Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Humans better than animals?

gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 3:43:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Is there one shred of actual proof that humans are any better than animals? I don't believe there is. If we are no better than animals, but only more intelligent, then isn't it safe to assume that religion is man-made? If so, what would the consequences be if we all acted and reacted based solely on instinct? I understand that this is a common topic of debate, but the thoughts it provokes can be very exciting and even a little scary. I would love to hear what the DDO regulars have to say.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 4:27:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 3:43:12 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If we are no better than animals, but only more intelligent, then isn't it safe to assume that religion is man-made?

Non-sequitur.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 4:54:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 4:27:26 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 11/15/2010 3:43:12 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If we are no better than animals, but only more intelligent, then isn't it safe to assume that religion is man-made?

Non-sequitur.

Well put, but the FACT is that there is no concrete evidence that G-d exists, which would mean that all these religious works are man-made. Please be aware that I am simply playing devil's advocate, and do not necessarily believe this to be true. My goal is to figure out what life truly would be like in a religion free world. Maybe it would be great. Personally, I think it would fail, badly...
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 5:06:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Humans suck.
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 5:11:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 5:06:00 PM, SuperRobotWars wrote:
Humans suck.

They do
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
MTGandP
Posts: 702
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 6:43:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 4:54:21 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
Well put, but the FACT is that there is no concrete evidence that G-d exists, which would mean that all these religious works are man-made. Please be aware that I am simply playing devil's advocate, and do not necessarily believe this to be true. My goal is to figure out what life truly would be like in a religion free world. Maybe it would be great. Personally, I think it would fail, badly...

Bible stoning rape yadda yadda.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 7:37:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Is there one shred of actual proof that humans are any better than animals?
Call me when the chickens start asking for proof.

We have proof as to the fact that humans reason. The burden of proof is on the affirmative as to whether animals do too.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 8:02:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 4:54:21 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/15/2010 4:27:26 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 11/15/2010 3:43:12 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If we are no better than animals, but only more intelligent, then isn't it safe to assume that religion is man-made?

Non-sequitur.

Well put, but the FACT is that there is no concrete evidence that G-d exists, which would mean that all these religious works are man-made. Please be aware that I am simply playing devil's advocate, and do not necessarily believe this to be true. My goal is to figure out what life truly would be like in a religion free world. Maybe it would be great. Personally, I think it would fail, badly...

Just curious, why do you have a problem with saying "God" over the internet?
sherlockmethod
Posts: 317
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 8:15:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I am guessing he is Jewish, Mongeese. I haven't looked at his profile, but I see Jewish writers do this all the time.
Library cards: Stopping stupid one book at a time.
ViatorVerum
Posts: 43
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 9:08:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Jews can't say the name of the Lord because they don't know how it's pronounced. It's spelled YHVH (Hebrew) and the pronunciation was only known by the High Priest.

Jehovah and Yahweh are both pronunciations (who knows if correct) of the same word (YHVH).

But ya, humans are technically animals. Only by asking that question did you differentiate the two at all.
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 9:46:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 9:08:33 PM, ViatorVerum wrote:
Jews can't say the name of the Lord because they don't know how it's pronounced. It's spelled YHVH (Hebrew) and the pronunciation was only known by the High Priest.

Jehovah and Yahweh are both pronunciations (who knows if correct) of the same word (YHVH).

But ya, humans are technically animals. Only by asking that question did you differentiate the two at all.

The Tetragrammaton is actually YHWH. And there is no way Jehovah is an accurate pronunciation. Virtually no scholars believe Jehovah is anything but a prevision arising from transliteration and the mixing of vowels from Adonai.

As for whether humans are better than animals, this depends on the measure of "better." By most standards I think it would be far better to be a human than an arthropod. Possible differences between humans and other members of the animal kingdom are reason, values and consciousness - all of which can be used to established human superiority. On the latter issue, I think it has been reasonably established that human consciousness is not a mere biological function or neurological construction of the brain - making us not creatures of determinism.
ViatorVerum
Posts: 43
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 9:52:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
The Tetragrammaton is actually YHWH. And there is no way Jehovah is an accurate pronunciation. Virtually no scholars believe Jehovah is anything but a prevision arising from transliteration and the mixing of vowels from Adonai.

Simply what I was taught. I have no desire to argue on this issue.

As for whether humans are better than animals, this depends on the measure of "better." By most standards I think it would be far better to be a human than an arthropod. Possible differences between humans and other members of the animal kingdom are reason, values and consciousness - all of which can be used to established human superiority. On the latter issue, I think it has been reasonably established that human consciousness is not a mere biological function or neurological construction of the brain - making us not creatures of determinism.

How is this 'reasonably established'? All scientific findings have pointed to the idea that we actually are simply deterministic beings, like animals. We might be more evolved, but that only makes us 'special' by our own standards.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 9:55:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 7:40:00 PM, Ren wrote:
Humans are animals.

Therefore we act like animals. Humans are quite savage by nature except for certain standards that keep us from doing certain things such as murder. If such standards didn't exist, sh*t would go down very fast.
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 10:08:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Simply what I was taught. I have no desire to argue on this issue.

This a good introductory note whilst addressing your second comment.

How is this 'reasonably established'? All scientific findings have pointed to the idea that we actually are simply deterministic beings, like animals. We might be more evolved, but that only makes us 'special' by our own standards.

Given that you are wont to accept what you are taught without further study - this is NOT an insult as it is commonplace - it's not at all surprising that you are under the impression that "all" our scientific findings have pointed to the idea of us being simply deterministic beings. To the contrary, medically established veridical experiences of clinically dead persons (later resuscitated) establishes the veracity of a sort of emergent consciousness. These are separated from other cases that are not evidential in nature, as it has been scientifically established that similar experiences can be stimulated via the right temporal lobe of the brain. But we have evidential cases where persons have veridical experiences where they make empirically verified observations about their surroundings, things said, things used and etc, all while there is literally no brainwave activity because they were clinically dead.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 10:17:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 10:08:41 PM, InquireTruth wrote:
Given that you are wont to accept what you are taught without further study - this is NOT an insult as it is commonplace - it's not at all surprising that you are under the impression that "all" our scientific findings have pointed to the idea of us being simply deterministic beings. To the contrary, medically established veridical experiences of clinically dead persons (later resuscitated) establishes the veracity of a sort of emergent consciousness. These are separated from other cases that are not evidential in nature, as it has been scientifically established that similar experiences can be stimulated via the right temporal lobe of the brain. But we have evidential cases where persons have veridical experiences where they make empirically verified observations about their surroundings, things said, things used and etc, all while there is literally no brainwave activity because they were clinically dead.

well... I'd like to see if you could post a link..

and then, though I prolly won't really respond to it... I'd like to see you argue it out with Puck. :)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 10:18:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 10:17:05 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 11/15/2010 10:08:41 PM, InquireTruth wrote:
Given that you are wont to accept what you are taught without further study - this is NOT an insult as it is commonplace - it's not at all surprising that you are under the impression that "all" our scientific findings have pointed to the idea of us being simply deterministic beings. To the contrary, medically established veridical experiences of clinically dead persons (later resuscitated) establishes the veracity of a sort of emergent consciousness. These are separated from other cases that are not evidential in nature, as it has been scientifically established that similar experiences can be stimulated via the right temporal lobe of the brain. But we have evidential cases where persons have veridical experiences where they make empirically verified observations about their surroundings, things said, things used and etc, all while there is literally no brainwave activity because they were clinically dead.

well... I'd like to see if you could post a link..

like... to a study or somthing... some kind of evidence..

if you would..
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 10:36:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 10:18:08 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 11/15/2010 10:17:05 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 11/15/2010 10:08:41 PM, InquireTruth wrote:
Given that you are wont to accept what you are taught without further study - this is NOT an insult as it is commonplace - it's not at all surprising that you are under the impression that "all" our scientific findings have pointed to the idea of us being simply deterministic beings. To the contrary, medically established veridical experiences of clinically dead persons (later resuscitated) establishes the veracity of a sort of emergent consciousness. These are separated from other cases that are not evidential in nature, as it has been scientifically established that similar experiences can be stimulated via the right temporal lobe of the brain. But we have evidential cases where persons have veridical experiences where they make empirically verified observations about their surroundings, things said, things used and etc, all while there is literally no brainwave activity because they were clinically dead.

well... I'd like to see if you could post a link..

like... to a study or somthing... some kind of evidence..

if you would..

Well a lot of different researches are stuyding it. You can look at some of Stuart Hameroff's work who tries to use quantum theory, specifically quantum coherence, to explain emergent consciousness. You can look at Michael Sabom's (a cardiologist) work on the issue. Here is a link to at least one encounter that includes interviews with both the presiding surgeon and Michael Sabom.

There are many medically attested, veridical NDE's that are evidential in nature. So I'm not saying that any which one is definitive proof, only that they stand in strong frictions with many current scientific theories.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 10:40:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 10:36:38 PM, InquireTruth wrote:
You can look at some of Stuart Hameroff's work

LMAO @ you referencing a New Ager, LOL. I remember referencing him a long while back in my first debate against Ragnar_Rahl.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2010 10:56:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 10:40:05 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 11/15/2010 10:36:38 PM, InquireTruth wrote:
You can look at some of Stuart Hameroff's work

LMAO @ you referencing a New Ager, LOL. I remember referencing him a long while back in my first debate against Ragnar_Rahl.

Yeah, a reference =/= an endorsement. I think he's wrong, for obvious reasons. But the quantum coherence regarding consciousness is a well discussed subject in the scholarly realm - as bizarre as it is.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 11:25:12 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 9:55:53 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 11/15/2010 7:40:00 PM, Ren wrote:
Humans are animals.

Therefore we act like animals. Humans are quite savage by nature except for certain standards that keep us from doing certain things such as murder. If such standards didn't exist, sh*t would go down very fast.

We don't murder anymore?!
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 12:21:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 9:08:33 PM, ViatorVerum wrote:
Jews can't say the name of the Lord because they don't know how it's pronounced. It's spelled YHVH (Hebrew) and the pronunciation was only known by the High Priest.

Jehovah and Yahweh are both pronunciations (who knows if correct) of the same word (YHVH).

But ya, humans are technically animals. Only by asking that question did you differentiate the two at all.

We know how it is pronounced, sir. It is a sin in the Jewish faith to even attempt to pronounce the name of G-d. The closest pronunciation is a full breath in and a full breath out, according to Jewish mysticism.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2010 12:25:30 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/15/2010 9:52:16 PM, ViatorVerum wrote:
The Tetragrammaton is actually YHWH. And there is no way Jehovah is an accurate pronunciation. Virtually no scholars believe Jehovah is anything but a prevision arising from transliteration and the mixing of vowels from Adonai.

Simply what I was taught. I have no desire to argue on this issue.

As for whether humans are better than animals, this depends on the measure of "better." By most standards I think it would be far better to be a human than an arthropod. Possible differences between humans and other members of the animal kingdom are reason, values and consciousness - all of which can be used to established human superiority. On the latter issue, I think it has been reasonably established that human consciousness is not a mere biological function or neurological construction of the brain - making us not creatures of determinism.

How is this 'reasonably established'? All scientific findings have pointed to the idea that we actually are simply deterministic beings, like animals. We might be more evolved, but that only makes us 'special' by our own standards.

I agree. We have decided that we are special, and even created something called "The soul." There is no proof that such a thing even exists, yet people talk about it as if it were common sense that humans have souls. Some even believe animals have souls...