4 ms·
No, actually both sides are not correct. It's not correct to say that the headline is wrong because a human is a type of animal. The claim that is being made is
by jonstokes 10y ago
No, actually both sides are not correct. It's not correct to say that the headline is wrong because a human is a type of animal. The claim that is being made is that headline is wrong/misleading/unethical, and that specific claim is nonsense.
Also, the claim on which the "headline is wrong" claims are based (i.e."human" == "animal", always and forever and if you disagree then you're some sort of creationist throwback) is also incorrect.
There is no two sides here. The people insisting that a) "animals" are always considered a superset of "humans", therefore b) the headline is wrong, are just plain wrong on both counts.
- headShrinker 10y ago> "animals" are always considered a superset of "humans" technically, humans are a subset of animals, not the other way around.
- Veratyr 10y agoI didn't say both sides are correct, I said both sides have an argument. In this case I believe the "human != animal" definition is clearly what was intended but those who wish to argue that it shouldn't have been used have an argument, as in technical contexts (such as scientific journals), "animal" usually encompasses humans.