Onefinity: I will consider it. I generally don't give away such information on the principle that I assert that age is not very important in the least. If the quality (or lack thereof) of my ideas is not apparent, blame it not on my age (be I 8 or 80) but simply on my ability (or inability). water: Think of this: All thoughts are sensory perception-based. How do we view reality? Through the same sensory perception. I would agree with your sentiment here, Water. duendy: Okay. c7ityi_: How would you turn into the cat, anyway? Water: Nicely put.
I am compelled to share a song which I find fitting for the topic, namely, "Be Human". This song, composed by Yoko Kanno for the Japanese anime series "Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex" seems remarkably fitting for the topic, as it is about a robot who wishes to be human. From http://www.animelyrics.com/anime/ghostshell/behuman.htm: I analyze and I verify and I quantify enough 100 percentile no errors no miss I synchronize and I specialize and I classify so much Don't worry 'bout dreaming because I don't sleep -- I wish I could at least 30 percent Maybe 50 for pleasure then skip all the rest If I only was more human I would count every single second the rest of my life If I just could be more human I'd have so many little babies and maybe a wife I'd roll around in mud and have lots of fun then when I was done Build bubblebath towers and swim in the tub Sand Castles on the beach, frolick in the sea, get a broken knee Be scared of the dark and I'd sing out of key Curse when I lost a fight, kiss and reunite, scratch a spider's bite Be happy with wrinkles I got when I smile Pet kittens 'till they purred, maybe keep a bird, always keep my word I'd cry at sad movies and laugh 'till it hurt I'd buy a big bike, I'd ride by the lake And I'd have lots of friends and I'd stay out too late If I could just be more human I would see every little thing with a gleam in my eye If only I was more human I'd embrace every single feeling that came in my life Would I care and be forgiving? Would I be sentimental and would I feel loneliness? Would I doubt and have misgivings? Would I cause someone sorrow too? Would I know what to do? Will I cry when its all over? When I die will I see Heaven? Tell me: Is it against Sciforums policy to post an mp3 of something copyrighted? Because I happen to have an mp3 file of this song which I'd be more than willing to share.
Any biological definition people give is nothing but a definition of what a human IS - not of what it MEANS TO BE HUMAN. I do not believe it means anything to be human other than to be human. We are who we are. We live according to the social structures we set up, according to the laws we create. We define what it means to be human, we define humanity, by being who we are. We can not escape that. It is a truth. So what does it mean to be human other than to be who we are?
it is a good ting to look at how organizatons DE-humanize people to make them conform to a group mind. take the military. they share with cults the strategy for dehumanizing an individual and taing away individualo freedom of feeling and thought...shaving heads, uniform, or nakedness, humiliation, mechanical time drilling, fanatic abeyance to authority, and so on.....these strategies haven't just com out of the blue. they have been very meticulously worked out. the military for esample are very keen using psychological techniques to gain their power over the individual. turning them into a dehumanized killing machine......sam with mos insitutions, school, uni., the civil service, politics, religion, etc so. what does it mean to be human?
so then i wonder...what does being alive mean?...i am not just interested in a purely intellectual analysis of this qeustion, but a visceral answer's needed to. causw we are both mind and body. i wonder when the mind goes dead do the body too
Well, I don't agree when it comes to some of the nature of the conversation here. The reason is that much of what we talk about here involves not just logic, but also wisdom. And where it involves wisdom, it involves the whole person, and it also involves the context of life that the person brings. Thus if you said the ideas you said and I knew you were 10 or 30 or 60, I would know something more about the ideas. Not because a 60 year old can reason or explain better than a 20 year old, but because a 60 year old has had more existence through which to temper and balance ideas with the emotional, physical, pragmatic, and other things. This is not to say that a 20 year old can't have wisdom as well as intellect; it's just that they cannot simulate or replace the informative effect of experience, time, and personal growth. In other words, if you are, say, 20, I am not going to think less of your ideas. I am simply going to grant them a more full appreciation given the human they are coming from. That is, a 20 year old, a 40 year old, and a 60 year old sitting at the table aren't equal (i.e., the same). They are plusqual - that is, each has something different to offer. In other words, rather than divorce the words from the speaker, I want to appreciate the words better by knowing who the speaker is, because that is the lived reality of human collaborative relationships, rather than artifice of an electronic bulletin board. In other words, the same mechanism that protects from prejudice also filters out much of the value. In other words, if you are 80, then what you present on this website isn't very impressive at all, because it doesn't reflect the degree of lived experience - with balance, wholeness, artfulness, the depth - that a person of that age would probably bring to philosophy to make ideas compelling. But if you are 15, then what you present on this website is VERY impressive, because of the vocabulary, questioning, and clarity of reasoning.
Yes, in fact I have had a dog and make no mistake, was very fond if it. My point, however is that a dog is a pack animal and only remains loyal to its masters because it sees itself as part of the pack. A cat will remain with you as long as it is fed. In other words any "love" an animal may have for its master is because of its own needs. I will be specific. My point is that we are different to animals and by the way, chimpanzees do "screw 24/7". Not all the time of course, but any time. Its about satisfaction of desires which they cannot control and which they cannot choose against. Very few animals experience pleasure when mating. It's a "must do" in order to proliferate their genetic material and this is another reason they do not do it 24/7
oh my gawwwd, you know so much what it's like to be an animal dont you? .....am jokin look. a person, especially a man will usually only stick round while he's being fed and can get a good fuk. gro uuuup. where've ya been? and for many men too a fuk is slam bam. didn't Reich also tll us how whatmany think are orgasms are really so much less than what could be achieved wit more care and feeling? in udder words. your talkin outta your...udder
Wht does it mean to be human? Ans: Getting and managing 3 GFs at a time,finding time to drink everclear at least once a week. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Peace. Rick
The one good think about discussing things on the internet is that you DON'T KNOW WHO IT IS YOU'RE TALKING WITH. The nature of debate is at its finest when it is only the arguments that are listened to - not the argumentor; when it is the words that make the point - not the speaker. To base ANYTHING upon the age, the sex, the creed, the colour, the sexual preference of an individual is the cardinal sin of logical debate. Sure, it is okay to bring your age, your sex etc into the debate as part of the evidence to support a claim, but knowing someone's age is irrelevant to the topic in hand. If you read the posts of someone ONLY because they are 80, or don't listen to someone because they are under 10, means that you have already suffered your first serious flaw. It is not WHO says things - but WHAT is being said.
No matter how hard you try, the what cannot be divorced from the who. Also, FYI, I don't believe that debate is the best vehicle for most of the issues discussed here. Dialogue is better. So don't debate...create!
Onefinity: Experience can also unduly bias one in favour of what one has experienced instead of what could be. A farmer might speak of his experience as a farmer as if it was the only experience available, whilst a jack-of-all-trades would know better. Interesting, interesting. I shall certainly consider it then, yes. Might you elaborate on how it'd be unimpressive were I 80, that is, to explain what you would mean by "balance", "wholeness", "artfulness", and "depth"?
I have asked you before, but you haven't answered: What are you trying to prove with this whole cat/dog argument? That humans are in some way superior to animals, or at least sufficiently different? Be clear and exact.
Humans are sufficiently different from animals to warrant an alternative explanation for their our origins.
I think it has more to do with behavior than with capabilities: Some people are Pigs, Some people are Snakes, Some people are Apes, Some people are Sharks, Some people are Donkeys, Some dogs are almost Human. Next time you go to the Aquarium check all the funny faces of the different types of fish, you can find all these expressions in people.
What does it mean to be human? It means we rule over everything else because we have the capability to as humans. How we choose to rule over everything else is a subject for a different thread Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! peace c20
