what makes animals different from humans?

for the sake of simplicity, lets limit “animals” to “mammals”

they receive inputs, they respond. they learn from their experience. they carry their unique memories. they live in societies. they apparently care about eachother. my dog clearly feels something that resembles heavenly pleasure when i scratch his back, near his tail, which he cant scratch on his own.

is there any reason at all to think that a mammal is not compeltely conscious just like a human is?

imagine you are an exteremly stupid person. you happen to be a wolf. you learn a total of like 20 or 30 things in your life. you dont have the language to explain things like the mind-body problem. your not smart enough to realize that the mirror is actually reflecting an image of yourself. you dont understand that the deer feel pain when you bite them. so what?!

if an animal doesnt have a few arbitrary characteristics that we humans associate with ‘intelligence’, does that mean that they are definetely not conscious in any way and are merely automatons, completely separate from humans?

i want to live as a wolf. imagine that life. how does it differ from a human who is put into the exact same situation?

I say the main diff is the taste.

any animal would love steely dan, if only he understood. just like my roomates.

I mean the flavor, but you’re absolutely right about Steely Dan!

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

There’s no difference at all. I’m a boll weevil, for example, and I bet nobody here could tell.

I’m quite certain that the science proper distinguisher is this: the ability to make tools.

But for me, it’s continous - evolution is continous, so no real distinguishers.

deleted

What makes animals different from dogs?
Does that question sound ridiculous? Think about it.

deleted

I guess that would depend on what you define as ‘virtuous’

I daresay, if humans could lick their own genitals, the world would indeed be a more virtuous place.

I think the dogs are simply not clever enough to be sinful; if they were, they would be more babaric than men - monkeys are an example - in which case, the monkeys aren’t clever enough yet still, to be virtuous as men. But generall, we don’t apply morality to animals, so branding dogs as “virtuous” is more or less equivalent to calling the fat red apple on your table as “healthy”…

deleted

I like that very much… despite the rest.

deleted

Let me try to improve on that for you:

Animals are more perfect than some humans, namely: the religious, the meta-physical, the selfish, the impossible… - the decadents.

“Error turned animal into man, would perfection turn man into animal again?” - Human-all-too-human, Nietzsche.

deleted

While what you said is unrefutable, I mantian my saying because we meant “perfect” in diferent concepts. I think it’s more physical of your “perfetion”, while mine is more on the philosophical side. Even though, physically, man is more biologically complex than all those animals you mentioned - in that sense then - man is actually more perfect. Also, physical ability is not all about the body and limbs, it involves the brain power as well strictly speaking. The motion brain power for man is obviously inferior than many animals, but the great substitude that is the reasoning power evolved to such an extent so that we are in actuality - invincible in the kingdom of all animals.

deleted