ok, so what makes humans better is that we come up with wants, then structure our society so that we depand on those wants, thus becoming needs. then on top of those needs we create more wants. so we come up with crafy methods for which to expand our resource binge and allow us to continue to consume. this makes us superior....ok....
Originally posted by KharmaDog
Once again, the point of the thread seems to be getting lost. I am not asking whether humans are better, equal or worse than animals, I am asking whether you believe humans ARE or ARE NOT animals as discussed in the first post.
Yeah well, but there won't be much oif a debate...well, until whob shows up.
Originally posted by KharmaDog
Once again, the point of the thread seems to be getting lost. I am not asking whether humans are better, equal or worse than animals, I am asking whether you believe humans ARE or ARE NOT animals as discussed in the first post.
the problem is that the only argument against the idea is based on the idea that humans are superior, rather than simply different. so its unvoidable.
Originally posted by KharmaDog
Once again, the point of the thread seems to be getting lost. I am not asking whether humans are better, equal or worse than animals, I am asking whether you believe humans ARE or ARE NOT animals as discussed in the first post.
Yes lol what is there to say about that yes they are or yes they aren't............as defined by science we are animals/mammals that really isn't a discussion.
Originally posted by KharmaDog
This sounds like a pretty basic question. But there are those that seem to think different.Discuss.
The quotes you posted are going to be inherently wrong simply because they are from whobdamandog. Not because he is incorrect but because they were written by him.
Aside from this...
On an anatomical basis, yes, humans are indeed animals. We are mammals. We share the same basic needs and desires as the rest of the animal kingdom. In fact, we have the same basic systems that keep us running.
However, just because we are animals in that sense does not mean we are animals in a bestial sense. If anyone hadn't pieced it together, the quotes shown were written in response to the idea that humans are animals in the entire sense of the word.
With this thinking comes the idea that our higher mental functions do not separate us from beasts and make us men. Thus, we cannot control our most primal urges--such as sexual desire--and are subject to the whims of our most immediate stresses and wants.
What whobdamandog was (and is) saying is that by equating our sexual practices with those of animals, we are no longer distinguishable from them. An animal eating its mate, its young, or its feces is clearly not a human practice. However, these practices are (probably) instinctual, just as is the sex drive. By equating humans as being "just animals"--and by stating that homosexuality occurs in nature and thus is natural (not to spark another debate, but that was another focus of the post)--one cannot say that the aforementioned practices, if practiced among humans, are unnatural or wrong.
So, to summarize:
Yes, we are animals, but we have higher brain functions, separating us from them.
Originally posted by FeceMan
[I'm going to regret this. I just know it.]The quotes you posted are going to be inherently wrong simply because they are from whobdamandog. Not because he is incorrect but because they were written by him.
Aside from this...
On an anatomical basis, yes, humans are indeed animals. We are mammals. We share the same basic needs and desires as the rest of the animal kingdom. In fact, we have the same basic systems that keep us running.
However, just because we are animals in that sense does not mean we are animals in a bestial sense. If anyone hadn't pieced it together, the quotes shown were written in response to the idea that humans are animals in the entire sense of the word.
With this thinking comes the idea that our higher mental functions do not separate us from beasts and make us men. Thus, we cannot control our most primal urges--such as sexual desire--and are subject to the whims of our most immediate stresses and wants.
What whobdamandog was (and is) saying is that by equating our sexual practices with those of animals, we are no longer distinguishable from them. An animal eating its mate, its young, or its feces is clearly not a human practice. However, these practices are (probably) instinctual, just as is the sex drive. By equating humans as being "just animals"--and by stating that homosexuality occurs in nature and thus is natural (not to spark another debate, but that was another focus of the post)--one cannot say that the aforementioned practices, if practiced among humans, are unnatural or wrong.
So, to summarize:
Yes, we are animals, but we have higher brain functions, separating us from them.
I agree; I like the fact that your conclusion is not arrogant. However, there is an inherent evil in separating our selves from nature, it appeals to the ego, and can lead to great suffering of animals.
We eat, breath, crap, pee, reproduce, work in a society, have differnet customs due to our geographic locations, fihgt each other, compete with one another, play with one another, are composed of the same internal organs, need blood to regualte our bodily systems, like most other living things on earth. What makes us different is that we can vocalize and record what we think. Our brains are also bigger when compared with our bodies than most other animals. These few differences are enough to totally seperate us from the animal kingdom? You'd be very uneducated and mislead if you believed that. No disrespect intended, though, it's just true.It's funny because these things do make us different but we use this knowledge to exploit our differences, or put ourselves on a pedestal, because of them. Without biological diversity our world could become a very unhospitable place for us, for a long time.
Originally posted by FeceMan
[I'm going to regret this. I just know it.]The quotes you posted are going to be inherently wrong simply because they are from whobdamandog. Not because he is incorrect but because they were written by him.
Aside from this...
On an anatomical basis, yes, humans are indeed animals. We are mammals. We share the same basic needs and desires as the rest of the animal kingdom. In fact, we have the same basic systems that keep us running.
However, just because we are animals in that sense does not mean we are animals in a bestial sense. If anyone hadn't pieced it together, the quotes shown were written in response to the idea that humans are animals in the entire sense of the word.
With this thinking comes the idea that our higher mental functions do not separate us from beasts and make us men. Thus, we cannot control our most primal urges--such as sexual desire--and are subject to the whims of our most immediate stresses and wants.
What whobdamandog was (and is) saying is that by equating our sexual practices with those of animals, we are no longer distinguishable from them. An animal eating its mate, its young, or its feces is clearly not a human practice. However, these practices are (probably) instinctual, just as is the sex drive. By equating humans as being "just animals"--and by stating that homosexuality occurs in nature and thus is natural (not to spark another debate, but that was another focus of the post)--one cannot say that the aforementioned practices, if practiced among humans, are unnatural or wrong.
So, to summarize:
Yes, we are animals, but we have higher brain functions, separating us from them.
Yes, well thought out. However, if we're all going to sit here and discuss whobs opinion, then let's do it in a relevant and fair manner. He says we are not animals because others used the argument that homosexuality is natual because it is observed in countless other species, beyond humanity. He then decided to equate homosexuality with pedophilia and a dog eating it's own shit. Sure, that would be one thing, if only those animals that exhibited homosexual characteristics were the ones raping kiddies and eating their own shit. However, that isn't the case. More over, there are no examples of pedophilia in nature, because pedophilia is a singularly human characteristic. One reason is that in human culture there is a difference between physical maturity and age of consent. However, there is no such difference in the animal kingdom. However, you never see an adult gorilla raping a baby gorilla. It's never been observed. But, homosexuality has been.