Why do creationists have such a hard time accepting that Humans are animals?
It's just a fact. Does it make you feel lesser or insulted? Can you legitimately deny the science of taxonomy based on your feelings?
gregloa · 61-69, M
Animals are much smarter and have way more common sense than some humans.
View 4 more replies »
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@XxBlahxX
On this planet life takes two forms = vegetation and animals. So, if you aren't a plant then you are an animal.
You can believe in both but that still doesnt mean we're animals lol big difference
On this planet life takes two forms = vegetation and animals. So, if you aren't a plant then you are an animal.
Straylight · F
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
Roundandroundwego · 61-69
@peterlee pure denial from the nature killers! Keep chattering so everyone can be enraged at your people, together.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
Simple but very deep-rooted human arrogance based on or bolstered by "if it's in the Bible it must be true" laziness - referring to Old Testament comments separating humans from all other animals.
I've noo trouble whatsoever regarding we humans as animals, of the genus homo (the hominids). After all, we fit all the definitions of "animal".
About the only major physiological difference, really, is a huge "surplus" of brain power that enable us to for a start to create and use languages. No other animals have that skill: even our nearest, the chimpanzees and bonobos, manage only calls.
I've noo trouble whatsoever regarding we humans as animals, of the genus homo (the hominids). After all, we fit all the definitions of "animal".
About the only major physiological difference, really, is a huge "surplus" of brain power that enable us to for a start to create and use languages. No other animals have that skill: even our nearest, the chimpanzees and bonobos, manage only calls.
@ArishMell
Yup. Shockingly no one has yet managed to make an argument for why humans aren't animals beyond " Well i don't reckon humans are animals" lol
But the intelligence thing isn't even really a difference. Or rather it's a difference in degree rather than category.
Also i like to remind people that all sorts of animals do something that is totally unique to them. Intelligence isn't inherently a more valuable trait.
Yup. Shockingly no one has yet managed to make an argument for why humans aren't animals beyond " Well i don't reckon humans are animals" lol
But the intelligence thing isn't even really a difference. Or rather it's a difference in degree rather than category.
Also i like to remind people that all sorts of animals do something that is totally unique to them. Intelligence isn't inherently a more valuable trait.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Pikachu I noticed that, with some respondents unable to contribute any sort of sensible response - but that's common on SW!
I remember from my First Year in our local grammar-school, a General Science lesson included one exercise in which we listed the defining characterics of plants and animals, showing their differences and similarities.
All those for animals apply to our species as much as to any other.
Generally, animals have specific traits such as their own ranges and sensitivity levels of the senses, that suit their own physiology and way of life for survival first and foremost. I doubt anyone can convincingly explain why Homo Sapiensis has so much higher IQ than any other creature that it can do things far beyond functionally necessary to it as an animal; but we are a lot weaker in one way or another than other large mammals.
For example, the hair on even a domestic dog or horse can let it survive a fairly cold night that would kill us without artificial protection; but neither the canines nor equines can build their own shelters. They have to find existing shelter, such as the lee of a hedge, as best they can.
On the other hand neither genus can talk in the way we can. They communicate with others of their own species but only as much as necessary for survival. People romanticise bird song and whale calls but those sounds are purely functional and specific to animal. (Birds don't chirp to please us. Nor do whales "sing": they only whistle, grunt and squawk, and the plangency is created by reverberation not the animals efforts.)
Perhaps we developed our intelligence first and foremost to help us survive physical dangers and to find food, warmth and shelter; then sort of grew it from there, presumably developing languages first.
One aspect of high intelligence is that it can let us over-ride or suppress our primary instincts to some extent, and that might be a double-edged sword. Its main advantage might be to aid social bonding but it sadly also allows our species to be most destructive of all.
I remember from my First Year in our local grammar-school, a General Science lesson included one exercise in which we listed the defining characterics of plants and animals, showing their differences and similarities.
All those for animals apply to our species as much as to any other.
Generally, animals have specific traits such as their own ranges and sensitivity levels of the senses, that suit their own physiology and way of life for survival first and foremost. I doubt anyone can convincingly explain why Homo Sapiensis has so much higher IQ than any other creature that it can do things far beyond functionally necessary to it as an animal; but we are a lot weaker in one way or another than other large mammals.
For example, the hair on even a domestic dog or horse can let it survive a fairly cold night that would kill us without artificial protection; but neither the canines nor equines can build their own shelters. They have to find existing shelter, such as the lee of a hedge, as best they can.
On the other hand neither genus can talk in the way we can. They communicate with others of their own species but only as much as necessary for survival. People romanticise bird song and whale calls but those sounds are purely functional and specific to animal. (Birds don't chirp to please us. Nor do whales "sing": they only whistle, grunt and squawk, and the plangency is created by reverberation not the animals efforts.)
Perhaps we developed our intelligence first and foremost to help us survive physical dangers and to find food, warmth and shelter; then sort of grew it from there, presumably developing languages first.
One aspect of high intelligence is that it can let us over-ride or suppress our primary instincts to some extent, and that might be a double-edged sword. Its main advantage might be to aid social bonding but it sadly also allows our species to be most destructive of all.
Roundandroundwego · 61-69
Same reason my other answer was invisible. Hush. Shhhh. No.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment