Harut Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 what is the essential difference between the human being and the rest of the animals? what sets us apart and so rapidly diverges us from the rest of the livings. IS there any fundamental difference? or this andropocentric perseption of life is just an illusion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 the only thing that i see that separates us from the rest is the ability to learn, to invant, and to pass it to the future generations. while language played a crutial role and seems to be the difference (see my title, Mard U Anasun), i believe what i mentioned above played a greater role. though, of course, the former would have been impossible without the former. maybe a more articulated essay later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Plants have phisical and etheric body Animals have phisical, etheric and astral body (insticts) Humans have phisical, etheric, astral bodies, Ego and soul Good topic Harut Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 I think everything boils down to that we (humans) are the only ones aware of our finite lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Invention, etc. - remember Einstein had something about it, regarding imagination? I used to wonder if this was the crux. But animals, too, have dreams in their sleep. If that is not imagination, what is it? Maybe theirs is not geared toward future planning aside from copulating and getting fed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arpa Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 (edited) the only thing that i see that separates us from the rest is the ability to learn, to invant, and to pass it to the future generations. while language played a crutial role and seems to be the difference (see my title, Mard U Anasun), i believe what i mentioned above played a greater role. though, of course, the former would have been impossible without the former. maybe a more articulated essay later... style_images/master/snapback.png What a vayri anasun!! :) Harut, you answered your question in many different ways. The last first. "articulated". Exactly, the ability to articulate. And the subject topic itself; If you had used the topic title as "asun u anasun" it would have made it even more compelling. Language!! Mard is the only "anasun" in the sense of animal/kendani that is "asun", that ability, unique to humans is the main difference whereby the experience is passed on to generations prepetuating the legacy. The Armenian language must be the only one making this dintiction between "mard u anasun" when calling the latter "speechless, i.e. without language. You also know that "mard" means "mortal", yet it seems the language factor does in fact make "mard/humans" immortal in a sense, the memory never dies. Allow me repost this paragraph from a previous post of mine a few days back in "God Exists" in the Theology section; One of those reasons might be that, as the sole species—as far as we know—capable of contemplating its own death, we needed something larger than ourselves to make that knowledge tolerable. “Anticipation of our own demise is the price we pay for a highly developed frontal lobe,” says Persinger. “In many ways, [a God experience is] a brilliant adaptation. It’s a built-in pacifier.” Edited October 30, 2004 by Arpa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 But animals, too, have dreams in their sleep. If that is not imagination, what is it? style_images/master/snapback.png Imaginnation is a conscious process. Dreaming is not however. Dreams come from your interaction with your past, present and future emotional life. As animals have insticts they can have emotions. But they do not have imagination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Plants have phisical and etheric body Animals have phisical, etheric and astral body (insticts) Humans have phisical, etheric, astral bodies, Ego and soul Good topic Harut style_images/master/snapback.png Nice summary Armen. I would like to add that humans also have a powerful brain as opposed to animals and plants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 I think Socrates sommed it up pretty well. What is so special about us is our capacity to reasonate and have volonty which will support reason, while other animals have volonty to support their sentiments only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 We can control animals, but animals cannot control us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 We can control animals, but animals cannot control us. style_images/master/snapback.png Another good point. We can control the whole nature too, if we really wish. That includes all of the natural laws that seem to be unbreakable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 We can control animals, but animals cannot control us. style_images/master/snapback.png Another good point. We can control the whole nature too, if we really wish. That includes all of the natural laws that seem to be unbreakable. style_images/master/snapback.png also we can fly airplane and they can't. (sorry) what i'm trying to find is more fundamental. like, but why is that we can control them and not vis versa? it is not that we have an encoded ability to do so, is it? there is something else that over time brought us to a point that we are able to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 We can control animals, but animals cannot control us. style_images/master/snapback.png Obviously you've never had a cat Arpa, very interesting about the asun/anasun/sasun in the Armenian language... it's a nice distinction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Arpa jan, anasun? I guess no more Dog's verbal tricks probe origin of language 17:58 10 June 04 NewScientist.com news service A word-learning pet dog has given scientists clues that some animals may have the comprehension necessary for language, even though they cannot actually talk. Rico, a smart border collie, was spotted on television by Julia Fischer and her colleagues at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. With a "vocabulary" of 200 words, Rico showed exceptional ability in retrieving specific toys when asked to fetch them. The researchers decided to test whether Rico's ability was based on understanding and if he could learn and remember new words. They placed a new toy among his favourites and asked Rico to fetch it, using the unfamiliar name. The dog nearly always did. This suggests that Rico is using a system called "fast-mapping", which young children use to learn new words by matching new words to new objects. The study is the first to show fast-mapping in animals. "It shows that fast-mapping is not specific to humans, that it probably has a more general purpose in figuring things out in your world," says Fischer. "Dog owners often boast about the communicative and social abilities of their pets, and this study seems to vindicate them," writes Paul Bloom, a psychologist at Yale University, US, in a commentary accompanying the study in the journal Science. Finely-tuned articulation Fischer adds the results suggest there may be reasons other than comprehension which have stopped language evolving in dogs and chimps. "With the evolution of language the constraints are not on the comprehension side - that had all been in place before humans uttered a word," she told New Scientist. "The constraints are more on the production side." Making the jump from comprehension to talking may require a change in neural organisation to give voluntary control and fine-tune articulation, she says. Another hypothesis suggests that gesturing is a pre-requisite to language developing. "Primates have fabulous control of their hands, but they don't gesture," Fischer explains. "So this shows there must be more going on, perhaps in terms of social cognition." Retrieval rate To be sure that Rico's language skills were not based on visual prompts, the researchers placed 10 known items in a room, while Rico and his owner waited in another room. The owner asked Rico to go in fetch two randomly chosen items 20 times. Rico correctly fetched 37 out of 40 toys. When a new toy was placed in the adjacent room with seven other familiar objects, Rico correctly retrieved the unfamiliar item in seven out of 10 sessions. He was then tested four weeks later to see if he remembered the link between the novel word and the novel item. The learned toy was placed among four completely new toys, and four familiar ones. In three out of six sessions, Rico picked the right one. "This retrieval rate is comparable to the performance of three-year-old toddlers," write the researchers. Rico may be an exceptionally bright and studious dog, admits Fischer "If he were human, we would call him a workaholic. He's so motivated, it's mind-boggling." She also points out that dogs may be a special case in responding to human language because they have co-evolved with humans. But other animals like apes have also shown comprehension. Another factor could be that border collies are working dogs and have been selected to respond to a shepherd's calls. But despite their word skills, they do not make easy pets, she warns, as they require a lot of exercise and attention. Journal reference: Science (vol 304, p 1682) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sev-mard Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 I think everything boils down to that we (humans) are the only ones aware of our finite lives. style_images/master/snapback.png Well Animals can be seen reacting to dead bodies and higher sentient forms, primates, etc, have been seen showing actual sadness. So maybe they are aware of their finite lives as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 I think what sets human beings apart from the rest of the animals is that we are spiritual beings. Yes, I'm an atheist and don't believe in God and in religion in general, but I think spirituality is completely different from religion. By spirituality I mean our inner world - "nerkin ashxarh". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shiner Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 I wandered about this myself, obviously there is no true, factual answer (at least not yet), but I don't think humans have all consciousness as opposed to animals who have none at all. I just think humans have a lot, lot more. But even other animals have some as opposed to others who have less. For example, I am sure a chimp has much more consciousness than a chicken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 IS there any fundamental difference? Nope ... there is really no difference. We just happen to be on the top of the intelligence hierarchy. Except for "thinking", anything you pick, there is at least one animal that can do it better than us. We just happen to be better than all the rest in thinking, analyzing, learning, problem solving, communicating, memorizing, philosophizing, conceptualizing, recognizing, and a whole bunch of other -ing's, that are a side-effect of our superior brains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 it is very interesting to see how some of you took the topic in spiritual, some in scientific, some in practical, some in philosophical directions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 You know Aristotle claimed that the fundamental difference between humans and animals is that humans have reasoning. I had a 5 hour discussion with my brother regarding the subject. I came to a conclusion that humans are more inclined to practice excess and deficit while animals always stay at their mean. Humans always want more of everything without a necessity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sev-mard Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 I had a 5 hour discussion with my brother regarding the subject. I came to a conclusion that humans are more inclined to practice excess and deficit while animals always stay at their mean. Humans always want more of everything without a necessity. style_images/master/snapback.png I'd say a 5 hour discssion on the subject is a tad excessive... K'nerek katak anum em, bayts I couldn't resist the irony of your statment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 (edited) I think everything boils down to that we (humans) are the only ones aware of our finite lives. style_images/master/snapback.png Well not according to lion king.. Mufasa sure knew where he was headed Edited October 29, 2004 by gevo27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 what is the essential difference between the human being and the rest of the animals? what sets us apart and so rapidly diverges us from the rest of the livings. IS there any fundamental difference? or this andropocentric perseption of life is just an illusion? style_images/master/snapback.png Find the smartest animal that we know of other than ourselves, such as a monkey or something.. try to teach it the most basic "theory" of lets say mathematics... try to teach it how to understand and comprehend the idea of addition.. Do you honestly think they will learn "concepts" etc... obviously not... Make sure, however, that you can distinguish between "remembering" and "understanding".. the dog example being smart.. i dont think that is anything special.. and doesnt prove much either.. just that the dog was able to "map" a new word with a new toy that he knew her had to get yet wasnt thaught (or didnt remember) the sound to the object... dogs dont understand the words we say as what they really mean.. they understand by us making a certain sound he/she is expected to sit.. by making a certain sound we expect them to come to us etc... I have had many dogs, and they learn their names.. not because they understand the idea of Bruno being "his" name and "lacy" being the other dog's name.. but out of memory that the sound is associated with the expected action.. Seaphan, you say that the only thing that disinguishes us from animals is our superiority n brain size/thinking skills... well, what makes you YOU>? isnt it how you act, who you are, what you say, your decisions you make.. otherwise, isnt what you think basically you??? I mean how does one become a "one" at all.. what makes him/her an entity.. its what you think of yourself.. and the sense of you knowing who you are.... Anoushik.. your right, we have a feeling of self.. animals seem to just have a feeling of safety.. Though ofcourse i can see jealousy in one of my dogs while i play with the other, and one always takes the others' food and stuff like that.. But that doesnt necessarily mean they feel "jealous".. they do not understand being ":jealous" they just want to play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormig Posted October 30, 2004 Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 And all flowing waters stop... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harut Posted October 30, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 30, 2004 ok, Gevo, so what was your answer? what was the difference? i honestly didn't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.