Which is a narcissistic viewpoint, promoting self importance does not mean we are important .. if it did then we would receive some sort of special treatment from nature itself . .we don't. dolphins have the ability for complex abstract thought; Scientific research into the inner world of dolphins reveals signs of an advanced consciousness that have traditionally been thought to be unique to humans: selfawareness; emotions; self-conscious reflection on the contents of consciousness; solving problems by using abstract thought; grasping the causal structure of ones environment; innovative and creative thinking; operating in foreign cognitive environments; and using tools. Dolphins have also demonstrated the ability to work with the basic elements of human language: vocabulary; grammatical rules and grammatical categories that assemble symbols into meaningful sentences; sentences as complex as 5- word commands that include modifiers and both direct and indirect objects; and questions as well as commands. - http://www.indefenseofdolphins.com/book/overview.html
You assume that importance is based upon nature bestowing a special role upon us. I'm saying that importance is intrinsic within you, or in this case within our species. Nature does not have to tell us we're special. But can they to the level of humans? Can they paint masterpieces or write symphonies?
So....it is our hands that make us special? Gorillas paint....but can you echolocate....or do this? [video=youtube;wuVgXJ55G6Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuVgXJ55G6Y[/video]
Just as you assume that being special (what ever that means) is intrinsic within our species. The only evidence of that is the evidence we provide ourselves .. makes it rather self serving. Can the majority of humans do those things, can a 3 year old do those things .. are they not special because they cannot do them?
Well a good starting point would be for pro-lifers (not all I hasten to add) to support comprehensive sex education and free contraception, these are the only things proven to, at least, reduce unintended pregnancies and abortions, and yet we see the same radical people standing against them as stand against abortion .. seems a little hypocritical to me. Stop abortions but also stop the very things that reduce abortions.
Because nothing else that we know of has the capability to provide evidence... Doesn't that make us special? No, but I was speaking about humans as a species. We have the ability to do these things! A 3 year old could study composing and piano and eventually write a symphony, expressing what it means for them to be human!
Not in the slightest, as I said from the start claiming that we are special based on that we think we are special is just a circular argument. So until they do actually learn to do it (if they have the ability) then they are not special.
I think, therefore I am. We are special because we have that self recognition. That ability to think about thinking. In this way we are different and therefore special. No. They have the potential to do it. They have the ability to learn how to write a symphony or even the potential to figure out how to do it by themselves.
We are not the only animals with self-recognition; self-awareness provides the ability to contemplate the past, to project into the future, and to speculate on what others are thinking The Red Spot Technique created and experimented by Gordon Gallup studies self-awareness in animals (primates). In this technique, a red odorless spot is placed on an anesthetized primates forehead. The spot is placed on the forehead so that it can only be seen through a mirror. Once the individual awakens, independent movements toward the spot after seeing their reflection in a mirror are observed. During the Red Spot Technique, after looking in the mirror, chimpanzees used their fingers to touch the red dot that was on their forehead and even after touching the red dot they would smell their fingertips. "Animals that can recognize themselves in mirrors can conceive of themselves," says Gallup. This would mean that the chimpanzees would possess self-awareness. Note that the chimpanzees have had experience with a mirror before the Red Spot Technique was performed. Having experience with a mirror before the technique was performed reflects the past, independent movement while looking in the mirror would reflect the present, and touching the red dot would reflect what others are thinking which relates perfectly to Gallups statement in the beginning of this article. Chimpanzees, the most studied species, compare the most to humans with the most convincing findings and straightforward evidence in the relativity of self-awareness in animals so far. Dolphins were put to a similar test and achieved the same results. Diana Reiss, a psycho-biologist at the New York Aquarium discovered that bottlenose dolphins can recognize themselves in mirrors. In her experiment,[20] Reiss and her colleagues drew with temporary black ink on some of the dolphins in the aquarium on parts of their bodies that they could only see in a mirror. A gigantic mirror was placed inside the dolphins tank. The dolphins who did not get drawn on ignored the mirror, but the dolphins who did get drawn on made a bee-line to see where theyd been marked according to Reiss. After the experiment the dolphins that have been drawn on once, returned to the mirror to inspect themselves even when they were drawn on again but with clear water. The dolphins recognized the feeling and remembered the action from when they were drawn on which relates to a factor of self-awareness. Magpies are a part of the crow family species. Recently, similar to the Red Spot Technique, researchers studied magpies self-awareness by using the Mark Test. In this study, Prior and Colleagues performed eight sessions per magpie (5) tested twice, using two different colors; yellow and red. The bird was marked with either yellow or red, or a black imitation mark (the black mark is an imitation because magpies are black in feather color). The magpies were tested with a mirror and a colored mark, a mirror and a black mark, no mirror and a colored mark, and no mirror and a black mark. The sessions were twenty minutes long each, and each color (red or yellow) was used once. The black (imitation) mark experiment that is put on the Magpies is comparative to the Dolphins in Reisss study when they were drawn on with clear water. The imitation marks (and being drawn on with clear water), if recognized shows that no anesthesia is needed and the remembrance of the action does represent self-awareness. The differences between the Red Spot Technique [21] and Reisss Dolphin study [20] compared to the Mark Test are that in the Red Spot Technique the primates are anesthetized and have prior experiences with a mirror where in the Mark test, the magpies were not anesthetized nor experienced with a mirror. Majority of birds are blind to the area below the beak near the throat region due to it being out of their visual field; this is where the color marks were placed during the Mark Test, alternating from yellow to red. In the Mark Test, a mirror was presented with the reflective side facing the magpie being the only interpretation of the bird seeing the marked spot they had on them. During one trial with a mirror and a mark, three out of the five magpies showed a minimum of one example of self-directed behavior. The magpies explored the mirror by moving toward it and looking behind it. One of the magpies, Harvey, during several trials would pick up objects, posed, did some wing-flapping, all in front of the mirror with the objects in his beak. This represents a sense of self-awareness; knowing what is going on within himself and in the present. In all of the trials with the mirror and the marks, never did the birds peck at the reflection of the mark in the actual mirror. All of the behaviors were towards their own body but only heightened when there was a mirror present and the mark was of color. Behavior towards their own bodies concluded in the trials when the bird removed the mark. For example, Gerti and Goldie, two of the magpies being studied, removed their marks after a few minutes in their trials with a colored mark and a mirror. After the mark was removed, there were no more behaviors toward their own bodies.[23] A few slight occurrences of behavior towards the magpies own body happened in the trial with the black mark and the mirror. It is an assumption in this study that the black mark may have been slightly visible on the black feathers. Prior and Colleagues, stated This is an indirect support for the interpretation that the behavior towards the mark region was elicited by seeing the own body in the mirror in conjunction with an unusual spot on the body. The behaviors of the magpies clearly contrasted with no mirror present. In the no-mirror trials, a non-reflective gray plate of the same size and in the same position as the mirror was swapped in. There were not any mark directed self-behaviors when the mark was present, in color, or in black. Prior and Colleagues, data quantitatively matches the findings in chimpanzees. In summary of The Mark Test, the results show that magpies understand that a mirror image represents their own body; magpies show to have self-awareness. In conclusion, the fact that primates and magpies spot the markings on them and examine themselves better means, according to theory, that they are seeing themselves which means they are self-aware. According to the definition stated earlier in this section, if an individual can process, identify, store information (memory), and recognize differences, they are self-aware. The chimpanzees, dolphins, and magpies have all demonstrated these factors in the mentioned experiments The items you have mentioned in earlier comments are nothing to do with self-recognition they are abilities that are learned, just as other self-aware animals can learn as shown in an earlier reply with dolphins and in the above section. What you are trying to do here is to make assumptions that because we can learn 'human' things we are special simply because we are the only ones who can do them (as far as we know), this is simply incorrect, animals can also learn things that we can never achieve.
Can guarantee that a certain section of the population would scream very loud that it was an infringement of their rights and not even realize the hypocrisy in that very statement. I have found that a lot of Americans wail over their loss of rights only when they feel that right fits with their preconceived opinion.
I usually just follow the profit motive under any form of Capitalism; only the least wealthy have to worry about drug tests and any form of non-corporate welfare.
That's pretty easy. A fetus with a willing womb is very likely to become a human being. So killing the woman and her womb could be a double homicide. A fetus without a willing womb, is a collection of cells, that will never become a person. A woman chooses to give life or to withhold it. If she chooses to bear the pregnancy, then she is carrying a future person in most cases, if not, then she isn't. It's up to her.
