• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Human Animals?

Kfox

Well-Known Member
Then I don't believe you use other animals as your friends with their consent.

Now that I think about it, please explain to me the process of obtaining other animal's consent. Do they give verbal consent? Sign a consent form?
If you feed a stray animal, and they keep coming to your home for food, and eventually you allow them in your house as your pet, you don't have to be a genius to figure out the animal wants to be there.
If a man kills a woman's kids and rape her, do you consider that act wrong? Or would you judge him by the same standard you would judge a lion.
But then again, I wasn't the one who invented a scenario where a lion would follow a lioness home because he thought she was attractive and wanted to rape her.
My scenario is based on real life events
You are a modern ape.

Tell me what you think an ape is.
Do you understand the difference between a lion vs a house cat; even though they are both in the cat family? If so, you should understand the difference between a human and a modern ape; even though they are both in the ape family.
 

SalixIncendium

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
Staff member
Premium Member
If you feed a stray animal, and they keep coming to your home for food, and eventually you allow them in your house as your pet, you don't have to be a genius to figure out the animal wants to be there.
Completely irrelevant to what I asked you for.

If a man kills a woman's kids and rape her, do you consider that act wrong? Or would you judge him by the same standard you would judge a lion.

My scenario is based on real life events
I've already pointed out the flaw in your analogy. Unless both are sociopaths, your analogy fails. There is no point in pursuing it.

Do you understand the difference between a lion vs a house cat; even though they are both in the cat family? If so, you should understand the difference between a human and a modern ape; even though they are both in the ape family.
The problem with your logic is there is no such species as "modern ape." Let me simplify this in terms you might better understand.

Lion is a species. House cat is a species. Cheetah is a species. All are members of the cat (felidae) family.

Human is a species. Chimpanzee is a species. Gorilla is a species. All are members of the ape (hominid) family.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
What's modern got to do with it? Humans are apes, as per my link.
Do you recognize the difference between a house cat vs a lion; even though they are both in the cat family? If so, then you should understand the difference between a human vs an ape even though they both are in the ape family.
 

SalixIncendium

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
Staff member
Premium Member
Do you recognize the difference between a house cat vs a lion; even though they are both in the cat family? If so, then you should understand the difference between a human vs an ape even though they both are in the ape family.
I've already addressed your confusion in the preceding post. Repeating the same error doesn't make it correct.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
It's not a matter of opinion or arrogance; you are a human therefore you are an ape.

"The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnɪdiː/), whose members are known as the great apes or hominids(/ˈhɒmɪnɪdz/), are a taxonomic family of primates that includes eight extant species in four genera: Pongo (the Bornean, Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutan); Gorilla (the eastern and western gorilla); Pan(the chimpanzee and the bonobo); and Homo, of which only modern humans (Homo sapiens) remain."

- Hominidae - Wikipedia
Ape is a loaded term; because when people think of apes, they think of modern apes; not the great ape which hasn't been around for a million years. The apes that are around today are not human.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
The impression was given that non-humans are below us though, as many do actually think this. We are just different, had a different evolutionary path than even our closest relatives (the other primates and hominids), will hardly be equal in many ways, but perhaps have as much value as other creatures. How can one species actually be the equal of any other?
Do you believe humans to be superior to all other animals? I do. I base this on the fact that humans are intelligent; what I mean by intelligent is we learn from those who came before us, and add to it; then we teach our young what we learned and they take that knowledge even further. Non humans don’t do that; they just learn from their parents, and they don’t take it any further. That’s why if it were possible to bring a dog from 500 years ago, to the present; that dog would fit right in with today’s dogs. But you take a human from 500 years ago, and bring to the present, he would be lost among modern humans. IMO our ability to expand knowledge from one generation to the next makes us better than those creatures unable to do it.
What about you? Do you find humans superior to all other animals? Or equal. What do you base that on?
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
Completely irrelevant to what I asked you for.
No it isn’t; when a dog chooses to go to my house, and even enter my house, I call that consent.
I've already pointed out the flaw in your analogy. Unless both are sociopaths, your analogy fails. There is no point in pursuing it.
No; you obviously didn’t understand my analogy. If you are gonna hold humans to a higher moral standard than you hold non humans, you may say we are all equal, but your actions prove otherwise.
The problem with your logic is there is no such species as "modern ape."
When I say “ape” I’m talking about those creatures you find in cages at the zoo.
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
If you are gonna hold humans to a higher moral standard than you hold non humans, you may say we are all equal, but your actions prove otherwise.

Imo it means that we are here to help take care of this planet and it's animals and other inhabitants. That's the moral distinction between us and them. We are here for them. Just as much as they are here for us.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
That's disappointing. Because we are apes as well.
Yeah; but if we're gonna have a conversation, there needs to be an understanding concerning what we are talking about. If you're talking about an ape at the zoo, and I think you're talking about the man who lives next door, there is gonna be confusion so there needs to be a distinction between the two when we talk; otherwise our conversation will not get very far. Does this make sense to you?
Imo it means that we are here to help take care of this planet and it's animals and other inhabitants. That's the moral distinction between us and them. We are here for them. Just as much as they are here for us.
Though I can agree with that, That's not what we were talking about.
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
Yeah; but if we're gonna have a conversation, there needs to be an understanding concerning what we are talking about. If you're talking about an ape at the zoo, and I think you're talking about the man who lives next door, there is gonna be confusion so there needs to be a distinction between the two when we talk; otherwise our conversation will not get very far. Does this make sense to you?

Though I can agree with that, That's not what we were talking about.

If you were to be referring to the "apes" in the zoo, maybe try calling them what they are? Gorillas, Orangs even, or others.

To say ape and only refer to the "animal", is anthropocentric.

Almost like we aren't animals or something.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
If you were to be referring to the "apes" in the zoo, maybe try calling them what they are? Gorillas, Orangs even, or others.

To say ape and only refer to the "animal", is anthropocentric.

Almost like we aren't animals or something.
And if I don't know the difference between a baboon vs an orangutan? It might be easier for me to just refer to them as apes.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Denial doesn't change what you did.


Please don't include me in your "we." I don't.

But in answer to your question, humans use other animals because humans can be cruel, egotistical, merciless creatures, and in my book that puts them below other animals, especially from a moral perspective.

Other species work together to accomplish a result rather than use each other.

main-qimg-16618b0ce38a11c73693b3eeb620a670-lq

3-34ae1220fdd040dc9b842c7d6bb4ab0d.jpg

3-afdde5f17f6c42ca876bb12d50350904.jpg

clown-fish-523220498-15b4365cdf8d4dc9acebb7105b53d990.jpg
This absurdly reminded me of the quote from Aliens where Ripley says, about the Aliens to Burke, who just betrayed them to earn a profit off the aliens:
"You know, Burke, I don't know which species is worse. You don't see them ******* each other over for a ******* percentage."
 

SalixIncendium

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
Staff member
Premium Member
No it isn’t; when a dog chooses to go to my house, and even enter my house, I call that consent.
I wasn't aware that you "use" a dog to enter your house. You've lost your train of thought somewhere along the way here. We were talking about "using" animals with their consent.

No; you obviously didn’t understand my analogy. If you are gonna hold humans to a higher moral standard than you hold non humans, you may say we are all equal, but your actions prove otherwise.
As I said, it's about intent. Your analogy fails because you were unable to demonstrate identical intent.

But since you have a problem letting go, let's go the other way and build on it.

Tell me how the acts described in your analogy place humans morally superior to non-humans. If a human can rape and murder for lust, how is this morally superior than a lion who rapes and murders for procreation?

When I say “ape” I’m talking about those creatures you find in cages at the zoo.
Then you should specify non-human apes so we can understand what you mean.

I don't go to zoos, because I find them inhumane. But anyway, those in the cages would be chimpanzees, orangutans, gorillas, gibbons, bonobos, etc....all apes. Just like the apes that paid money to get in the zoo to gawk at them. All you have to do is go there and read the signs in front of these cages. You will find the species name on them. Find me one that says "ape" without any modifier under species and I'll concede my position.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Do you believe humans to be superior to all other animals?
Quite simply, no.
I do. I base this on the fact that humans are intelligent; what I mean by intelligent is we learn from those who came before us, and add to it; then we teach our young what we learned and they take that knowledge even further. Non humans don’t do that; they just learn from their parents, and they don’t take it any further.
This says more about our ability to conceive of symbolic language (and thought) and as to how we have managed to pass on knowledge gained from generation to generation via the various technologies that we have invented, especially parchment and paper, and hence why it has only been since the invention of such that recorded history has been available to us, even if we can't rely on this to be accurate. Religious texts, take note.
That’s why if it were possible to bring a dog from 500 years ago, to the present; that dog would fit right in with today’s dogs. But you take a human from 500 years ago, and bring to the present, he would be lost among modern humans. IMO our ability to expand knowledge from one generation to the next makes us better than those creatures unable to do it.
I think you might have to prove that, given that any human that had no contact with other humans (born and left in the wild and which survived such) would hardly be able to converse with any other humans or probably even fit into society, given that all humans go through a lengthy period of training to become humans. Someone from the past as you mentioned might do this equally as well, having much the same brain as us now.
What about you? Do you find humans superior to all other animals? Or equal. What do you base that on?
Superior in some ways but far inferior in many ways too. Hard to tell really, but most humans wouldn't survive in the wild without any aids or special knowledge. Most animals seem to though.
 
Top