"I am NOT an animal"

[Zzyzx]

.
"I am NOT an animal"

Many who do not appear to have much knowledge of biology seem indignant when learning that H. sapiens are classified as animals (alternatives being plant and virus). I do not recall ever hearing a Non-Theist object. 1) Is there something about religion that causes this?

You see I am NOT an animal, never was and never in a billion years will I evolve to be one, my family tree all the way back to Adam don't have one ape in it.

2) Why be upset, indignant or in denial about a biological / taxonomic classification?

3) Since humans differ from other animals only in degree (some mental and physical characteristics), what is the objection to recognizing that they are animals?

4) Is anything other than religion (and possibly narcissism) involved?


In the quoted statement someone (whose theological position apparently defies description) claims knowledge of his family tree back to Adam – as though that proves the claimant is not an animal. However, if the hypothetical Adam was human (H. sapiens), he (Adam) classifies as an animal.

[ttruscott]

.
"I am NOT an animal"

Many who do not appear to have much knowledge of biology seem indignant when learning that H. sapiens are classified as animals (alternatives being plant and virus). I do not recall ever hearing a Non-Theist object. 1) Is there something about religion that causes this?

Probably the understanding that the I in the animal body is a self aware intelligent and spiritual person. You think?

Peace, ted

[Goat]

To me, this is a prime example of ignoring science, data and even the dictionary in favor of one's belief system.

The best Arian was able to reply (at least that I am aware of) when confronted with the dichotomy is with something along the lines of: definitions change and the dictionary is not reliable, all the while ignoring and discounting the genetic evidence.

-all the best

I think it is a different problem. I think it is the logical fallacy of equivocation, where two different meanings of the same word are being confused with each other. One is 'being an animal' on a moral/action base, and the other is 'being an animal' on a strictly biological basis. One is a metaphyiscal/philisophical construct, the other is a physical classification.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 25:

Many who do not appear to have much knowledge of biology seem indignant when learning that H. sapiens are classified as animals (alternatives being plant and virus). I do not recall ever hearing a Non-Theist object. 1) Is there something about religion that causes this?

Probably the understanding that the I in the animal body is a self aware intelligent and spiritual person. You think?

Leaving open the issue of how self-aware and intelligent certain folks really are (strictly clinical terms, and not a dig at theists, as I'm fixing to show).

Clinically as this amateur can tell it, we see in the schizophrenic varying levels of severity, from a mild psychosis on the one end, to workin' up that divorce money on the other'n. I see a certain relation between those who claim to hear the voice of God, and folks like myself, who hear the voice of the "Devil", as it were. If schizophrenia is thought of as a line then, on the one extreme we should expect to find the "God spoke to me" bunch, and folks such as myself on the other end of that line, a-fretting what we get told.

In the most extreme forms of schizophrenia, there's a complete break with reality, a complete loss of "self", such that the schizophrenic may do horrible things to himself, if only to silence the voices in his head. Do we see this in the "god group"? Maybe not the destructive behaviors, but I think it's fair to say that line's a candle on both ends of it, it's just maybe only the one end's been lit right now. I conclude then that there's something to consider regarding the "self-aware" angle as quoted above.

In my own example, I kinda have 'em both. I start out "level" and go one of the two ways. I usually start puffing up and getting all super proud of myself, such that the whole of humanity is beneath my contempt. Not so much for hating 'em, but for how I'm loving me so much. I ride that cloud, in smug arrogance. My metaphorical hair blows in the wind like a movie star with a forty dollar hair cut. Then I crash. Hard. Fast. The world turns dark and cold, and the voices set in. Maybe they're the voices of those I was so far above before. They taunt and holler, and yell and cuss, 'til I'm physically and emotionally drained. I reckon my voices are mean to me 'cause I'm mean there when I get all high falootin'. I don't ever seem to hear praise from the voices. They just don't seem to like me at all.

So on a +10 to -10 scale, where 0 is normal, I figure I run anywhere from a +8 to a -10. I don't tell this for sympathy, that's in the dictionary. I tell it to try to help folks think about all this. I offer my example as my own anecdotal deal there, and your mileage may vary. I may be wrong about all of it, and being as I have my issues, folks're just as well to dismiss anything I have to allow on it.

Conclusions?

About self-aware, how much any of us is any of it, is a fair thing to think on.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 27 by JoeyKnothead]

Thanks Joey.

You have given us a lot to think about. There is a great deal of wisdom in your words. Perhaps we are all on that same continuum to some extent -- and you know and experience more of it than most.

[ytrewq]

From Post 25:

Many who do not appear to have much knowledge of biology seem indignant when learning that H. sapiens are classified as animals (alternatives being plant and virus). I do not recall ever hearing a Non-Theist object. 1) Is there something about religion that causes this?

Probably the understanding that the I in the animal body is a self aware intelligent and spiritual person. You think?

Leaving open the issue of how self-aware and intelligent certain folks really are (strictly clinical terms, and not a dig at theists, as I'm fixing to show).

Clinically as this amateur can tell it, we see in the schizophrenic varying levels of severity, from a mild psychosis on the one end, to workin' up that divorce money on the other'n. I see a certain relation between those who claim to hear the voice of God, and folks like myself, who hear the voice of the "Devil", as it were. If schizophrenia is thought of as a line then, on the one extreme we should expect to find the "God spoke to me" bunch, and folks such as myself on the other end of that line, a-fretting what we get told.

In the most extreme forms of schizophrenia, there's a complete break with reality, a complete loss of "self", such that the schizophrenic may do horrible things to himself, if only to silence the voices in his head. Do we see this in the "god group"? Maybe not the destructive behaviors, but I think it's fair to say that line's a candle on both ends of it, it's just maybe only the one end's been lit right now. I conclude then that there's something to consider regarding the "self-aware" angle as quoted above.

In my own example, I kinda have 'em both. I start out "level" and go one of the two ways. I usually start puffing up and getting all super proud of myself, such that the whole of humanity is beneath my contempt. Not so much for hating 'em, but for how I'm loving me so much. I ride that cloud, in smug arrogance. My metaphorical hair blows in the wind like a movie star with a forty dollar hair cut. Then I crash. Hard. Fast. The world turns dark and cold, and the voices set in. Maybe they're the voices of those I was so far above before. They taunt and holler, and yell and cuss, 'til I'm physically and emotionally drained. I reckon my voices are mean to me 'cause I'm mean there when I get all high falootin'. I don't ever seem to hear praise from the voices. They just don't seem to like me at all.

So on a +10 to -10 scale, where 0 is normal, I figure I run anywhere from a +8 to a -10. I don't tell this for sympathy, that's in the dictionary. I tell it to try to help folks think about all this. I offer my example as my own anecdotal deal there, and your mileage may vary. I may be wrong about all of it, and being as I have my issues, folks're just as well to dismiss anything I have to allow on it.

Conclusions?

About self-aware, how much any of us is any of it, is a fair thing to think on.

All very interesting. Would it be fair to say that you have provided further evidence that human emotions , feelings and perceptions are not reliable? We already know they are not, but it seems to me you are providing futher evidence by way of personal experience.

And that being so, that there is little credibilty or evidential value in personal claims of a God 'talking' to people?

[FarWanderer]

How "intellectually superior" is any creature that creates the means to wipe itself off the face of the earth?

It's not that we are "smarter" than the other animals so much as that we are more creative.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 29:

All very interesting. Would it be fair to say that you have provided further evidence that human emotions , feelings and perceptions are not reliable?

Ya can rely on gonna have 'em

We already know they are not, but it seems to me you are providing futher evidence by way of personal experience.

That's my conclusion. I don't wanna carry it too far, but yes, I think the data indicates that some "true believers" (no slur) may suffer bouts of emotively irrational thought. I gotta tell I suffer it from the other end of the spectrum, but there we go.

And that being so, that there is little credibilty or evidential value in personal claims of a God 'talking' to people?

If my voices are considered an apparition, and I readily admit they are (where there's nobody there when I hear 'em), well there we go.

I'm not trying to say the "voice of consciousness" we all have is the deal here. Surely we can all agree that's just a useful term. I refer specifically to instances where the perception is that of something or someone vocalizing, only they ain't there to do it. There's data indicating that such voices are "heard" in a very real sense, where brain activity can be seen to correspond to such events. In my case, I've never had such a real time scan performed, but I don't need one to convince me that my turning to look at the voice I just heard, and ain't nobody there, well how 'bout that.

I wanna be real clear though to say that in admitting my deal, I should have my comments considered within that scope as well as without it. I've suffered this condition my whole life, and if what I'm told's correct, I'll tote it with me to the grave. But boy won't that be a hoot, if I get buriated there, and the voices start coming up from it? Why, folks're apt to start thinking I'm the next coming of Jesus, just fixing to hop right on up and set to callin' a square dance, right there were good folks're trying to get them their final rest

[squint]

.
"I am NOT an animal"

Many who do not appear to have much knowledge of biology seem indignant when learning that H. sapiens are classified as animals (alternatives being plant and virus). I do not recall ever hearing a Non-Theist object. 1) Is there something about religion that causes this?

You see I am NOT an animal, never was and never in a billion years will I evolve to be one, my family tree all the way back to Adam don't have one ape in it.

2) Why be upset, indignant or in denial about a biological / taxonomic classification?

3) Since humans differ from other animals only in degree (some mental and physical characteristics), what is the objection to recognizing that they are animals?

4) Is anything other than religion (and possibly narcissism) involved?


In the quoted statement someone (whose theological position apparently defies description) claims knowledge of his family tree back to Adam – as though that proves the claimant is not an animal. However, if the hypothetical Adam was human (H. sapiens), he (Adam) classifies as an animal.

Christianity sez no different (caricatures of claims to the contrary notwithstanding):

Ecclesiastes 3:18
I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.

Ecclesiastes 3:19
For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.

Sorry if somebody else already cited the above.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 30:

It's not that we are "smarter" than the other animals so much as that we are more creative.

You mean to tell me if you decided you had to dam you up a river, right then and there, you wouldn't waste time trying to find an axe, you'd just set to gnawing trees down?


Jethro sitting on the front step of the mansion whittling on some big pieces of pine:

Uncle Jed: Jethro, where'd you get them pine logs you's whittlin' at?
Jethro: I cut down one of Mrs. Drysdale's pine trees.
Uncle Jed: Boy! Shes gonna kill you!
Jethro: Nah, I gnawed on the stump so she'll think a beaver done it!

Y'all come back now, ya hear

[KenRU]

To me, this is a prime example of ignoring science, data and even the dictionary in favor of one's belief system.

The best Arian was able to reply (at least that I am aware of) when confronted with the dichotomy is with something along the lines of: definitions change and the dictionary is not reliable, all the while ignoring and discounting the genetic evidence.

-all the best

I think it is a different problem. I think it is the logical fallacy of equivocation, where two different meanings of the same word are being confused with each other. One is 'being an animal' on a moral/action base, and the other is 'being an animal' on a strictly biological basis. One is a metaphyiscal/philisophical construct, the other is a physical classification.

Perhaps, but Arian denies that he is an animal under any circumstances, and is drawing conclusions based upon this assertion. And once the multiple definitions are pointed out to him, he simply says the dictionary is wrong.

This does not seem like confusion to me. It seems much more in line with denial.