Originally posted by KellyJayOkay, female lions then. That makes slightly more sense. It sounds to me, first of all, like this pride was on the brink of starvation, although I haven't seen the video. Probably, the female killed was not a member of the pride, or was old or weak.
The topic is animal behavior, not agreeing with you or bringing up
points you dislike isn't leaving topic. Loins do kill other loins, and
I didn't say what sex I saw do it either, as a matter of fact it was
female upon female grown loins that killed one another, and the
pride did eat the fallen loin. This isn’t a trait I’d limit to loins
either, but ag ...[text shortened]... human did that, I’d say it was evil
and bad behavior that should have never occurred.
Kelly
Secondly, I alluded to the fact that Lions simply aren't bright enough to be self aware, and thus couldn't exhibit moral reasoning anyway. Chimps on the other hand, do.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/index.php?feed=Science&article=UPI-1-20070322-00122000-bc-us-primatemorality.xml
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/science/20moral.html?ex=1332043200&en=84f902d5855a9173&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8240.html
Originally posted by KellyJayObserving, then bluntly blurting out "Goddunit" isn't science though.
I can observe as well as everyone else; however, like a great many
things we disagree on, it is what we claim we are seeing. You want to
put human traits upon animals to make them more like us, so you
can understand them, life isn’t a cartoon.
Kelly
Originally posted by scottishinnzBright enough to be self aware, and I guess you need a mirror for
Okay, female lions then. That makes slightly more sense. It sounds to me, first of all, like this pride was on the brink of starvation, although I haven't seen the video. Probably, the female killed was not a member of the pride, or was old or weak.
Secondly, I alluded to the fact that Lions simply aren't bright enough to be self aware, and ...[text shortened]... =84f902d5855a9173&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8240.html
understanding that?
Kelly
Originally posted by howardgeeYou and Bad Wolf brought souls into this discussion not me.
Always.
You claim we have souls without any evidence whatsoever. Then you claim God gave us souls to make us better than all the other animals.
With regard to animal behaviors as I said, we hold their actions
to a different standard than we hold ourselves, the reason being
is they are animals. We on the other hand know right from wrong,
we know when we are taking something that does not belong to us,
we know when we are murdering someone it is wrong. Animals just
go about their day, no matter what they did in the past, they just
do what they do, and that is that they are just animals.
So yes, I think we are better than animals, and I think you lower
the human species to something less than what it is, when you
make claims we are nothing but an animal. It may excuse your
bad behavior between your ears, but no where else.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayThere is plenty of evidence that an equivalent moral code exists in non-human animal species.
You and Bad Wolf brought souls into this discussion not me.
With regard to animal behaviors as I said, we hold their actions
to a different standard than we hold ourselves, the reason being
is they are animals. We on the other hand know right from wrong,
we know when we are taking something that does not belong to us,
we know when we are murdering some ...[text shortened]... ing but an animal. It may excuse your
bad behavior between your ears, but no where else.
Kelly
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3014747.stm
Of course our moral code applies only to humans, just as say a pig's moral code would not apply to humans.
Yet again, you put non-humans down with no evidence. You just blindly swallow all the nonsense in the bible.
Come on the Kelly, do you believe we humans have souls and animals do not?
Originally posted by KellyJayYour record of being 100% wrong remains unblemished. Animals have emotions and we are discovering that the higher social ones have morality as well:
You and Bad Wolf brought souls into this discussion not me.
With regard to animal behaviors as I said, we hold their actions
to a different standard than we hold ourselves, the reason being
is they are animals. We on the other hand know right from wrong,
we know when we are taking something that does not belong to us,
we know when we are murdering some ...[text shortened]... ing but an animal. It may excuse your
bad behavior between your ears, but no where else.
Kelly
Bekoff was able to show--after at least a decade of painstaking observation and analysis--that canine play is actually a complex social interaction in which the participants constantly signal their intentions and check to make sure their behavior is correctly interpreted. Dogs that cheat--promising a playful bite but delivering a harsh one, for example--tend to be ostracized.
That understanding is nothing short of revolutionary. Only a decade or so ago, scientists were arguing vigorously over whether animals had emotions: just because a dog looks sad or a chimp appears to be embarrassed doesn't mean it really is, the skeptics said. That argument is pretty much over. The idea of animal emotion is now accepted as part of mainstream biology. And thanks to Bekoff and other researchers, ethologists are also starting to accept the once radical idea that some animals--primarily the social ones such as dogs, chimps, hyenas, monkeys, dolphins, birds and even rats--possess not just raw emotions but also subtler and more sophisticated mental states, including envy, empathy, altruism and a sense of fairness. "They have the ingredients we use for morality," says Frans de Waal, a professor of primate behavior at Emory University in Atlanta, referring to the monkeys and chimps he studies.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1079521-1,00.html
2 edits
Originally posted by scottishinnzI'm simply bringing up what was bought up about the mirror that
Why are you ignoring the fact that non-human animals have morals. That's the main thrust. I'm not going to let you weasel out by going off on a tangent.
shows us animals are self aware, with regard to morals, show me that
animals know right and wrong.
Kelly
Originally posted by howardgeeThere is evidence of an equivalent moral code, well if a "welfare
There is plenty of evidence that an equivalent moral code exists in non-human animal species.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3014747.stm
Of course our moral code applies only to humans, just as say a pig's moral code would not apply to humans.
Yet again, you put non-humans down with no evidence. You just blindly swallow all the nonsense in the bible.
Come on the Kelly, do you believe we humans have souls and animals do not?
campaigners" say so it must be true. You did read the whole thing
correct? You like you do with many of the sciences read into things
what you want to see.
Kelly
Originally posted by no1marauder"Bekoff was able to show--after at least a decade of painstaking observation and analysis--that canine play is actually a complex social interaction in which the participants constantly signal their intentions and check to make sure their behavior is correctly interpreted. Dogs that cheat--promising a playful bite but delivering a harsh one, for example--tend to be ostracized. "
Your record of being 100% wrong remains unblemished. Animals have emotions and we are discovering that the higher social ones have morality as well:
Bekoff was able to show--after at least a decade of painstaking observation and analysis--that canine play is actually a complex social interaction in which the participants constantly signal their intent ...[text shortened]... and chimps he studies.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1079521-1,00.html
Yea, that dog cheated, it promised it was going to be a playful bite,
but delivering the a harsh one. So all the other animals got together
and ostracized it. LOL, really, it promised? I don't think it is below
an animal to avoid some other animal that has shown it will hurt
them, you have turned it into a group agreement.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayYou illustrate my original thread title perfectly.
"Bekoff was able to show--after at least a decade of painstaking observation and analysis--that canine play is actually a complex social interaction in which the participants constantly signal their intentions and check to make sure their behavior is correctly interpreted. Dogs that cheat--promising a playful bite but delivering a harsh one, for example--te ...[text shortened]... r animal that has shown it will hurt
them, you have turned it into a group agreement.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayDo you regard being stupid as a requirement of your religion?
"Bekoff was able to show--after at least a decade of painstaking observation and analysis--that canine play is actually a complex social interaction in which the participants constantly signal their intentions and check to make sure their behavior is correctly interpreted. Dogs that cheat--promising a playful bite but delivering a harsh one, for example--te r animal that has shown it will hurt
them, you have turned it into a group agreement.
Kelly