rant about vegans and fatkins diet

[Renorei]

As for the word extinct having the meaning that I said it meant, all I can say is that I must have spelled it wrong or heard it wrong or something. Or, it could have been invented for the purposes of the person using it. It sorta fits the bill, and makes decent sense. The prefix 'in' in instinct can be use to help refer to something that is already 'in' when the animal is born, the prefix 'ex' can be used to referred to knowledge gained outside of the womb. If you're still not happy with the word extinct, just replace the word 'extinct' with knowledge gained through experiences after birth, as opposed to information you're born with. Ultimately, the word itself is not so important, but the meaning.

You remind me of a politician at times. You can say a whole lotta words that mean a whole lotta nothin'.

Plays on words are a great way to end a post, aren't they?

As far as me saying a whole lotta words, yeah most definitely. I've always been the wordy type. But the meaning of those words being a whole lotta nothin? Nope. There's meaning there, even if it is only evident to some people and not others.

Are Nazis then superior to you? They were smarter.

Really? You think so? Great point, but you certainly can't back that up.

Sorry, but your statement does NOT cut the mustard. Humans being "superior" is STRICTLY a matter of YOUR opinion (and other arrogant ignorant people.)

If indeed it is merely an opinion, then on the other side of the coin, the belief that humans are NOT superior is also an opinion (to which you are entitled). But I am most certainly entitled to believe that we are, if I choose to. As far as you calling me arrogant and ignorant, say what you will but you've never met me and you know little or nothing about me. Also, it's pretty rude to insult a person who has never attacked you personally. True, I did perhaps go over the line by saying this:

Humans are superior to animals, because we are smarter. Whether you like it or not, doesn't mean it isn't true, although many people may not like this statement.

Though the majority of research suggests humans are smarter, I can never prove it (most things in life can never be completely proven), and it was wrong of me to wave it around like fact. And the issue of human superiority or human and animal equality is opinion, as you said, and it was wrong of me to purport that as fact as well. But in terms of insisting one's own beliefs are right and that others are wrong, many of your statements that follow aren't substantially better.

Sure, there are things that humans have/do that make them different, but superiority is purely a human concept, and therefore is ONLY valid to humans, who would of course declare themselves superior.

Though animals don't sit around and ponder their own superiority or inferiority in relation to other animals, superiority and inferiority do most certainly exist in the animal kingdom, and is valid to animals. Superior predators frequently eat too much prey to allow an inferior predatory species to survive, and that is one of the ways species die out. The superior survive, while the inferior die off, making way for new species.

The fact of the matter is that in the scheme of things that matter to the entire planet, humans are the evil infestation that is destroying the planet. We aren't superior to anything, other than our superior ability to destroy this planet for everyone and everything including ourselves.

True, we are destroying the planet. I've never stated that we aren't. But, IMO, our destruction of the planet is b/c of our superiority. We are the ultimate predators (though not in physical prowess), causing other species to die out and lose habitat. It is our intelligence that allows us to be superior. It allows us to build bushhogs to clear the brush were rodents live. It allows us to create chemical plants that pollute the environment. Humanity (not necessarily in all parts of the world) is thriving, while other animals die off. I have never stated that I am happy about this. I think the destruction of our planet is a terrible thing. Without this infernal intelligence that gives us the advantage that we have over the rest of the world, our planet would be in much better condition. And yes, the point that you made about us destroying ourselves is certainly a possibility. But there are correllaries to this in nature as well. If a superior predator is too superior, and consumes too much of the prey, the predators begin to suffer and die of starvation, which could eventually happen to us.

So, I'm sorry if YOU don't like to hear that you're not only not superior, but part of a species that is destroying the planet.

I never said I wasn't part of the species that is destroying the planet. And I never said I was proud of the fact that we were. But I am proud of the fact that there are many humans in the world who are using their superior intelligence to try to find ways to save the environment. If enough of us channel our abilities towards improving our world, we can make a significant impact in reducing the damage that we have done to the planet, though we can never reverse it entirely.

If fewer people thought as you do, there would be fewer extinct species, more pristine forests, more wild wildlands, and most important to me, fewer dead wolves.

Thought as I do? You know nothing of what I think, aside from the fact that I believe animals are inferior. Believing that something is inferior doesn't mean that I believe that it isn't worth saving, or that I don't care about it. I have never in my life been responsible for the destruction of species or habitats. I've never killed a wolf, or burned down a forest b/c I didn't care about those who lived in it (b/c I do). I have planted far more trees than I have ever cut down.


From the nature of your post, it sounds like you believe that I sit around, wallowing in my own beliefs of superiority, destroying the lives of animals for no valid reason as if they were worthless, and claiming that I have every right to waste the resources of this planet simply because I believe I'm superior. True, I do believe I'm superior, but I don't use it as an excuse to toss aside animal life pointlessly. I view human superiority as a gift and a curse, a weapon which we may use for the good of this earth...or the bad. I believe that because of our superiority, we have a responsibility (which we all too often fail to live up to) to respect the earth and the resources that it yields, without wasting them or destroying them needlessly.

So. I hope that clarifies my thoughts on human superiority. I am not stating human superiority as fact (not anymore); but it is my belief and I am entitled to it. You are entitled to believe that we aren't superior if you want, whatever you choose to believe is entirely up to you. From what you have said in your post, it is clear that you love this earth very much, and never wish to see it come to harm. And so do I. Frankly, I think that is far more important.

EDIT: Just wanted to add that it was never my intention to anger either or you, or attack your beliefs, or tout my own as fact. But this is what I believe, and I have a right to do so. I hope that none of my comments will cause either of you to hold grudges against me, and I hope that none of the animosity here between us will pass over to other threads. I'd really like to end this argument now, b/c we can argue all day long about it if we want, but likely no agreement will be reached, plus we are going totally off topic, which is kinda rude to Searif (yeah I know I started it). So...I'd like it if we could wrap it up at this point. If either of you want to pursue the matter further, I'd prefer we do it my PM.

(Very sorry Searif...your topic deserved attention and I ignored it, but rather used it as a venue to debate unrelated matters...I will definitely try not to let it happen again.)

[vrikasatma]

Before we knew what I had, my doctor actually told me to *avoid* fiber, because it's like a scrub brush in your guts. This could be good for something that has parasites and yeah, it's probably great for breaking up and absorbing fat molecules, but for someone with diverticulitis or colitis it'd be agony.

Interesting factoid: humans and horses are among the only animals in the world, aside from bivalve mollusks, that create pearls. In humans they're called gallstones, and horses can pass gastroliths if they're eating from sandy soil.

[vrikasatma]

Regarding human superiority:
Every species puts itself in the pivotal position in the grand scheme of things. This is a survival adaptation: My Species Comes First. Take away civilization and if you see compassion or altruism at all, it's usually intra-species, or it's a one-way involuntary thing, like in the case of parasitism. We're the only species that considers ourselves the caretakers of the entire world, not just ourselves.

So, I believe that humans are superior.
What, no qualifier?
Yes, exactly. I sure as heck aren't going to leave my well-being up to the local redwood tree, 'cause she don't give a tinker's damn.

[Lupin]

Are Nazis then superior to you? They were smarter.

Weren't smart enough to win, were they?

Only humans can have such concepts as[...]

No, humans are the only ones to have the concept of the items on both of those lists. IIRC no other species has been shown to have the ability to grasp abstract concepts like that.

[Renorei]

If this is a topic many of us are interested in and want to continue discussing, this thread should perhaps be split....

[Renorei]

Interesting factoid: humans and horses are among the only animals in the world, aside from bivalve mollusks, that create pearls. In humans they're called gallstones, and horses can pass gastroliths if they're eating from sandy soil.

If only we could get the amount of money for our gallstones that oyster farmers get for pearls. I can almost imagine a high-society lady wearing a gallstone necklace...

Thanks for sharing that!

[vrikasatma]

They're not as pretty. Unfortunately we rather lack a shell that can polish it up and lay on an outer coating of mother-of-pearl...

[Vilkacis]

As for the word extinct having the meaning that I said it meant, all I can say is that I must have spelled it wrong or heard it wrong or something. Or, it could have been invented for the purposes of the person using it. It sorta fits the bill, and makes decent sense. The prefix 'in' in instinct can be use to help refer to something that is already 'in' when the animal is born, the prefix 'ex' can be used to referred to knowledge gained outside of the womb.

I imagine in that case that it would be exstinct, rather than extinct (there's still no dictionary definition for this word, though).

-- Vilkacis

[Renorei]

Oh well. I still couldn't find it either, using the new spelling. But I imagine that exstinct would be the correct spelling, though, if it were a real word.

[Scott Gardener]

OK, deep breath.

1. The idea that humans are "superior" per se:

This belief is seperate from the fact of human intelligence. It's an assumption that the human type of intelligence, based on abstraction and language, which allows us to verify each other's cognitive ability, somehow makes humans superior to other animals.

According to that logic, I should consider myself superior to most other people, since my intelligence by most estimates is about two standard deviations above the mean.

For the record, I do not consider myself superior. Just making a point.

By the same logic, adults are superior to children, and the mentally retarded are inferior. Again, for the record, I do not agree with this, as I disagree with the logic of the arguments I'm disputing.

2. Animals and emotion:

It's generally considered a fact that animals have emotion; it's no longer considered "anthropomorphizing" or applying our emotions to them. The limbic system, the area of the brain associated with familiar forms of emotion such as happiness, sadness, and fear is considered a "primitive" area of the cerebrum, present in every mammal and bird. Something similar but more rudamentary is likely present in reptiles.

Historically, there has been a tendancy to ignore emotions in other animals or dismiss emotional behavior, because of the lack of complex, abstract language in other animals to convey concepts we associate with emotions. Some of that was human arrogance, but some of it was bourne from behavioral psychology.

Behaviorism is a school of psychology that is based on observed behavior. It intentionally avoids delving into the underlying motivations or thought processes, focusing instead on how one responds to stimuli. It is the school of thought that gave us "Pavlov's dog," who learned to drool at doorbells or flashing lights with the expectation of being fed. It's a useful method of describing and predicting behavior, and any parent should be familiar with it when dealing with very young children. But, it ignores the mind to such an extent that it almost assumes that the subconscious does not even exist.

3. Animals and morals:

Altruism is a documented fact in a number of animals. The stories of animals risking their lives to save humans are routine stuff on cable TV. The assumption that only humans are capable of "good" is part of a collective neurosis, and is similar to the assumption that humans are inherantly m"good" or "evil."

4. Attacking religions versus disagreeing:

Fellow Pagans among you: try to remember that not all Christians are Fundamentalists who think that teaching evolution is a Satanic conspiracy. Many are open-minded, intelligent people. And, according to one Engrish translation of Star Wars, the Presbyterians have been the champions of peace and justice throughout the galaxy for generations.

5. The Passion of the Vegetables:

While there is evidence that plants have some sort of emotional phenomenon, this evidence is debatable. What is certain is that plants have no organized nervous system. And, certain portions of vegetables by design appear to be intended to be removed, in an effort to convince animals to eat them and thus deposit their seeds in the process. It is possible I could be just as guilty of vertebrate arrogance, but for the time being, I feel satisfied in eating a salad that the amount of suffering to which I'm contributing is far less than that associated with the lifetime of restraint and suffering endured by industrialized meat animals.

I can add wisecracks about the suffering of plants to the list on my drinking game.

6. Humans have something that other animals lack:

Until I've read about the recent suggestion that normal animal behavior and perhaps thought processes were similar to that of humans with autism (whom I don't consider, by the way, inferior to other humans), I've generally agreed with a growing consensus realization that human thought processes are a highly sophisticated version of the same things exhibited by most other mammals. Our social behavior is an extrapolation of basic mating and fighting instincts, just made very layered, for example. I'm willing to reconsider in light of a plausible suggestion. But, I refuse to believe that something came from nothing, without some sort of intermediate step.

The desire to seperate humans from other animals boils down to the "soul" concept. Mainstream Christianity teaches that humans have souls and that other animals don't. That notion, combined with the concept of "dominion," that humans have an inherant right to what amounts to a parent role over other animals, has promoted so much of the suffering of other animals through the ages, and continues to push it today. I consider Dominionism and the idea that other animals are soul-less to be a major stumbling block to moving humans forward.

The claim of superiority needs to be supported, not with words but with action. If humans are truely superior and above the natural order, then they should not use natural laws as an excuse to justify suffering. If humans are subject to natural laws, then so be it, but don't claim superiority as long as we still die of cancer or old age--tell it to me when I can upload my consciousness to a glowing energy form powered by zero point energy. Until then, get over it. You're animals like the rest of us.

In short,

If humans are superior, ACT IT!

[Figarou]

If humans are superior, ACT IT!

"Bow before me!! I am your superior!!" *rasies duckie high in the air*


Heh, couldn't resist.

[Set]

Only humans can have such concepts as:

Murder
Rape
War
Abuse

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by concepts, but if you meant they don't do those things then I have something to tell you that you won't like. It's obvious you love animals very much but they're not all sweet and innocent like you tend to portray them as. Male dolphins will sometimes gang up on on a female and rape her. I've seen video of monkeys doing that too.

A lion that's just acquired a pride will kill all the cubs that aren't his. Female animals will kill the babies of others to ensure that their own get enough to eat. Some species of birds will push their siblings out of the nest so they can have it to themselves. By a human's standards that would be murder.

There are two tribes of chimpanzees, they live near some river in Africa, that are in a kind of "war". Animals are quite capable of abusing eachother especially those that travel in groups.

Another "human" characteristic is the mothers playing favorites. This can be most easily seen by watching pets like cats and dogs. I had a cat that favored her little gray baby over all the others. And it wasn't even the biggest or strongest kitten.

[vrikasatma]

Wild burros gang-rape the jennies, too.

Also, lions don't have the infanticide market cornered, most predators (including wolves) have been known to indulge in it. Mustang stallions will, too, hence the importance of a guarding/tending stallion remaining with his herd even after the kids are born. And, very occasionally, a stallion will kill his own foal or an older member of the herd that's slowing them down and keeping them from escaping a threat.

I've heard of baboons killing the babies of low-ranking females in the troop. Yes, this could be considered a survival adaptation but take it over to the human race and you'd have people screaming their heads off: discrimination, typecasting, stratification of society, bullying, murder, et alia.

Female African wild dogs will sometimes hijack the litters of other, lower-ranking females and add them to her own litter. Rather more benign, but it's still kidnapping (at least in human terms). Horses will kidnap foals, too, even geldings (who of course can't feed them). Horse breeders are exceptionally careful to keep a mare and newborn foal away from other horses until the pair have bonded.

Many insects engage in what could be considered prostitution: the male will feed the female while he's copulating with her.

[Lupin]

There are two tribes of chimpanzees, they live near some river in Africa, that are in a kind of "war". Animals are quite capable of abusing eachother especially those that travel in groups.

Yep. Animals have no problems making war. The two ant colonies that inhabit the insides (the spaces between the walls, not the space where I dwell) of this house met a couple of weeks ago and had a great time making a mess of my patio with their bodies.