Poll: "What are you people, animals?!"

[Drundy]

Yes we are just animals.

 

[Mr. GameBrain]

Physically and emotionally we are just animals.

But I would argue that our intelligence is really starting to push beyond the boundaries.

If, one day we became able to evolve ourselves, (either through DNA manipulation or Technological augmentation), beyond the point at which we were able to reproduce with (if we even reproduce at all, we could eventually artificially create our young, and sex only becomes a social past-time, (obviously I'm looking reaaally unrealistically far into the future) the humans genome seen today, I would argue that we could not be animals, as we would have officially broken/sidestepped natural evolution. I think humans of the future would have to be classed as something beyond conventional animal status.

 

[Kurokami]

It would be evident by actions and patterns I assume and I'm positive someone in a lab coat, if not more than one, has already tried testing the theory out. Besides, humans are more likely to believe patterns than possibilities, there are too many of those.

Do you believe animals have discussions?

I do

Without any intention of demeaning or assaulting your opinion, could you give me an example of what kind of conversation you assume they have? So much as "how are you?" would be a miracle in my books, atleast when discussing animals.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

It would be evident by actions and patterns I assume and I'm positive someone in a lab coat, if not more than one, has already tried testing the theory out. Besides, humans are more likely to believe patterns than possibilities, there are too many of those.

Do you believe animals have discussions?

I do

Without any intention of demeaning or assaulting your opinion, could you give me an example of what kind of conversation you assume they have? So much as "how are you?" would be a miracle in my books, atleast when discussing animals.

Well I dunno, current events, politics? In a hierarchical society, I would imagine that not everyone is happy with the current rule. It's true you can't compare a human being to any other kind of animal, but I do think that perhaps we presume too little of animals. After all, we only look at them and judge them next to our nature and logic correct?

 

[Datalord]

But the reason higher thought means superiority is because without comprehension of superiority, superiority is pointless, if you can communicate to a rat that it is superior to a human, the rat won't care, for the rat, life goes on regardless of the designation

So what you are saying is that humans are superior, simply because only they can understand the concept of superiority in the first place?

Glad you understand that

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Art
Language
Tool use
and self aware abstraction?

An monkey could draw if taught
Most animals can use tools, either by pushing it or actually picking it up
Selfaware abstraction is just for humans, as far as I know.
The language is a human-only thing

Not entirely true, chimps when taught sign language actually become fluent and a mother taught her offspring how to communicate with it as well.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Humans are but animals and every aspect of our civilization can be traced back to basic evolutionary terms like any animal, we are more complex perhaps in some regards, smarter than many, but we are just animals, our intelligence is just an evolved trait that allows us to survive better.

 

[Kurokami]

It would be evident by actions and patterns I assume and I'm positive someone in a lab coat, if not more than one, has already tried testing the theory out. Besides, humans are more likely to believe patterns than possibilities, there are too many of those.

Do you believe animals have discussions?

I do

Without any intention of demeaning or assaulting your opinion, could you give me an example of what kind of conversation you assume they have? So much as "how are you?" would be a miracle in my books, atleast when discussing animals.

Well I dunno, current events, politics? In a hierarchical society, I would imagine that not everyone is happy with the current rule. It's true you can't compare a human being to any other kind of animal, but I do think that perhaps we presume too little of animals. After all, we only look at them and judge them next to our nature and logic correct?

I agree we probably don't understand animals fully to the extent of perception, but my personal view on it is that their perception is fully impulse based, they go according to their programming which is a survival guide. Because of this I don't feel much remorse for animals, I don't believe in torturing them or necessarily hunting them (for sport), but as far as any action goes to them I see it as... insignificant. I measure life according to potential/capacity. (Meaning a rabbit which will eat, breed and die is in my opinion much inferior to a human who 'CAN' change society and the world... (I guess you can argue here that animals 'can' also do this? hrm...))

I think this entire comment was more or less off topic, but hopefully I've explained my reasoning coherently enough. =/

 

[Azure-Supernova]

I agree we probably don't understand animals fully to the extent of perception, but my personal view on it is that their perception is fully impulse based, they go according to their programming which is a survival guide. Because of this I don't feel much remorse for animals, I don't believe in torturing them or necessarily hunting them (for sport), but as far as any action goes to them I see it as... insignificant. I measure life according to potential/capacity. (Meaning a rabbit which will eat, breed and die is in my opinion much inferior to a human who 'CAN' change society and the world... (I guess you can argue here that animals 'can' also do this? hrm...))

I think this entire comment was more or less off topic, but hopefully I've explained my reasoning coherently enough. =/

Uh yeah, I guess I better apologize for carrying this on in the topic and not through PMs huh. But when it comes down to the matter I see myself at a different end of the scale. I take animals into regard as much as I do humans, if not more. I won't go into the whole argument because it's already been dragged on long enough. But it's sufficed to say, that indeed Rabbits do somehow play into society and the world, through food chains.

 

[Godavari]

Humans are part of the Kingdom Animalia, therefore we are animals.

Next question!

 

[Birras]

Species:Sapien
Genus:Homo
Family:Hominidae
Orderrimate
Phylum:Chordata
Kingdom:Animalia

Even if you think yourself a noble class, never forget your kingdom.

 

[Composer]

pfffffft humans are the food for the master race

 

[Hollock]

of course.

 

[Xaryn Mar]

We are the dominant species on earth because we dominate the earth. I'm sitting on a leather couch right now. That leather was taken from a cow that was killed because it was controlled by humans and needed for its leather. Tomorrow I need to drive to school, so I will drive in a car on oil extracted from earth by humans over a road which was created by humans. The road is a clear symbol of our superiority. A large area of land was cleared and changed for our convenience. That is why we are the dominant species because we change the earth to how we want it.

Cyanobacteria have made a much greater change to the Earth than humans ever will. They created oxygene and almost wiped out all other bacteria 3 billion years ago. So I wouldn't say that humans are in control or dominant in any way.
We are not even the greatest threat to life on this planet.

EDIT:

Bad argument, because as the only species to survive in all climates and the vacuum of space, we ARE the most versatile and resourceful species.

Bacteria lives more places than humans. They have even survived in space. They thrive in pure sulphur environments, without oxygen (which humans can not) The live at the bottom of the sea, on land, in air. Whatever life might be found on Mars, Titan or Europa will be in the form of bacteria.

 

[Brad Shepard]

i sometimes see the whole human race as idiots, sence we find shit to argue about to the point of dipshit logic, so none of the above i guess.

 

[CloakedOne]

Something that has always bugged me is the way people use calling another person an animal as a pejorative. There are many. "You're eating like an animal!" "You people are no better than animals!" et cetera.

This has always struck me as absolutely stupid, and one of the grander signs of our dripping, seeping hubris. Sure, we're very intelligent, resourceful and adaptive, but are these not traits animals have too, in varying amounts?

So I put this to you, Escapists: do you see humans as animals, or did we cross some arbitrary line at some point that no longer delineates us thus? And if so, why?

You have two hours.

Turn over your answer sheet.

We are animals, we are just animals that have glorified our existence to such a degree that we believe ourselves beyond what we have deemed "animals."

 

[knight56]

Well we're certainly not plants!

 

[Virus0015]

Since "animal" is a human phrase then I'm not quite sure. Surely we have risen above other species, but that doesn't change how we fit into that category. The thing we can be sure of however is the crapness of these kind of jokes/insults.

 

[Chunko]

We are the dominant species on earth because we dominate the earth. I'm sitting on a leather couch right now. That leather was taken from a cow that was killed because it was controlled by humans and needed for its leather. Tomorrow I need to drive to school, so I will drive in a car on oil extracted from earth by humans over a road which was created by humans. The road is a clear symbol of our superiority. A large area of land was cleared and changed for our convenience. That is why we are the dominant species because we change the earth to how we want it.

Cyanobacteria have made a much greater change to the Earth than humans ever will. They created oxygene and almost wiped out all other bacteria 3 billion years ago. So I wouldn't say that humans are in control or dominant in any way.
We are not even the greatest threat to life on this planet.

EDIT:

Bad argument, because as the only species to survive in all climates and the vacuum of space, we ARE the most versatile and resourceful species.

Bacteria lives more places than humans. They have even survived in space. They thrive in pure sulphur environments, without oxygen (which humans can not) The live at the bottom of the sea, on land, in air. Whatever life might be found on Mars, Titan or Europa will be in the form of bacteria.

Well they still don't have the level of communication and infrastructure we have.

 

[Daveman]

Well, we are.

We're still driven by the same basic instincs as other, less advanced animals are we not?

To pretend we're above that seems kinda silly.

yeah well I think the real question is