon the food line for a reason. We are smart. shud of known that you people.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
We were plasced upon the food line for a reason. We are smart. shud of known that you people.

Irony is ironic.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Way to completely miss the point. Sure we might make artificial life or travel to the moon but we'll never be capable of traveling in a bloodstream or metabolizing nylon or surviving at ridiculously cold temperatures without help from something. There are many many ways to define "special" or "superior" and at least one of them will apply to anything you care to imagine. This is pretty special:
http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/1931/lsugliestalmiqui0310fl8.jpg

edit.

Originally posted by inimalist


and yes, many of the morals that we consider "human" are really just behavioural patterns that turned out best for genetics in many species.

If I use "human" standards and these standards are applicable to ants and animals then im not looking from a human perspective im looking from their perspective as well. I can these use these standards as a criteria for what is superior or better.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Way to completely miss the point. Sure we might make artificial life or travel to the moon but we'll never be capable of traveling in a bloodstream or metabolizing nylon or surviving at ridiculously cold temperatures without help from something. There are many many ways to define "special" or "superior" and at least one of them will apply to anything you care to imagine.

Is the point you that youare trying to make is that eventhough humans can create artifical life and travel to the moon its irrelevant because there are still things that other creatures can do that we obvoulsy cant do, such as survive in extreme cold without assistance.

Your other point is simply saying that I am using a human criteria for what is special or superior.

Instinctual nature is special, but the ability to disobey instinctual nature is even more special...,thank you conscious thought.

Yes, humans are special. More so than the fuzzy bunny, laughing hyena, slithering snake, soaring bird and marching elephant circus.

At any rate genetic engineering and going to the moon can be applied to the vaules of other animals and insects. Humans as well as other creatures on this planet want to survive, if I can survive better than anybody else then im superior.

An asteroid threatens to wipe out life on earth we escape and everything else dies im superior. If I can take the DNA of other animals and take their attributes and others im superior. If I can even use my science to make them better at what they do im superior.

Originally posted by Alfheim
At any rate genetic engineering and going to the moon can be applied to the vaules of other animals and insects. Humans as well as other creatures on this planet want to survive, if I can survive better than anybody else then im superior.

An asteroid threatens to wipe out life on earth we escape and everything else dies im superior. If I can take the DNA of other animals and take their attributes and others im superior. If I can even use my science to make them better at what they do im superior.

don't forget

if i can kill more i'm superior

Originally posted by stickman618
don't forget

if i can kill more i'm superior

Well animals and insects kill to survive. *shrug*

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
Instinctual nature is special, but the ability to disobey instinctual nature is even more special...,thank you conscious thought.

Yes, humans are special. More so than the fuzzy bunny, laughing hyena, slithering snake, soaring bird and marching elephant circus. Have you ever heard the wolf cry to the blue corn moon?

For shame. Pocahontas scorns you. For shame. uhuh

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Have you ever heard the wolf cry to the blue corn moon?

Is that what the lyrics are!? No shit. Kind of insulting now that I know what she's really singing.

Well, that's only because you can't paint with all the colors of the wind, obviously.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Well, that's only because you can't paint with all the colors of the wind, obviously.

That's kind of an unfair assumption! I've been told it's possible I'm 1/18 Indian. Which seems to be true, because I'm not allergic to Poison Ivy.

I'm only, what, 14 fractions away from owning a casino?

Originally posted by Devil King
That's kind of an unfair assumption! I've been told it's possible I'm 1/18 Indian. Which seems to be true, because I'm not allergic to Poison Ivy.

I'm only, what, 14 fractions away from owning a casino? Nah, it just takes a lot of lies, a bit of money and no conscience whatsoever to get an Indian Casino. You are 14 fractions away from getting your house taken away getting a piece of worthless land with 1000 other people and some blankets with smallpox. Damn, must feel good to be a white homo in the US.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
This is pretty special:
http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/1931/lsugliestalmiqui0310fl8.jpg

Yup. Damned ugly though.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Is the point you that youare trying to make is that eventhough humans can create artifical life and travel to the moon its irrelevant because there are still things that other creatures can do that we obvoulsy cant do, such as survive in extreme cold without assistance.

Yes . . . because they're special, just like us.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Your other point is simply saying that I am using a human criteria for what is special or superior.

Exactly. That's dumb. The question is "are humans special" not "are humans special from our point of view" you lack objectivity.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yup. Damned ugly though.



Yes . . . because they're special, just like us.



Exactly. That's dumb. The question is "are humans special" not "are humans special from our point of view" you lack objectivity.

Then in other word I didnt miss the point you did.

Originally posted by Alfheim


Come to think of it though alot of creatures when it come down to it have similar values to that of humans. An ant has a sense of community etc, so to an extent we can compare human values to that of other creatures.

Just that your "we can compare human values to them" is your idea, no one says we can apply that objectively but you.

even if we are comparable, thats the operative term, COMPARE.

To compare two things, you must use a variable that each can be measured on. So, if I have two cups of liquid, a comparison could be made about the relative heat of the liquids to each other or to the room, etc. The important part of this is that in any comparison, there are variables and there are the things that these variables are being compared too.

"Superiority" and "specialness" are not comparative variables. Superiority deals with rank, where imho, specialness deals with relative frequency (less frequency, more special). By definition or even just by the definition of the words, something cannot have general "superiority" or "specialness" when compared to another thing (I guess special is somewhat applicable, since it would be dealing the the frequency of the thing, which is a valid measure).

Ok, so, the most important thing then, are to define what variables are being compared with each other. Herein lies the problem. The variables that humans commonly use to distinguish themselves from one another may only be relevant to humans. Further, the value of certain qualities is dependent on both culture and species.

This isn't really a problem in any normal sense. The community aspect of ants is comparable to the community aspect of humans. Variables within the title "community" (gender roles, work habits, etc) can be compared. Of course, one must be sure not to assume human type distinctions (we tend to anthropomorphize animal behaviour to explain it as if it were a human in an animal's body), but there are still comparative studies that could be ran.

The problem is with the introduction of the word "superior". What does it mean for an animal to be superior to a human, or vice versa? The answer is that it is a meaningless question. Tigers and bears have superior claws and teeth to ours, when compared in regard to sharpness, however we would have far superior teeth to tigers and bears, when compared in regard to cleanliness.

As far as I am concerned, that is the best we can do. As soon as we say that hygiene is "superior" to sharpness, or whatever combination of factors, we are taking the subjective need that each species has for their physical characteristics and putting them into the context of another species' experience.

So, with regard to the common examples of genetic engineering and space flight, these are things that are inherently human. One way of expressing this is to say that humans are superior because we can make things that other animals cannot, or we can put in goal posts and say "when humans reach X degree of technology or X degrees of independence from nature we are superior", but every single variable that we are superior to animals in is a variable that is culturally specific to the human context. The entire concept of independence from the natural world is a human concept, thus, the fact that any other animal has not achieved it does not show any general degree of human superiority, rather it shows that the human condition has created a situation where humans value this type of autonomy.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Just that your "we can compare human values to them" is your idea, no one says we can apply that objectively but you.

Obvously thats up to you to decide what you think, my beef was that in my post quoted I was not saying humans are special from our point of view, I was saying that humans are special because things that we consider as attributes for superiority can be applied to other creatures. ie humans are not superior to animals because they cant build cars but were superior because we can achieve the same objectives more easily.

Originally posted by inimalist

As far as I am concerned, that is the best we can do. As soon as we say that hygiene is "superior" to sharpness, or whatever combination of factors, we are taking the subjective need that each species has for their physical characteristics and putting them into the context of another species' experience.



Ok but im not doing that am I? Im not saying that we are superior because we can fly to the moon and they cant, im saying were superior because we both have the same objectives but because im human I can do it better, and im not using the human defintion for "better" im using the universal one.....better = not dead.


Originally posted by inimalist


So, with regard to the common examples of genetic engineering and space flight, these are things that are inherently human. One way of expressing this is to say that humans are superior because we can make things that other animals cannot, or we can put in goal posts and say "when humans reach X degree of technology or X degrees of independence from nature we are superior", but every single variable that we are superior to animals in is a variable that is culturally specific to the human context. The entire concept of independence from the natural world is a human concept, thus, the fact that any other animal has not achieved it does not show any general degree of human superiority, rather it shows that the human condition has created a situation where humans value this type of autonomy.


Animals and insects dont fly in space but they do use the environment to make life easier and hence these things can be used in comparison with insects and animals. They dont make what we do but they do create things or use things for the same pupose, survival. Start a forest fire and every creature will try to escape as would a human being if we both have the same gaols but I can reach these goals more easily then im superior.

Independence from nature is a human concept as well but this can still be applied to survival. Any creature that faces danger wil want to "independent" from it. You set fire to an ant hill and the ants will try to escape the difference is that as a human I have more options.

Originally posted by Devil King
That's kind of an unfair assumption! I've been told it's possible I'm 1/18 Indian. Which seems to be true, because I'm not allergic to Poison Ivy.

I'm only, what, 14 fractions away from owning a casino? Poison Ivy is hot, you know you'd do her even though she's fictional and you're gay.

Originally posted by Alfheim
I was not saying humans are special from our point of view, I was saying that humans are special because things that we consider as attributes for superiority can be applied to other creatures.

I wasn't saying humans are special from our point of view.
I was saying humans are special because of things we consider make us special.

How is that not a logical inconsistency? The underlined clauses are relatively synonymous.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I wasn't saying humans are special from our point of view.
I was saying humans are special because of things we consider make us special.

How is that not a logical inconsistency? The underlined clauses are relatively synonymous.

Maybe because you didnt read the underlined
bit. *shrug*

Originally posted by Alfheim
Obvously thats up to you to decide what you think, my beef was that in my post quoted I was not saying humans are special from our point of view, I was saying that humans are special because things that we consider as attributes for superiority can be applied to other creatures. ie humans are not superior to animals because they cant build cars but were superior because we can achieve the same objectives more easily.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Maybe because you didnt read the underlined
bit. *shrug* So when humans use attributes (defined subjectively) they consider are superior (subjective) and apply them to animals under the assumption (subjective) that they're applicable to animals, they're not taking it from a subjective human point of view. OK... ermmhappy

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
So when humans use attributes (defined subjectively) they consider are superior (subjective) and apply them to animals under the assumption (subjective) that they're applicable to animals, they're not taking it from a subjective human point of view. OK... ermmhappy

Everything can be defined as subjective but what I was saying wasnt logically inconsistent as you stated. Feel free to disagree just dont be saying things I never said.

I paraphrased what you said. Paraphrasing the latter part was superfluous when the former already established the criterion as being subjectively human making the sentence essentially synonymous. The latter part of the sentence only furthers subjectivity. But at least you're now accepting that your criterion is from a subjectively human point of view. doped

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I paraphrased what you said. Paraphrasing the latter part was superfluous when the former already established the criterion as being subjectively human making the sentence essentially synonymous. The latter part of the sentence only furthers subjectivity. But at least you're now accepting that your criterion is from a subjectively human point of view. doped

Subjectvity can be applied to everything. Hell it could even be argued theres no such thing as being objective.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Subjectvity can be applied to everything. Yes I saw that the first time. I mostly agree. So then why deny that you're criterion is from a subjectively human point of view or as written earlier "our point of view"?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Yes I saw that the first time. I mostly agree. So then why deny that you're criterion is from a subjectively human point of view or as written earlier "our point of view"?

Again you are just taking one part of my quote. Maybe this will make my point clearer

Originally posted by Alfheim


Ok but im not doing that am I? Im not saying that we are superior because we can fly to the moon and they cant, im saying were superior because we both have the same objectives but because im human I can do it better, and im not using the human defintion for "better" im using the universal one.....better = not dead.

Why would an ant consider human attributes as superior with regard to ant survival? The human still can't lay ant eggs. Obviously you've never walked the footsteps of a stranger, you'll learn things you never knew you never knew.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Why would an ant consider human attributes as superior with regard to ant survival? The human still can't lay ant eggs. Obviously you've never walked the footsteps of a stranger, you'll learn things you never knew you never knew.



Originally posted by Alfheim


Animals and insects dont fly in space but they do use the environment to make life easier and hence these things can be used in comparison with insects and animals. They dont make what we do but they do create things or use things for the same pupose, survival.
Start a forest fire and every creature will try to escape as would a human being if we both have the same gaols but I can reach these goals more easily then im superior.

Special and superior (in a positive manner) aren't necessarily synonyms. Equating them is a very subjective human thing to do.

Getting zero on a math test is pretty special. As is singing with all the voices of the mountain.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Special and superior (in a positive manner) aren't necessarily synonyms. Equating them is a very subjective human thing to do.


Thats good because I wanst doing that. I was talking about superioty and I defined what I meant by that.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol

superior isn't defined by the human condition. For instance, from a bacteria-eye-view, the fact you cannot reproduce through division, steal DNA from other organisms, or motor around with a flagellum far outweigh the petty buildings and whatever that humans needed to build to survive, or their abstract, yet truly meaningless, art and philosophy which they only produce to compensate for their depressing existance (intelligence as a curse).

bacteria, as far as well adapted and survival is concerned, outshine us. Unless you define superiority in terms of being human, you can't really say you are superior to them. The fact that your life is dependent upon harmonious symbiotic living between you and numerious species of bacteria. Soil is dependant on bacteria. Human civilization and everything we take to be monuments of human invention, are dependent on bacteria.

OK, You seem to say that "special" shouldn't be defined from the human point of view- and yet you then go on to define "special" from the bacteria point of view... not a very consistent argument. If having a flagellum is the proof of being "special" then yes, bacteria have it all over human beings. I prefer to look at things like achievement, intellect, conscious awareness, evolutionary advancement... these are things which are not dependent upon have either a flagellum OR having opposable thumbs- I think they are a species-neutural way of grading higher forms of life versus lower forms of life.

Bacterial are a lower form of life, human-beings are a higher form. Any honest and objective comparison will acknowledge this- in fact, humans EVOLVED from bacteria-like single cell organisms. A billion years ago, these primitive lifeforms crawled out of the primordial soup, beginning their long march up the ladder. We are the most recent rung of that ladder. We can argue all day about the existential meaning of "special" but no one (barring insanity) would trade places with a bacteria. I agree that art and philosophy are abstract. Bacteria could never comprehend such abstractions (in fact, they can't comprehend at all), so that is another special quality of humanity. But to call art and philosophy meaningless is just silly. You are obviously very intelligent and well spoken- but do you mean to say that you don't appreciate art? You don't go to movies, enjoy music, or beautiful paintings? I think these things are all preferable to having a flagellum and motoring around in a petri dish. I think ALL forms of life are special... but on this planet, human beings sit atop the evolutionary ladder. This is a scientific reality that makes one look foolish trying to argue.

Originally posted by Cap'n Happy
OK, You seem to say that "special" shouldn't be defined from the human point of view- and yet you then go on to define "special" from the bacteria point of view... not a very consistent argument. If having a flagellum is the proof of being "special" then yes, bacteria have it all over human beings. I prefer to look at things like achievement, intellect, conscious awareness, evolutionary advancement... these are things which are not dependent upon have either a flagellum OR having opposable thumbs- I think they are a species-neutural way of grading higher forms of life versus lower forms of life.

Bacterial are a lower form of life, human-beings are a higher form. Any honest and objective comparison will acknowledge this- in fact, humans EVOLVED from bacteria-like single cell organisms. A billion years ago, these primitive lifeforms crawled out of the primordial soup, beginning their long march up the ladder. We are the most recent rung of that ladder. We can argue all day about the existential meaning of "special" but no one (barring insanity) would trade places with a bacteria. I agree that art and philosophy are abstract. Bacteria could never comprehend such abstractions (in fact, they can't comprehend at all), so that is another special quality of humanity. But to call art and philosophy meaningless is just silly. You are obviously very intelligent and well spoken- but do you mean to say that you don't appreciate art? You don't go to movies, enjoy music, or beautiful paintings? I think these things are all preferable to having a flagellum and motoring around in a petri dish. I think ALL forms of life are special... but on this planet, human beings sit atop the evolutionary ladder. This is a scientific reality that makes one look foolish trying to argue.


LOL

what was the last thing you read about bacterial evolution?

Can I save myself the time and just say: "Read a book"

Originally posted by inimalist
LOL

what was the last thing you read about bacterial evolution?

Can I save myself the time and just say: "Read a book" [/QUOTE

Yes, by all mean, tell me which book you have in mind. I would love to read a book that makes the case that human beings are below bacteria in any true, meaningful way. Please note, I recognize that bacteria are capable of many amazing things which humans can not do. I just don't rate these things higher than the many hallmarks of human achievement-conscious thought, creativity, ect.
Read a book? I DO read books- yet another thing a bacteria can not do (or are you now going to call reading and writing another meaningless human achievement?) The topic here is "are humans special?" I believe that being the most advanced life-form on the planet makes us special. You seem to be saying that bacteria are some how superior to humans. I would bet that something like 99% of scientists and philosophers and theologians would back me up on this. I am quite serious though, please tell me which books you have in mind. I'd love to read them, and don't mind having my opinions challenged.

Originally posted by Cap'n Happy
Originally posted by inimalist
LOL

what was the last thing you read about bacterial evolution?

Can I save myself the time and just say: "Read a book"

What about the type of bacteria that evolve into Eukaryotes and cooperate with other bacteria to form humans? What about the type that can survive and win a tangle with the human metabolism?

Originally posted by Quark_666
What about the type of bacteria that evolve into Eukaryotes and cooperate with other bacteria to form humans? What about the type that can survive and win a tangle with the human metabolism?

Well, you're kind of making my point. Bacteria/single cell organisms EVOLVED (over many millions of years) into higher (that is, more complex) forms of life... hence, humans are a superior form of life.
A eukaryote is a classification of life, meaning any organism whose cell structure has a nucleus (I think that's it- I'm not a scientist).
As for bacteria that are harmful to human beings... well, what about the many bacteria we can easily wipe out? None of this proves the special-ness or superiority of one over the other... you have to take the whole picture of each organisims abilities and attributes in consideration.