Majestyk

dk, your arguments seem to presuppose facts that are unsubstantiated.

"People can certainly act like animals, but in doing so become degenerates." Are people animals? Yes or no, please.

btw, "“lack” means “deficient”." "lack" means "deficient or "missing".

Nowhere357

Well, people are the only animals who have invented a legal system. In that sense, people are culpable for their actions, while animals are not. But wait: people apply their legal system to animals! Bad dogs even get the death penalty! Good dogs get put to death also - merely because they have no owner! Then I think about the way we treat our food animals, but that is digression.

Meanwhile, 'deficient' and 'sufficient' are relative terms. I agree we have more reason and more free will than dogs have. I disagree that this gives us 'dominion' over them. Also, you 'answered' my question "What evidence do you have to support "Animals lack free will and reason?" with assertions, not evidence.


This statement has no meaning. Please stop that.

Humans are animals. Therefore humans have deficient reason? I assume you mean non-human animals have deficient reason. What is the significance? Are you trying to say that because we are smarter than other animals, we have dominion over them? By that logic, if we meet aliens who are smarter than us, you think we should submit to them, that they have dominion over us? I don't understand what you mean.

Plenty of dogs never had an owner, and so were not trained, or abandoned. Any willful breeding may be many generations removed - those breeders cannot be held responsible. So it seems that a particular viscious dog does not of necessity reflect poorly on anyone.

Also, here is your original statement: "You can judge yourself to be an animal, but nobody can make you into an animal or a fool." I said this has no meaning. Your 'explanation' above does not even address the staement!

I suspect you think we have a god-given right to dominate animals. Please address this directly.

Smilin

Disagreed on both counts.

Stumble upon a pack of wild dogs, or even enter the territory of a 'domesticated' guard dog, and you'll discover who has 'dominion'. The religous notion of 'dominion' is an Anglo-Saxon belief used to justify greed, personal land ownership, and the right to take more from nature than is needed.

True, many breeds of dogs exist as the result of selective reproduction. However, do a close comparison and you'll
find the common ancestor to the dog is the wolf.
FWIW, dogs are not 'man's best friend'. The term
'greatest manipulator of man' is more suitable. Given
their scavenging instincts they can and do survive
on their own in the wild.

Smilin

How can this be?

An animal, such as a dog, that displays social behaviors such as hunting in packs, interacting and playing with each other, and defending the packs young as a group not be self aware?

I have no scientific basis, just logical reasoning. Seems to me that any animal capable of group strategies such as hunting and self-defense would definately be aware of itself.

Just my thoughts.

Regards,
~Smilin

Smilin

Agreed on all counts. And if dogs deserve hell, I'll gladly join them.

Wyz_sub10

I clarify my definition a little further down from my original comments. A dog lacks a "thrid party" perspective of sorts. He cannot recognize himself in a mirror and has no concept of his existence beyond the first person.

He is, of course, aware that he exists and must compete with others for food, sex, etc. Defending the packs young is an evolutionary response that happens without much thought from the dog.

Nowhere357

I understand what you mean about recognition in the mirror. I'm not sure why you say that means a dog has 'no concept' beyond first person. I think a dog's brain and a human brain have all the same parts.

Smilin

Another thought I've had on the 'dog can't recognize himself in the mirror' experiment. Neither can a human baby, until it learns can it? Can a dog or cat be taught to recognize itself (as humans have to learn as well)

Certainly dogs and cats learn, and retain memories. That much can be verified.

Just a hunch I have. If a dog learns to recognize itself.. does it therefore possess consciousness?

doghouse

Yep -- neurons

The human pre-frontal region of cortex (important in higher cognitive functions) and temporal regions (important in language) are bigger than in dogs. Since we value language and abstract reasoning, we feel this makes us superior.

On the other hand, the canine olfactory lobe is relatively huge compared to that in people. Who the hell cares about talking on the phone to a telemarketer or calculating compound interest when you can sniff a shoe and tell who wore it last and when, and what they had for lunch. Of course he’s too polite to say so, but I know my dog looks down his considerably longer nose at us because we’re olfactory idiots.

mike_decock

Could you tack a canine olfactory lobe onto a human brain? That would be pretty fun .

-Mike...