The Hierarchy Of Men And Animals. A Comparison.

Philosophy Forums Psychology and Mind
1

[b]I think that in order for me to define and compare the hierarchy of animals between that of men it would roughly coincide with this sentence:

The hierarchy of animals is purely physical and instinctually emotionally based while the hierarchy of men is entirely ideological.

Is there anybody out there that wishes to challenge this statement?[/b]

I would go on further to state that at one time historically the hierarchy of men was no different than that of other animals since long ago people only had a rudimentary form of “reason” like that of all other organisms in the general sense.

The question which concerns us, is what exactly changed that rudimentary form of reason into what we see now?

My guess would be that of religion as I tend to focus religious ideology as the anomaly of man in which many things of our day to day lives derives from that we continually take for granted.

2

I will challenge it because the whole thing is ill-defined. Man isn’t able to have ideologies because they have less instincts than animals, its because we have more.

Secondly, the drive tos et up hiearchies in one way or another is hardwired into humans, we’ll never have a group where some form of hiearchy or another doesn’t establish itself almost immediately. The type of hiearchies may depend on societal issues but the same standards usually apply, wealth, power, etc.

Religion is certainly a hiearchy issue in most forms and it subscribes to that formula as most human groups or institutions do. Though I think this was always the case and today’s religion is just an example mass-scale.