• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Eqality beyond Humanity?

JJR

Muse
J
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
563
The Great Ape Project: Equality Beyond Humanity
By Paola Cavalieri, Peter Singer

A compelling and revolutionary work that calls for the immediate extension of our human rights to the great apes.The Great Ape Project looks forward to a new stage in the development of the community of equals, whereby the great apes-chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans-will actually receive many of the same protections and rights that are already accorded to humans.This profound collection of thirty-one essays by the world's most distinguished observers of free-living apes make up a uniquely satisfying whole, blending observation and interpretation in a highly persuasive case for a complete reassessment of the moral status of our closest kin
Click to expand...

A true head scratcher

April 1998:
Koko's First Interspecies Internet Chat

On April 29, 1998, Koko participated in the first interspecies web chat in internet history, hosted by AOL.. This introduced millions of people to the idea that the internet could be used to learn about the perspective of other species directly, especially endangered species. Chat transcript.

Today: Koko has inspired many students across the nation to do National History Day projects focusing on the theme Communication in History: the Key to Understanding.
Click to expand...

More fun than a barrel of monkees!!

Should apes be treated as equals? Koko is supposed to have an I.Q. of 76.
 
On a few occasions I've heard creationist proclaim "we did NOT evolve from monkeys". I usually point out to them, "you're absolutely right, we evolved along with them, but we do share a common ancestor".

Just to digress slightly, the creationist will also point out that the "theory of evolution" is just that, a "theory". I would then agree with them saying "absolutely!, but it's a theory in the scientific sense, whereas it proposes a robust model that is falsifiable with lots and lots of evidence for proof and more being found every year. Just to get a condescending dig in, I would add "you do know the difference between an accepted scientific "theory" definition and a "theory" as a educated guess definition, right?"

Charlie (loves agreeing with creationists) Monoxide
 
Charlie Monoxide said:
On a few occasions I've heard creationist proclaim "we did NOT evolve from monkeys". I usually point out to them, "you're absolutely right, we evolved along with them, but we do share a common ancestor".

Just to digress slightly, the creationist will also point out that the "theory of evolution" is just that, a "theory". I would then agree with them saying "absolutely!, but it's a theory in the scientific sense, whereas it proposes a robust model that is falsifiable with lots and lots of evidence for proof and more being found every year. Just to get a condescending dig in, I would add "you do know the difference between an accepted scientific "theory" definition and a "theory" as a educated guess definition, right?"

Charlie (loves agreeing with creationists) Monoxide
Click to expand...
To walk out onto your branch of the topic, there is growing evidence that the family tree that led to homo erectus and homo sapiens is more a shrubbery than a tree. Saw some stuff in Sci Am and other periodicals on this lately. They keep getting more interesting puzzles to solve with each find out there in East Africa, it seems, and are coming to see that a number of the homo XXXX species were alive at overlapping times and eras. What they have yet to resolve is why homo sapiens is all that is left.

DR
 
This thread is making me go ape. Think I'll run around the house naked. :boggled:
 
Darth Rotor said:
To walk out onto your branch of the topic, there is growing evidence that the family tree that led to homo erectus and homo sapiens is more a shrubbery than a tree. Saw some stuff in Sci Am and other periodicals on this lately. They keep getting more interesting puzzles to solve with each find out there in East Africa, it seems, and are coming to see that a number of the homo XXXX species were alive at overlapping times and eras. What they have yet to resolve is why homo sapiens is all that is left.
Click to expand...

The Greys came and took the rest away. We are the descendants of the only ones who couldn't find our starship tickets.

Says a lot about us, doesn't it?
 
I say we let them vote. They can't possibly do a worse job than we have.
 
drkitten said:
The Greys came and took the rest away. We are the descendants of the only ones who couldn't find our starship tickets.

Says a lot about us, doesn't it?
Click to expand...
Drat, I missed the Sci Fi reference, must be a book I either forgot or didn't read. :(

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
To walk out onto your branch of the topic, there is growing evidence that the family tree that led to homo erectus and homo sapiens is more a shrubbery than a tree. Saw some stuff in Sci Am and other periodicals on this lately. They keep getting more interesting puzzles to solve with each find out there in East Africa, it seems, and are coming to see that a number of the homo XXXX species were alive at overlapping times and eras. What they have yet to resolve is why homo sapiens is all that is left.

DR
Click to expand...
Right you are sir! I might have heard the same thing or some reconstituted version. It seems that it was thought homo habilus (handy man) evolved to (or maybe from, this is off the top of my head) Australopithecus africanus (see http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/habdebate.html). Now it seems they might be different species altogether.

It's very fascinating stuff. Much more interesting than attributing it to some old testament god.

It'd be nice if there was conclusive evidence found ....

Charlie (at least in my lifetime) Monoxide
 
Charlie Monoxide said:
It's very fascinating stuff. Much more interesting than attributing it to some old testament god.
Click to expand...
It probably attracts a lot of grant money, if nothing else. :) Also makes for neat Discovery Channel episodes when they present new stuff to the adoring public in suitably packaged form.

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
What they have yet to resolve is why homo sapiens is all that is left.
Click to expand...



In my mind, the easiest question in all of anthropology.

We killed them.

They reminded us that we were akin to animals. They looked different. They made us feel bad about ourselves. We hunted them down and we killed them.

How do I know?

Imagine that when World War II took place, instead of Jews there were Neanderthal communities spread throughout Europe.

We're not the "fittest," we're the most bloodthirsty. Killing people we don't like, that's what makes us human.


Edit: The above represents my opinion only and is not any better supported by the archeological record than any competing theory.


Incidentally, kudos on using "homo sapiens" as a singular noun. As with a lot of french/latin words, the ending "s" is frequentl cut off by people who mistake it for the "s" that makes a noun plural.
 
Last edited:
We probably did. Today, killing is a last resort . . . but operant conditioning with increasing intensity is not. Not at all. If killing is the only way to achieve the goals of competition, so be it but that's the last method used.

Or combinantions occur. It varys.
 
Almo said:
Really? :confused: Doesn't seem like it to me... Perhaps for you and me, but not for governments.
Click to expand...

Well . . . what I meant was, "Industrial scale murder is the last resort". I never said . . . creative killing was above some governments. Or assassination, etc.

I wish the CIA had assassinated Soddom Hussein instead of blasting Iraq. Of course, I can say that and still want to nuke them.

That's why I'm voting Republican for the next President. Nuke power, man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom