ThatAtheistPlace

I miss my xbox :-(

I can understand you irritation, for sure, as I should have clarified that what made me feel icky specifically was reading Hannibal's statement "I don't know about you, but I'm more than an animal." I'm just so used to that kind of thing being followed up by "if we come from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" lolAlso, I did use language with negative connotations... pretentious, glib, etc... I do apologize for that and I can see that could contribute to your irritation, as well. I'll also concede that as human beings, we are mentally superior, undoubtedly. You are right.Let me try to better explain where my consternation lies. My personal understanding of UPB, beyond the basics, is that once a living creature moves beyond pure instinct (an amoeba engulfing a protozoa or a pitcher plant dissolving a fly) we are more able to attribute a level of correctness to their actions. For instance, if bacterium kills a man, it's not wrong or right (it would do that no matter what); if a lion kills a man, the lion is wrong, but not morally responsible (you can train a lion not to kill); If a man kills a man, it is wrong and he is morally responsible.On the flip side it would seem that the more a living creature ascends up this scale of awareness of action, the more it is processed as being wrong to perform morally repugnant acts against them. Especially by an equal or more highly culpable creature.Is that gelling? I'll do some more thinking on this. I appreciate that this thread has opened this train of thought for me, and apologies for riding a tangent so far away from the original post. :-p

I would certainly agree that we are different, with advanced brain structuring and whatnot. I do have a problem with glib superiority for something that is just chance for us. It seems that being in an evolutionarily progressive position makes us discount other species. Starts to sound similar to the young earthers who don't believe in evolution cuz we ain't kin to no monkeys. We have this thing called Universally Preferable Behavior, which applies to absolutely every living creature. I feel it's fair to say that it is against UPB to neglect a dog, or for a child to hit, or even for a lion to kill a gazelle. As cognoscente adult human beings, we are held responsible for when we act in opposition to UPB. It's like you said, Kevin. As humans, we differ because we have the ability to apply morality to these actions. We have awareness. Since we are responsible parties, I would deduce that we also shouldn't aggress against those with less mental capacity. For instance, we would teach a child it's wrong to hit and why. We would attempt to remove a dog from a neglectful home. We understand that the act of killing is wrong, but that in nature it's simply necessary for many species' survival. With that being said, it just feels to me that to claim superiority over other animals is a tad pretentious toward them, when knowing what we know should make us more protective of them. Does that make sense? Not sure if I'm doing a good job of explaining myself or why I feel kind of icky when reading comments like that.

That's awesome, Prohexa. I would up vote it, but I ran out Remind me tomorrow.

I gotta tell ya'.... I'm an Ockham's razor kinda gal. I find it easier to see the truth in "Violence is wrong" rather than something requiring a veritable doctorate to grasp the full understanding of it... Just saying...

Homo Sapiens are animals by definition. Can you help me explore your line of thinking on that? How are we not animals? Why is that a derogatory thing to be?

I totally agree. I appreciate that this conversation seeks to solve that problem by reframing how people view normalcy, virtue, and truth ...which would benefit me directly, LOL. This seems like a great corollary to universally preferred behavior.

I also enjoyed the video very much. I think Kevin answered FriendlyHacker's question regarding 'leaving parties better off' very well. As for this question: If you don't mind me taking a stab at it, I'd venture to say that all primates care about property. The more complex the animal, the more territorial they are. Silverback gorillas fight for territory and female monkeys trade the currency of mating rights for the safety of a harem. These are crucial to their survival. Humans take it to a more civilized extreme, but it's pretty much the same thing, in my opinion. I think that to act as if we have risen so far above our primitive instincts is to be intentionally obtuse.

That's like me joking about going to church. If it's a common practice, despite how irrational, is it really funny? Seems to be more imitation than satire.

Oh my god, please go away!! I was completely raised with this bullshit. It's 2013, man. Your value doesn't increase according to how much red lipstick you put on.

Very interesting article. They seized farmlands, inflation spiked my 11,200,000, and had to print billion dollar notes! Now they're down to $217. ...And how do you think they're going to get more government money? Hmmm? http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2013/01/zimbabwe-down-its-last-217/61562/

Wow! I submitted! Glad to know voting works sooomewhere. Congratulations!!!!