I once saw a question on Quora asking about human-animal hybrids. My answer was, it depends on whether you consider Neanderthals to be humans or animals. Many modern people have Neanderthal DNA; up to 4% in some cases. So if Neanderthals are classified as animals, these people would be human-animal hybrids. But if Neanderthals are a subspecies of Homo sapiens, then they would be human. The old classification had them as Homo neanderthalensis; a different species within the genus Homo. The new one has us as Homo sapiens sapiens and them as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, where we are different subspecies of the same species.
https://horses.extension.org/is-there-a-chance-that-a-mule-may-reproduce-if-bred/[quote][c=000000]However, there are likely more cases of mules/hinnies reproducing than we know especially in developing countries. Most recent cases of mules producing foals have been documented in Morrocco (late 1990s), China (hinny that produced a foal named Dragon in the 1980s), and most recently, a mule bred to a jack in a pasture in Colorado in 2008. Most documented cases of mules/hinnies being fertile have been in the female mule (molly/mare mule). A majority of male mules/hinnies are castrated, but one case of a fertile hinny producing live, mature spermatozoa was documented at Texas A&M in the 1950s. [/c][/quote]
Language has limits. It cannot describe accurately the many different ways, either collectively or individually, in uniqueness or experiential depth, that the many kinds of experiences that humans know.
To describe even one might require as many thousands of page volumes as there are different in as many populations, eras, and population sizes.
Its absurd to be so filled with simple minded arrogance to assert otherwise.
@sree251 For decades I wasn't aware that most people's thinking was done in words. Once I found out I was very , very very relieved that they were not all merely a bit unintelligent but simply intelligent in a way that blinded both of us to one another's intellectual disconcurrences.
@SteelHands [quote] That is only true in the first dimension of thinking. The second level is also mainly dependent on language as well, however the third opens the mind to the question. This is where most academics are halted by the covers and binders of books. [/quote]
What do you mean by second and third level of thinking? Is English your first language?
Different cultures have other concepts inaccesible to the western mind. We just don't have those ideas. Western translation of eastern philosophy produces western perception of the eastern mind. This has resulted in unbridgeable geopolitical division. For example, western society based on the idea of the individual practices democracy. Eastern society based on the family structure practices socialism.
@SteelHands [quote] For decades I wasn't aware that most people's thinking was done in words. [/quote]
Yes, this is true for "first dimension" thinking. Every word or symbol (in math) represent an idea. I don't understand what you meant about second and third level of thinking.
To me, there seems to be only one level of thinking: the basic level where words/symbols are used to represent ideas of things (i.e. objects, people, places) or intellectual concepts (i.e. God, love, etc.).
Beyond thinking at the basic level, there is contemplation or reflective inquiry into the nature of first level thinking and existence of things including the thinker itself.
We are germs on a planet full of food. We destroy, build structures and eat everything we find including each other. Nobody cares about the planet, they only care about themselves. This will never change.
@Jake966 No, the Bible was written from the inspired words of Jesus, not God. The First Testament of the Bible was written about 60 years after the death of Jesus.
we can set our own priorities. primitive animals have pre-determined proirities, intelligent animals can develop priorities through experience and memory. humans can choose priorities strait out of an internal complex decision-making process. only a human can decide to put asside whatever was naturally going to happen tomorow and start taking piano lessons. all choices, preferences and all behaviors that naturally come from them are a complex system of priorities, our personality is a system of prioriities.
It would have to be something simple and universally achievable to all humans, no matter their station in life. So the meaning to life is likely as simple as experiencing life. There's ultimately no wrong way to do it (apparently), and everyone does it in their own way. Some people seem to fail into success, while others couldn't catch a break if it hit them.
To have empathy for others. To form into social groups to the benefit of all. To pick up those who fall not just leave them to die. To strive to do great things. Seek pleasure. Please others. To feel good when you do good and feel bad when you bad.
@JamesBugman Good idea! Never thought of using a different search engine! I've been taking counseling for anger management and self-harm issues because of those damn squares that won't go away!
@sree251 You literally asked him what his definition of human is.
He was asking an open-ended question. You can define "human" any way you want. If it's too vague for you, put up your own post where you ask the question in a specific way to get the answers you want.
@LeopoldBloom [quote] You literally asked him what his definition of human is. [/quote]
I did. "The Closing of the American Mind" is a book written by Allan Bloom. We Americans are mentally dead.
One can't tell if he is asking an open-ended question. After all, what else can a human be? But his question in the OP seemed loaded.
[quote] He was asking an open-ended question. [/quote]
Was he? He has not contributed to this thread and had not engaged in discussion.
[quote] You can define "human" any way you want. If it's too vague for you, put up your own post where you ask the question in a specific way to get the answers you want. [/quote]
I don't think anyone here is capable of defining "human" different from what science has decreed.
My answer to his question would depend on his definition of "human".
I believe it pretty much boils down to the ability to reproduce.
Language is no longer even a factor. They just discovered that whales have a alphabet of sorts. We just can't easily determine how to reproduce their alphabet. We just don't have the range of senses and abilities.
It means being beyond animal we aren’t animals we are separate to animals yes we’re mammals like lions but we are unique to animals we can create and build things that animals can’t do yes some animals can create to but it’s not like a building six story building we can cure diseases we can help those who can’t help themselves
To be mean, greedy, consuming, rude, selfish and create more than your body weight in rubbish each week?🤔
Oh, and completely ignore the state of things while eating junk food wrapped in plastic, in your car, with the air con on, and windows down while watching cat videos 😌
I don't know if I will ever know what the meaning of my life is 🤔 But when I was a child, my grandfather told me that you only live once, and in order to find my life's purpose it's important to spend countless hours every day on the internet, desperately searching for the validation of strangers 🤗
[/center]
