Total Posts:113|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

In your opinion, what makes a human a human?

Selcouth_Debater
Posts: 70
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence." ~ Charles Bukowski

Formerly known as kawaii_crazy. I'm back.
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 12:51:30 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I wish your definition applied to all humans - but unfortunately in my opinion it doesn't.

To me manual dexterity and the ability to create using our minds and hands is what makes us human, in comparison to creatures who are unable to coordinate the mind and hands. Primates do possess some of our manual dexterity, but lack the intelligence to build what humans build.

My cat always stares at my hands in amazement, when I'm opening a bag of catfood or when I stroke her fur or pick her up. She puts her paw up to my palm sometimes and spreads out her toes trying to mimic my hands.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,861
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 4:07:24 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?
Exactly, thoughts make us human. And coded communication like historical record keeping and handing down of witnessed events. Plus beer.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 6:12:40 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

Being a member of the human race.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,153
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 7:58:40 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?
A "human", may be dead or alive. If dead, the being was once alive.
When alive, the being had DNA which is/was unique to members of the human race, distinct from other animals.
This being had a brain, that gave it personal identity.
This does beg the question "Whai is personal identity?".
At a minimum, "personal identity" requires a functioning brain.

My big toe is alive, and it is human, but it is not "a human (being)", because it does not have a brain, or personal identity.

I would like to see the argument that a two year old questions their existence. It seems to me it assumes its existence, which is not the same.
Two year olds do not ask themselves "Do I exist?", in my opinion.
A two year old can be a human, in my opinion.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 9:06:53 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I guess we can make a special case for humans and affix what subjective bias we want to the definition so we can marginalise any number of people I guess we can do that.

Can we add that it has to be a being with hands that can grasp things? Ooo how about they have to have a mouth that speaks a known language?

Is your definition inclusive of. Psychopaths, coma patients, new born babies, or those with severe mental disorders?
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 9:47:14 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Mummy's and daddy's make humans .
Or doctors of whatever there called, with the parts from mummy's and daddy's.
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 9:47:55 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

Its biological for me. Not philosophical. Since being human doesn't have much philisophical value, its a biological classification. Unless, its estalished that being human has any philosophical value over not being human, which you can't establish.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,001
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 10:06:11 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I disagree. I don't see how a 90 year old comatose person is suddenly not human. Or how a sleeping person is not human. Or a six month old infant is not human. Your definition is terribly misleading.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,001
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 10:10:25 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 4:07:24 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?
Exactly, thoughts make us human. And coded communication like historical record keeping and handing down of witnessed events. Plus beer.

Monkeys have thoughts. Some of them know sign language. So your definition fails.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,001
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 10:11:52 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:51:30 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I wish your definition applied to all humans - but unfortunately in my opinion it doesn't.

To me manual dexterity and the ability to create using our minds and hands is what makes us human, in comparison to creatures who are unable to coordinate the mind and hands. Primates do possess some of our manual dexterity, but lack the intelligence to build what humans build.

My cat always stares at my hands in amazement, when I'm opening a bag of catfood or when I stroke her fur or pick her up. She puts her paw up to my palm sometimes and spreads out her toes trying to mimic my hands.

A person with broken fingers has no dexterity, and yet is still human, so your definition fails.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,001
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 10:12:42 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 6:12:40 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

Being a member of the human race.

As always, Geogeer shows his wisdom.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,001
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 10:13:56 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 7:58:40 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?
A "human", may be dead or alive. If dead, the being was once alive.
When alive, the being had DNA which is/was unique to members of the human race, distinct from other animals.
This being had a brain, that gave it personal identity.
This does beg the question "Whai is personal identity?".
At a minimum, "personal identity" requires a functioning brain.

My big toe is alive, and it is human, but it is not "a human (being)", because it does not have a brain, or personal identity.

I would like to see the argument that a two year old questions their existence. It seems to me it assumes its existence, which is not the same.
Two year olds do not ask themselves "Do I exist?", in my opinion.
A two year old can be a human, in my opinion.

Very well said.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 10:33:53 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 10:11:52 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:51:30 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I wish your definition applied to all humans - but unfortunately in my opinion it doesn't.

To me manual dexterity and the ability to create using our minds and hands is what makes us human, in comparison to creatures who are unable to coordinate the mind and hands. Primates do possess some of our manual dexterity, but lack the intelligence to build what humans build.

My cat always stares at my hands in amazement, when I'm opening a bag of catfood or when I stroke her fur or pick her up. She puts her paw up to my palm sometimes and spreads out her toes trying to mimic my hands.


A person with broken fingers has no dexterity, and yet is still human, so your definition fails.
You miss the concept - the ability to create is my point. Steven Hawking creates via his mind, he is certainly human - along with any other human who lacks the use of their hand. My point is that most of us are given the use of our hands to create, and the use of our hands is what separates us from other creatures of the animal kingdom - at least physically.

I had a "revolution of my mind" in 2006 - that digital means - thru the use of our digits - and is designed to impede our creative process. Most digital devices steal away our hands while we use them.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,001
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 11:05:22 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 10:33:53 PM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:11:52 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:51:30 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I wish your definition applied to all humans - but unfortunately in my opinion it doesn't.

To me manual dexterity and the ability to create using our minds and hands is what makes us human, in comparison to creatures who are unable to coordinate the mind and hands. Primates do possess some of our manual dexterity, but lack the intelligence to build what humans build.

My cat always stares at my hands in amazement, when I'm opening a bag of catfood or when I stroke her fur or pick her up. She puts her paw up to my palm sometimes and spreads out her toes trying to mimic my hands.


A person with broken fingers has no dexterity, and yet is still human, so your definition fails.
You miss the concept - the ability to create is my point. Steven Hawking creates via his mind, he is certainly human - along with any other human who lacks the use of their hand. My point is that most of us are given the use of our hands to create, and the use of our hands is what separates us from other creatures of the animal kingdom - at least physically.

I had a "revolution of my mind" in 2006 - that digital means - thru the use of our digits - and is designed to impede our creative process. Most digital devices steal away our hands while we use them.

Infants can't create, so your definition fails.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 11:19:46 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 11:05:22 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:33:53 PM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:11:52 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:51:30 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I wish your definition applied to all humans - but unfortunately in my opinion it doesn't.

To me manual dexterity and the ability to create using our minds and hands is what makes us human, in comparison to creatures who are unable to coordinate the mind and hands. Primates do possess some of our manual dexterity, but lack the intelligence to build what humans build.

My cat always stares at my hands in amazement, when I'm opening a bag of catfood or when I stroke her fur or pick her up. She puts her paw up to my palm sometimes and spreads out her toes trying to mimic my hands.


A person with broken fingers has no dexterity, and yet is still human, so your definition fails.
You miss the concept - the ability to create is my point. Steven Hawking creates via his mind, he is certainly human - along with any other human who lacks the use of their hand. My point is that most of us are given the use of our hands to create, and the use of our hands is what separates us from other creatures of the animal kingdom - at least physically.

I had a "revolution of my mind" in 2006 - that digital means - thru the use of our digits - and is designed to impede our creative process. Most digital devices steal away our hands while we use them.

Infants can't create, so your definition fails.

Mine fills the diapers so quickly that I must object that they do not create. They create waaaaayyyyyy too much!
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,001
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 11:23:16 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 11:19:46 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/30/2016 11:05:22 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:33:53 PM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:11:52 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:51:30 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I wish your definition applied to all humans - but unfortunately in my opinion it doesn't.

To me manual dexterity and the ability to create using our minds and hands is what makes us human, in comparison to creatures who are unable to coordinate the mind and hands. Primates do possess some of our manual dexterity, but lack the intelligence to build what humans build.

My cat always stares at my hands in amazement, when I'm opening a bag of catfood or when I stroke her fur or pick her up. She puts her paw up to my palm sometimes and spreads out her toes trying to mimic my hands.


A person with broken fingers has no dexterity, and yet is still human, so your definition fails.
You miss the concept - the ability to create is my point. Steven Hawking creates via his mind, he is certainly human - along with any other human who lacks the use of their hand. My point is that most of us are given the use of our hands to create, and the use of our hands is what separates us from other creatures of the animal kingdom - at least physically.

I had a "revolution of my mind" in 2006 - that digital means - thru the use of our digits - and is designed to impede our creative process. Most digital devices steal away our hands while we use them.

Infants can't create, so your definition fails.

Mine fills the diapers so quickly that I must object that they do not create. They create waaaaayyyyyy too much!

Hahaha
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 11:48:54 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 11:05:22 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:33:53 PM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:11:52 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:51:30 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I wish your definition applied to all humans - but unfortunately in my opinion it doesn't.

To me manual dexterity and the ability to create using our minds and hands is what makes us human, in comparison to creatures who are unable to coordinate the mind and hands. Primates do possess some of our manual dexterity, but lack the intelligence to build what humans build.

My cat always stares at my hands in amazement, when I'm opening a bag of catfood or when I stroke her fur or pick her up. She puts her paw up to my palm sometimes and spreads out her toes trying to mimic my hands.


A person with broken fingers has no dexterity, and yet is still human, so your definition fails.
You miss the concept - the ability to create is my point. Steven Hawking creates via his mind, he is certainly human - along with any other human who lacks the use of their hand. My point is that most of us are given the use of our hands to create, and the use of our hands is what separates us from other creatures of the animal kingdom - at least physically.

I had a "revolution of my mind" in 2006 - that digital means - thru the use of our digits - and is designed to impede our creative process. Most digital devices steal away our hands while we use them.

Infants can't create, so your definition fails.
they use their hands to explore and learn and they can create messes - so yes infants do create thru exploration.
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 11:51:33 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

So, parrots and dolphins are human.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 11:52:06 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 9:47:55 PM, Hayd wrote:
Its biological for me. Not philosophical. Since being human doesn't have much philisophical value, its a biological classification. Unless, its estalished that being human has any philosophical value over not being human, which you can't establish.

^^
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,001
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 11:53:12 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 11:48:54 PM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 11:05:22 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:33:53 PM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 10:11:52 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:51:30 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I wish your definition applied to all humans - but unfortunately in my opinion it doesn't.

To me manual dexterity and the ability to create using our minds and hands is what makes us human, in comparison to creatures who are unable to coordinate the mind and hands. Primates do possess some of our manual dexterity, but lack the intelligence to build what humans build.

My cat always stares at my hands in amazement, when I'm opening a bag of catfood or when I stroke her fur or pick her up. She puts her paw up to my palm sometimes and spreads out her toes trying to mimic my hands.


A person with broken fingers has no dexterity, and yet is still human, so your definition fails.
You miss the concept - the ability to create is my point. Steven Hawking creates via his mind, he is certainly human - along with any other human who lacks the use of their hand. My point is that most of us are given the use of our hands to create, and the use of our hands is what separates us from other creatures of the animal kingdom - at least physically.

I had a "revolution of my mind" in 2006 - that digital means - thru the use of our digits - and is designed to impede our creative process. Most digital devices steal away our hands while we use them.

Infants can't create, so your definition fails.
they use their hands to explore and learn and they can create messes - so yes infants do create thru exploration.

Well then, every mammal meets your definition, and yet, not every mammal is human... So your definition fails.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 11:56:10 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 11:52:06 PM, someloser wrote:
At 3/30/2016 9:47:55 PM, Hayd wrote:
Its biological for me. Not philosophical. Since being human doesn't have much philisophical value, its a biological classification. Unless, its estalished that being human has any philosophical value over not being human, which you can't establish.

^^

<3
Selcouth_Debater
Posts: 70
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:29:21 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 11:51:33 PM, someloser wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

So, parrots and dolphins are human.

Parrots and dolphins can ask themselves why they are here on this Earth?
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence." ~ Charles Bukowski

Formerly known as kawaii_crazy. I'm back.
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:31:17 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 1:29:21 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
At 3/30/2016 11:51:33 PM, someloser wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

So, parrots and dolphins are human.

Parrots and dolphins can ask themselves why they are here on this Earth?

They are perfectly conscious and self aware. If you insist on a more direct verification that they have the particular type of thought you described, it would only be reasonable to extend that demand to every member of Homo sapiens.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Selcouth_Debater
Posts: 70
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:34:00 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 6:12:40 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

Being a member of the human race.

What distinguishes the human race from every other species?
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence." ~ Charles Bukowski

Formerly known as kawaii_crazy. I'm back.
Selcouth_Debater
Posts: 70
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:36:43 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 9:06:53 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

I guess we can make a special case for humans and affix what subjective bias we want to the definition so we can marginalise any number of people I guess we can do that.

Can we add that it has to be a being with hands that can grasp things? Ooo how about they have to have a mouth that speaks a known language?

Is your definition inclusive of. Psychopaths, coma patients, new born babies, or those with severe mental disorders?

I would like to amend my definition to say that a human is someone who, when old enough and of stable mind, has the ability to question their existence.
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence." ~ Charles Bukowski

Formerly known as kawaii_crazy. I'm back.
Selcouth_Debater
Posts: 70
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:37:44 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 10:10:25 PM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 3/30/2016 4:07:24 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?
Exactly, thoughts make us human. And coded communication like historical record keeping and handing down of witnessed events. Plus beer.


Monkeys have thoughts. Some of them know sign language. So your definition fails.

You forgot the beer part :P
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence." ~ Charles Bukowski

Formerly known as kawaii_crazy. I'm back.
Selcouth_Debater
Posts: 70
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:39:38 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/30/2016 7:58:40 PM, Welfare-Worker wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?
A "human", may be dead or alive. If dead, the being was once alive.
When alive, the being had DNA which is/was unique to members of the human race, distinct from other animals.
This being had a brain, that gave it personal identity.
This does beg the question "Whai is personal identity?".
At a minimum, "personal identity" requires a functioning brain.

My big toe is alive, and it is human, but it is not "a human (being)", because it does not have a brain, or personal identity.

I would like to see the argument that a two year old questions their existence. It seems to me it assumes its existence, which is not the same.
Two year olds do not ask themselves "Do I exist?", in my opinion.
A two year old can be a human, in my opinion.

I completely agree with your definition. You said what I was unable to word correctly.
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence." ~ Charles Bukowski

Formerly known as kawaii_crazy. I'm back.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:42:42 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/31/2016 1:34:00 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
At 3/30/2016 6:12:40 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/30/2016 12:31:55 AM, Selcouth_Debater wrote:
A human is someone who has the ability to question their existence. Someone who is able to love and sympathize and understand is a human.

Thoughts?

Being a member of the human race.

What distinguishes the human race from every other species?

Things like having a rational nature, etc. - yet it is possible for others to share those particular attributes. However, our specific genome is something that every human shares.
Sam7411
Posts: 959
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 1:44:47 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
A human is a species of animal that has capabilities beyond any other species of Earth- a being with self awareness.