Humans and Animals

[gerkin]

What seperates humans of animals - is it because humans are spiritual ?

[magicdice]

generally it's language. all species communicate but only humans have grammar & syntax, a language above protolanguage. also that we have mathematical ability and can distinguish between a group of ten and twelve at a glance, whereas for other species it's one, two and lots

[Clanad]

While I agree concerning language to a certain extent, I feel that language is an extension of that wholly human capability of sentience... self-awareness...

[El D]

Can you prove animals are not self aware clanad?

 

Pure intelligence imo.

[jills]

Waldo - lmao!!!!

From my memory of Uni (distant past, admittedly) I think Clanad is right about self awareness and recognition of self, but I'd need to check.

I think what separates us from the others is our ego.  We believe we're bigger, better and brighter than other species on the planet - Douglas Adams had it right imho.

[FP]

We are animals and have just evolved to have greater intelligence.  Just my opinion.  Shame we don't use that intelligence too well!

[simont]

Humans are different from animals because they use websites like this to ask if they're different from humans!

[jcherbstritt]

I thought that other animals were self-aware.  I thought scientists use mirrors to work out whether animals are or not.  When shown a mirror, Cats and most other animals firstly think it's another cat/animal and then realise it's a trick and ignore it (or maybe they're just not vain, to carry on the ego theory!).  But apparentlyI know that Dolphins love mirrors and have obviously figured them out.  I think other animals understand mirrors too - maybe chimpanzees.  But most animals don't .

DNA - wise, I think we have about 99.7% of the same dna as a chimp I think.

[jills]

can't believe Waldo's answer has been removed!!!  Shame, it was funny guys!

[Octavius]

Shame I missed it!

During the middle ages and after, alchemical thinking divided nature into animal, vegetable, and mineral.  There is in fact a natural succession from inert mineral to the plant that is alive but not (apparently) sentient to the animal that has awareness but not reason.  Hence the human kingdom as the next rung on the ladder of being.  The series mineral-plant-animal-man is still used in a number of western esoteric systems of thought, however the number of kingdoms in modern day has expanded to include 1st, 2nd, 3rd elemental (pre-physical, i.e. before particles and atoms) and spiritual (post-human).

The main difference in this classification for the animal kingdom and human kingdom would be the as Aristotle said, the animal has an irrational soul, whereas human has a rational soul.  Also, Animal (individualised astral body) Man (individualised ego: self-consciousness).

Humans are often labelled animals when they act irrationally or lose their self-consciousness.

[landie]

Humans have money to spend.

[Octavius]

Only when they spend it rationally.

My gf is an anilmal...

[jimmer]

nothing seperates humans from animals. different animals build houses, use tools, communicate, count, trade, have social order, lie, cheat, wash, laugh, are self-aware, get jelous etc etc. Humans have unique attributes but so do lots of other animals. plus we are only rational by our own standards.

 

jim

[Gef]

Humans ARE animals. So are fish, birds, amphibians, reptiles. insects, etc.

[slimfandango]

The holy grail of evolutionary psychology and comparative psychology is "Theory of Mind". It is the process by which human beings over the age of 3.5 yrs to 4 yrs+ are able to impute mental states to others. They know that behind anothers actions lie intentions and that this other mind may have a different picture of the world (physically and metaphorically) by virtue of having their own mind and not sharing the perspective of the other person. This is a very very hot subject in psychology since it is thought to be probably the main factor underlying the deficits in autistic spectrum disorders (and autism is pretty widespread).

It's also a pretty hot subject in comparative psychology because its pretty much the unbreakable qualitative difference between humans and other animals. No other animal really is able to demonstrate 'Theory of Mind'. Chimps, those old favorites, can do some interesting tricks based on perspective taking, but they simply cannot attribute mental states to other animals, conspecifics or humans included. Byrne and all did an interesting study with pigs (think it was Byrne and Held) where strangely only one of the subjects (pigs) showed that he kind of understood that seeing led to knowing (if another pig saw something that he didn't, then that pig should be relied upon for information and followed. But basically, Theory of Mind (aka mentalizing) is unique to humans.

Whiten and others suggest that what gave the homo line the kick into the pretty awesome intelligence we have today is machiavellian intelligence (the social brain hypothesis). This type of social scheming is really only exploitable if you have the ability to work out what another is thinking from what it is doing.

[slimfandango]

Almost all of the other suggestions about what make humans unique have been knocked down, forcefully, one after the other. Language (you're kidding right? - look at the overwhelming evidence of chimps and gorillas with sign language, of diana monkey symbolic and syntactic communication in the wild).

Granted, PSG (Phrase structure grammar) has not been shown properly yet outside humans but it's still a work in progress. Others...CULTURE, absolutely present outside of humans, especially in chimps. I'll chuck in one important caveat before I go...psychology is the study of the patterns of human behaviour, which picks out patterns in order to be able to predict them. In doing so it also tries to make broad anthropological and philosophical statements about what humans are (ie limited to those patterns or with behaviours that are predictable if we know enough about a subjects state and trait).

HOWEVER, psychology has no right to do this and has no evidence to justify it. It may just be the case that patterns in psychology are underlying factors which form the basis for higher level decision making in a way that is not tied to them (ie that we really do have free will) through a mechanism and a physics that we as yet do not understand. This, I believe, is probably what makes us unique as humans. We are not, for some reason, deterministic machines.

For those who object to this please:-have a look at quantum mechanics first if you deny that physics allows this to occur.-explain to me why we've moulded our entire criminal justice system on the assumption that individuals can choose in the final analysis.

[slimfandango]

Almost all of the other suggestions about what make humans unique have been knocked down, forcefully, one after the other. Language (you're kidding right? - look at the overwhelming evidence of chimps and gorillas with sign language, of diana monkey symbolic and syntactic communication in the wild). Granted, PSG (Phrase structure grammar) has not been shown properly yet outside humans but it's still a work in progress. Others...CULTURE, absolutely present outside of humans, especially in chimps.

I'll chuck in one important caveat before I go...psychology is the study of the patterns of human behaviour, which picks out patterns in order to be able to predict them. In doing so it also tries to make broad anthropological and philosophical statements about what humans are (ie limited to those patterns or with behaviours that are predictable if we know enough about a subjects state and trait). HOWEVER, psychology has no right to do this and has no evidence to justify it. It may just be the case that patterns in psychology are underlying factors which form the basis for higher level decision making in a way that is not tied to them (ie that we really do have free will) through a mechanism and a physics that we as yet do not understand. This, I believe, is probably what makes us unique as humans. We are not, for some reason, deterministic machines. For those who object to this please:

-have a look at quantum mechanics first if you deny that physics allows this to occur.

-explain to me why we've moulded our entire criminal justice system on the assumption that individuals can choose in the final analysis.

[slimfandango]

I just wanted to add something.
My cat has been miaowing at me for milk, and it reminds me of an important point that sews together a couple of points in this thread.
There are two ways to look at Language, and that arbitrary distinction does happen to separate down human/non-human lines.
What is seen by many as separating human language and animal communication actually involves Theory of Mind. That is, when I use language as a human, I talk to you knowing that your picture of the world is different from mine, and that I am trying to change your picture of the world by supplying you with some information. My cat miaows to me, and this looks A LOT LIKE HUMAN COMMUNICATION, but it is not, the cat performs the action without knowing that I really have a different perspective. It really is just learned through conditioning.
This is a complex bit, but it's very cool. Critical to this human/animal debate is 'levels of representation/intention'. Some psychologists believe that humans have FIFTH order representation in language. That is, when I speak to you, I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT I KNOW THAT WHEN I AM TALKING TO YOU I am trying to change your mind. (Start at the end and work back).
The point is that Language, where it is in the form above, uniquely human form, is often thought to be the differentiating factor between humans and others. In fact, the difference probably just stems from the underlying Theory of Mind, which is needed for Language of this type. Thus, autists have a severe language deficit.