5 ms·
If an animal can't communicate complex thought, he is just an animal. No matter how "smart" or "emotionally developed" they appear. Until then it's just instin
by d0100 10y ago
If an animal can't communicate complex thought, he is just an animal. No matter how "smart" or "emotionally developed" they appear.
Until then it's just instinct.
And if the day ever arrives, it can just be seen as an evolutionary step for the species, and not as proof that they where intelligent all along.
- mjlangiii 10y agoYeah, people seem to want to decrease the degree of separation between humans and animals. The scientists probably reach a bit in their conclusions, for many reasons, and readers seem to me they may have some latent desire to bring humans and animals closer together, like they want a grand unifying law of life and ethics or maybe a link to our past and how consciousness evolved which could mean we have more reason to treat animals more like equals. I get it, that all seems good and fine. But looking at the general evidence I still conclude there is a huge difference between animals and people. And I think the results of experiments don't change anything, regardless of what they find we should respect animals even though they're "just animals". I liked the experience vs awareness model presented in Stumbling Upon Happiness where people think about the future (awareness of what's happening to them/others) and animals simply operate in the moment based on instincts and being informed by memories (experience). I think that is a pretty good model for the difference.
- fao_ 10y agoDefine 'complex', and 'communicate'. Are deaf and blind people "just animals", no matter how -your quotes- "smart" or "emotionally developed" they appear?
- d0100 10y agoNo need to stretch what I said. Communicate has a well defined meaning: share or exchange information, news, or ideas. And 'complex' was used to exclude what I consider instinctual feelings/thoughts: anger, hunger, love, happiness, obedience, etc. The deaf and blind can communicate. And even in the case of a human vegetable, a broken table is still a table.
- fao_ 10y agoI'm actually not stretching it, I was demonstrating that your limitations either exclude humans or include animals. What your limitations seem to ignore is that not only does most of our day-to-day behaviour fall under what you consider instinctive, but also that you seem to be ignoring the fact that many animals communicate in languages you might not necessarily be able to understand (Dogs, for example, communicate mostly in body language, looks, etc.). Can you state an example of a complex thought? I can think of a fair amount of thoughts I would use to denote intelligence that would fall under what you consider 'instinctual'.
- tremon 10y agohow do you define "communicate" though? Does it involve you interpreting or understanding the animal's communication?
- d0100 10y agoBy it's definition: share or exchange information, news, or ideas.
- ZeroFries 10y agoHow did you arrive at the conclusion that communicating complex thought is not instinct, and all other forms of intelligent and emotional behavior are instinct?
- lttlrck 10y agoWhat if an animal can communicate a complex though to another animal? Like we do?
- grecy 10y agoHopefully when super-advanced telepathic aliens show up on Earth they don't think the same way about us because we can't communicate complex thought in the same way they can.