The 'We are Just Animals' Perspective

[Robert]

Of course there distinct differences between humans and other organisms ranging from methods of development (protostomes and deuterostomes) right through to small differences like organ size and usage. I dont debate that we are animals, highly intelligent animals but animals none the less.

The question is how we differ from our closest relatives and while using large scale comparisons like multicellularity and the like we may appear very similar using a finer scale we possess things that put us millions of years ahead of the closest species (again this is a relatively small time period considering the duration of the earths existence but its long enough for me!!!).

[My First Timbs]

This is completely incorrect, Prokaryotic cells are cells without a membrane bound nucleus, that is thier DNA, RNA is spead throughout the cells, they are primative cells.

Eukaryotic cells have organelles (endoplasmic reticulum, ribosomes etc)
and a membrane bound nucleus. It is though they envolved by a process called endosymbiosis (basically engulfment of other cells to form organelles) from prokaryotic cells.

Calling humans eukaryotic is meaningless, it seems there is a whole lotta misinformation on the science side of things being thrown around in this thread

i beg to differ.. calling humans "eukaryotic" is in no way a misnomer. eukaryotes are organisms composed of complex cells (mostly multicellular life forms as i pointed out earlier)

many different life forms are eukaryotic (plants, fungi, animals)

humans are animals, thus humans are eukaryotic... no misnomer here

calling humans eukaryotic gets to the heart of the issue.. that issue being what the original intent of this thread was.. are we are are we not animals... humans are eukaryotic (composed of more than one complex cell that contains membrane bound organelles),, and if we are eukaryotic that is to illustrate that we either are plant, fungus or animal

we are animal as u agree.

[My First Timbs]

What do I mean by outright? You just explained it, curiosity can kill you in the process, just like I said in the post you are responding to. ("Maybe" if I do this, then "maybe" it can help me with this. Lets see "if" it works.) One's choice of fight or flight is an "outright" decision to try stay alive. Curiousity "can help" as well as religion, but you must also consider the human trait of zealousness. Which can result in death in both cases.
I'm trying to talk absolutes here.

u are missing the issue and what is meant by survival value (from an evolutionary standpoint)

if a creature posseses this "trait" of curiousity, it has a 50/50 chance (or possibly greater) of that "trait" either providing a beneficial result or a negative result... as long as the beneficial reults outweight (by frequency or quality) the negative results, curiousity provides enormous survival value when compared to a creature that does not possess this trait of "curiousity"..

[Robert]

Yeah i see wot you mean now your not using the single cell definition of eukaryote and that makes sense, my apologies.

But saying that being a eukaryote cuts to the heart of the issue, does not make sense to me. This is not a factor that differentiates us from primates which is the most important thing, for me it is clear humans dont bear resemblance to plants and fungi or even protists, its our relationship wit primates that is in main point of discussion. To look at this we should analyze smaller scale differences like oposable thumbs, brain capacity, mating/feeding strategies, all these things, but thats just my opinion
peace

[My First Timbs]

Originally Posted by My First Timbs
that just simply isnt true.. there are many other animals that use their sense in a more complicated way then we do and achive better results from the processing of these senses than we could ever dream of.
our 5 senses are actually quite weak (even when used in conjuntion with other senses)Name such an animal

dogs have excellent hearing (in contrast to ours)
dogs have excellent smell (in contrast to ours)
dogs have excellent sight ( comparable to ours with use of a harderian gland)
dogs have excellent senses of touch (very comparable and on par with ours) involving similar receptors
dogs have very good taste receptors, especially sense they are couples with a pheomenal olfactory system...

the list of animals (including insects as well) could go on for pages when trying to compare and contrast with human senses.


in adiition, our sense of touch is laughable compared to any other creature that has antannae or hair feelers

the line is just as clear once u throw humanity in the mix as well...we are omnivorous mammals with a predatory drive.
My point exactly

if we agree on this, then nothing is to be said...

completely un true.. one of humanity's greatest survival values is a natural result of man's belief and understanding of religion! religion has been one of the most valuable tools in our survival on this planet... religion provides a framework thru which one can completely strive to live his or her life in such a way so that it potentiallu can yield more benefit than detriment! thats the ultimate in survival value ! in addition, it provides an inate sense of fear of many things (which potentially can steer one clear of harms way and thus provide survival value!)
How does religion help survival? Religion has been one of the most valuable catalyst of wars. You say completely untrue, when this is completely your opinion. But fact is, many religions only promise us great things after are lives are over. That is not survival as a scientist would define it. Right was right, wrong was wrong, life was life, and death was death long before man established religion and any of the rituals that go with them.

do not confuse the issue

even tho religion has indeed been the major force of destruction in our history (modern history), this is no way means that the concept of religion and belief was not the major force that provided benefit to a social creature living at the whim of nature. i already explained the exact mechanism how it provided and ultimately still provides benefit from an evolutionary point of view.

religion provides a framework thru which one can completely strive to live his or her life in such a way so that it potentiallu can yield more benefit than detriment! thats the ultimate in survival value ! in addition, it provides an inate sense of fear of many things (which potentially can steer one clear of harms way and thus provide survival value!)

[june181972]

u are missing the issue and what is meant by survival value (from an evolutionary standpoint)

Okay, evolutionary point taken.

[My First Timbs]

Yeah i see wot you mean now your not using the single cell definition of eukaryote and that makes sense, my apologies.

But saying that being a eukaryote cuts to the heart of the issue, does not make sense to me. This is not a factor that differentiates us from primates which is the most important thing, for me it is clear humans dont bear resemblance to plants and fungi or even protists, its our relationship wit primates that is in main point of discussion. To look at this we should analyze smaller scale differences like oposable thumbs, brain capacity, mating/feeding strategies, all these things, but thats just my opinion
peace

peace robert

se the thing is.. i was merely trying to break the issue down to its essence to first illustrate that humans are animals (by simple classification) starting with our cellularity and worlking my way up

for one to argue that humans are not animals, they first have to somehow revamp the whole classification system from the ground up

if life forms can either be (in a nutshell, not counting viral life forms) prokaryotes or eukaryotes.. and the eukaryotes comprise plants, fungi and animals... then those who claim that humans are not animals will first have to somehow illustrate the the initial classification is faulty.

are we or are we not multicellular? if yes, then check one for eukaryotic.

are we or are we not plant or fungus.. if not then that leaves "animal"..

only from there we can now start to discuss the higher orders and note our differences and similarities ...

But saying that being a eukaryote cuts to the heart of the issue, does not make sense to me. This is not a factor that differentiates us from primates which is the most important thing, for me it is clear humans dont bear resemblance to plants and fungi or even protists, its our relationship wit primates that is in main point of discussion. To look at this we should analyze smaller scale differences like oposable thumbs, brain capacity, mating/feeding strategies, all these things, but thats just my opinion
peace

also, i wanted to add that i wholeheartedly agree with u that the smaller scale differences are truly the issue at hand, but when debating with others about something as trivial as "are humans animals or not", u must first start at the beginning

[My First Timbs]

Okay, evolutionary point taken.

anything i talk about in regard to life is always from an evolutionary standpoint

nothing makes sense in biology unless it it viewed thru a lens of evolution

[Robert]

What ppl would argue, that is those that believe we are not animals, is that because we are conscious and far more intelligent then our closest living relatives, we should be considered in a separate grouping away from the animals. These ppl would not deny that we are related to monkeys, just that we are too advanced to be classed amoung them.

This is ludicrous to me, but i guess a lot of ppl think along these lines, and btw (though im sure you already now) viral life forms is a bit of an oxymoron coz viruses arent actually alive, but thats a whole other debate.....

[june181972]

dogs have excellent hearing (in contrast to ours)
dogs have excellent smell (in contrast to ours)
dogs have excellent sight ( comparable to ours with use of a harderian gland)
dogs have excellent senses of touch (very comparable and on par with ours) involving similar receptors
dogs have very good taste receptors, especially sense they are couples with a pheomenal olfactory system...

the list of animals (including insects as well) could go on for pages when trying to compare and contrast with human senses.
Hearing and smell understood
sight touch and taste, not buying it
Insects have the exoskeleton, so not buying at least the touch aspect



if we agree on this, then nothing is to be said...





do not confuse the issue

even tho religion has indeed been the major force of destruction in our history (modern history), this is no way means that the concept of religion and belief was not the major force that provided benefit to a social creature living at the whim of nature. i already explained the exact mechanism how it provided and ultimately still provides benefit from an evolutionary point of view.

religion provides a framework thru which one can completely strive to live his or her life in such a way so that it potentiallu can yield more benefit than detriment! thats the ultimate in survival value ! in addition, it provides an inate sense of fear of many things (which potentially can steer one clear of harms way and thus provide survival value!)

Maybe this issue is getting confused
The fact I even brought up "search for a higher power" (never religion)
was an attempt to show we are not just animals

[Robert]

Maybe this issue is getting confused
The fact I even brought up "search for a higher power" (never religion)
was an attempt to show we are not just animals

This really depends on what you consider an animal, for me just because humans are highly intelligent does not mean we are not animals, and this intelligence includes searching for a higher power and questioning our existence

[june181972]

This really depends on what you consider an animal, for me just because humans are highly intelligent does not mean we are not animals, and this intelligence includes searching for a higher power and questioning our existence

See Post #60 on page Four

[My First Timbs]

yea i know about the virus debate... its still an open debate

[My First Timbs]

Maybe this issue is getting confused
The fact I even brought up "search for a higher power" (never religion)
was an attempt to show we are not just animals

see thats the thing.. what do u mean when u say "not just animals"

humans are either animals or we are not.. u must take a stand or come up with some new classification system that somehow revamps biology to incorporate us as some special creature

[Robert]

yea i know about the virus debate... its still an open debate

Yeah a very difficult one too answer, maybe steer clear of it in this thread