[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

FW: Komodo Dragon venom -



         <BLU135-W2973F99206EDE28C644535B4D10@phx.gbl>
 

 <78eb35330910021801o76ec328cj7db62432fd64ac5e@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0




----------------------------------------
> Date: Fri=2C 2 Oct 2009 22:01:14 -0300
> Subject: Re: FW: Komodo Dragon venom -
> From: augustoharo@gmail.com
> To: wdm1949@hotmail.com
> CC: dinosaur@usc.edu
>
>> WHOOOOOAA!!!
>> Don't like laelling things?? Welcome to the human race! That's what we d=
o.
>
> I am not against labelling things for communication sake. Just to use
> labels with a bad connotation for animals. The bad appreciation of
> cats and snakes=2C for example=2C has lead people in other ages=2C as wel=
l
> as in our own=2C to kill these animals at sight.
=20
- Agreed. We sometimes attribute more basal instincts of other species to t=
he more
  elevated behavioral complexity of our own. This is a worldwide phenomenon=
 of our
  species. Primitive too.

>
>> Be carefull when you suggest that animals don't have morals. They sure d=
o.
>>>From arthropods on up. "Morals" are the clergy's word for "animal instin=
cts".
>
> I am not an expert on morality=2C but I think it has to do with rules to
> live well in society. These rules=2C at some level=2C may vary from a
> culture to other=2C as well. These rules are consciently accepted or
> refused by humans. With an instinct=2C you cannot do that. It is rare an
> animal can interpret these rules of our societies=2C destined for
> humans=2C and choose whether or not to accept them.

- Morality certainly has to do with rules to live well in society. But don'=
t be fooled
  by this. We make rules that are evolutionarily advantageous to us. Some s=
ocieties create
  rules to dominate others. These are still attributable to instincts of su=
rvival in its
  many varied forms. The complexity hides the fact that they are still attr=
ibutal to basal
  animal instinct. These rules of morality can be accepted or refused depen=
ded solely upon
  the degree of entrenchment (or how basal the instinct).
=20
- You're having difficulty making the connections. You think other species =
can not do this.
  A lioness can be attacked by other pride members if she is even suspected=
 of cannibalism
  of the odd lion cub. A lioness will do this very carefully and out of sig=
ht of other adults.
  She knows she will be "chasticed" if found out. They won't kill her. The =
pride will simply
  cast her out ..... permanently. No other adult will trust her ever again =
around their cubs.
  She won't even put up a fight. She knows "instinctively" when she's been =
"bad". And yes. She
  has a choice in her "society".
=20
- It is far from rare that an animal can choose whether or not to accept ou=
r rules. Dogs
  do in fact interpret them but on their level of understanding. Like child=
ren=2C they yearn for
  appreciation when they have done a task well however simple that may be. =
Watch a dogs behavior
  when it knocks over a vase=2C sleeps on a forbidden couch or poops where =
it should not have. Higher
  cognitive abilities related to that label "guilt" cause the dog to place =
its tail between its legs
  and adopt a submissive attitude sometimes hiding under an object well bef=
ore the human even finds
  out about the incident. Call it whatever you want. Its there and it does =
not separate us except
  by degree. And lets not even begin on altruism in other species. Its all =
there. Thats one of the=20
  very good reasons that we as humans can positively interact with other sp=
ecies sometimes without
  ever saying a word. It goes very deep. 550 my deep.
=20
>> You should not separate humans from animals this way. Different groups o=
f
>> fauna have different elevations of "morals". By that I mean "complexity"=
.
>
> Morals have to do with complexity? It may be that our brain is more
> complex than that of other animals=2C and we follow moral rules and they
> do not. But=2C then=2C chimp brains may be more complex than those of mos=
t
> mammals and they make things our morality should condemn if applied to
> them (although sadly many humans do)=2C as infanticide.
=20
- Yes. Complexity. I was referring to the level of morality. Its there. Mor=
als
  can even be a mixture of basal instinct (altruism in ants) v.s. more comp=
lex
  (altruism in dogs/humans). =20
>
>> You've never seen cats kill for fun? Know how to torture other animals t=
o
>> get something from them? Call it instinct if you want. Just because so m=
any
>> people can't bring themselves to utter the "E" word (evolution) and conn=
ect
>> with our distant past ........ --dale
>
> Likely=2C slowly killing a mouse is what cats are compelled to do. Cats
> do not have any social contract with mice. No society told them what
> is evil and what not. Even if we try=2C they will not learn. Small kids
> are selfish and can be also cruel if not educated. It does not have
> correspondence with an human torturer which knows the rules he/she is
> breaking.

- Again. See above. When I referred to torture you thought I was joking or =
didn't
  get the point. I'll go back to cats again. Cheetahs are not very competit=
ive with
  lions. Lions don't see them as prey food. If they know of the presence of=
 a cheetah
  in their territory=2C they will actively seek to find its cubs. If they f=
ind them=2C
  they won't kill them ..... at first. Instead=2C a lioness will hold a cub=
 high above
  the surrounding foliage and look around to see if its being watched. If i=
t can't
  detect the immediate presence of the mother=2C the lioness will gently bi=
te down on
  the cub to get it to violently kick and scream. It will break bones if ne=
cessary.
  It will keep the cub alive long enough to allow the pride to stalk the cu=
bs mother.
=20
- Its instinct. They've learned it usually gets results. If the ""Mob" can'=
t find you=2C
  you know how they can bring you out into the open. Really!! Where did you=
 think we
  learned all this??
=20
- Written morals were formulated from verbal morals which in turn are simpl=
y an expression
  of human feelings translated down to each generation. Human feelings are =
attributed by the
  clergy to the "soul". We know better. Its that internalised human/animal =
"spirit" predicated
  upon conjured up thoughts of that lump of gray matter basally influenced =
by its own hormones
  whose release is sometimes dictated by the many sensory inputs from its e=
nvironment. What=20
  codes all this? Genes. Look at species as individual apples. The clergy s=
ay we have "fallen".
  But no matter how far ..... we all fall from that one tree. But I do love=
 the label=20
  ....... animal instinct. --dale                                         =0A=
_________________________________________________________________=0A=
Click less=2C chat more: Messenger on MSN.ca=0A=
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=3D9677404=