Originally posted by FMFThat is far too vague. For a start, deaf and dumb people are excluded by your definition and if you decide to include them by allowing sign language as 'speech' then you have to include most animals which are capable of sign language (almost all higher animals have some forms of sign language, chimpanzees and gorillas are capable of quite sophisticated forms).
[b]What makes us human?
Our capicity for speech along with everything that enables it and everything it enables us to do.[/b]
Originally posted by whodeyThanks for that clarification and the answer is.....?
Thanks for that clarification and the answer is.....?
Originally posted by twhiteheadDeaf and dumb people have a capacity for speech but it is obstructed, often permanently - something we refer to as a disability - or, if we are very very NGO about it, we might describe them as diffabled. The cognitive capacity for it is still intact - it is what makes us human.
That is far too vague. For a start, deaf and dumb people are excluded by your definition and if you decide to include them by allowing sign language as 'speech' then you have to include most animals which are capable of sign language (almost all higher animals have some forms of sign language, chimpanzees and gorillas are capable of quite sophisticated forms).
Originally posted by FMFSo apart from that rather odd 'same species' clause, infants are not human until they start talking?
People with serious incapacities that preclude them from any kind of speech are also 'human' by virtue of the fact that they are from the same species as the people I have been talking about above.
Originally posted by whodeyof course animals don't have culture you dope I repeat...culture is a function of language. what "language " do cows speak?
Are you suggesting that animals do not have a culture of some kind? In fact, I think many animals live in packs/tribes much like humans. Perhaps they are not as complex, but they communicate and have a culture of some kind nonetheless.
Nature terminates fetuses all the time? Doesn't nature terminate adult human beings as well? How is that an arguemen ...[text shortened]... e and say otherwise I think it perhaps necessary to start yet another thread altogether!!!
Originally posted by twhiteheadA capacity for sophisticated speech would make a computer into a very good computer.
So apart from that rather odd 'same species' clause, infants are not human until they start talking?
Would a sophisticated computer capable of speech be human in your opinion?
Originally posted by FMFI on the other had think that it will.
The computer does not have the same capacity and, I think, never will.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI on the other had think that [computers] will [match human capacity for speech.
I on the other had think that it will.
[b]As for infants, I think - once again - the operative word is 'capacity'.
Capacity in what way? The only 'capacity' infants have is that in future they will (hopefully) grow into beings capable of complex speech. But how does one evaluate 'potential'? An embryo also has the potential to grow into a being c ...[text shortened]... m as human (presumably you would as they would fit your definition) and grant them rights.[/b]
Originally posted by whodeywe are human because we have an opposable thumb and the brains to use it.
The inspiration for this thread came from talking to someone about abortion in another thread of mine in which I was questioning when and for what reason we become "human"? That is, at what point should we attain "rights" that we now hold under the law of the land?
The thread I am referring to was started in the debate forum but I thought the spirituali we be considered human with special rights to go along with it.
So what do you think?
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonI forgot to add:
What defines a “species” is, contrary to what many people seem to believe, ill-defined.
So why should what defines the “human species” be well defined when not even what defines what a "species" is is well defined?
-ok, we have certain attributes that no other species has, but the same can be said for many other species. So what non-arbitrary cr ...[text shortened]... ributes should be the ones that we should use to define literally what it means to be “human”?
Originally posted by duecerI don't know, I don't speak cow. However, I have heard them moo from time to time. I may be a dope, but I know a moo when I hear it. I know a bark when I hear it. I know a meow when I hear it. Do you think these noises are devoid of the ability to communicate with each other? In addtion, alot of communicating in the animal kingdom is done without the use of making sounds much like that in our own style of communication. For example, when peacocks mate they spread their fancy feathers out so as to attract a mate. Is this not a form of communication?
[b]of course animals don't have culture you dope I repeat...culture is a function of language. what "language " do cows speak?