Are humans unique?

[Steve H]

Let me try again: every species is unique in so far as it is a distinct species, different from every other species, but that's not what we're talking about. No other species that I'm aware of, apart from humans, has abilities unique to it: flight, for example - most birds and most insects can fly. Bipedalism is shared by many creatures, as well. However, only humans can create complex language (as opposed to having a limited abiity to use human language), design and build complex tools and buildings, or have religious or philosophical ideas. Even chimps and gorillas can't do those things.

[Nearly Sane]

But those are just higher functions of what other animals do. They seem extraordinarily special because they define us.if other animals work on a basic language, then our complex language is merely an order of magnitude difference. Just as say our sight is order of magnitudes worse than some species.

The case you are trying to make is not whether humans are unique but whether that uniqueness is somehow unique - which is why I suspect you used the word special originally. I think you need to work out what that might really mean because I can't see much here other than 'Aren't humans amazing?'. To which the answer is yes but so are pipestrelle bats.

[Outrider]

Let me try again: every species is unique in so far as it is a distinct species, different from every other species, but that's not what we're talking about. No other species that I'm aware of, apart from humans, has abilities unique to it: flight, for example - most birds and most insects can fly. Bipedalism is shared by many creatures, as well. However, only humans can create complex language (as opposed to having a limited abiity to use human language), design and build complex tools and buildings, or have religious or philosophical ideas. Even chimps and gorillas can't do those things.

That 'creation of language' is a single thing: the religious and philosophical ideas are manifestations of that linguistic capacity.  Dolphins (for instance) show altruism - they can't philosophically express it, but they apparently understand the concept. Bees can communicate complex navigational concepts using a physical language. Pigs have distinct sung names their mothers use. Chickens have in excess of 20 different alarm calls depending on the nature of the threat identified.

Elephants have a sense of smell that can not only differentiate substances but also relative quantities of those substances.  And they have four kneecaps! Both unique traits.

Hummingbirds can hover, fly backwards and fly upside down.

Lobsters secrete a hormone that repairs DNA breakdown, meaning that they continue to grow throughout their lives and don't appear to suffer many of the frailties of age that afflict other animals.

Insects completely reform their entire physical structure metamorphosing from larvae to adults.

Goldfish can see in both the infra-red and ultra-violet spectra.

Sheep self-medicate on different plants to counter different ailments in the wild.

Rats come together as a colony to protect and care for sick members.

Turkeys and chameleons have entirely different, independent mechanisms for changing colour in response to mood.



Whilst the human capacity for purely academic and intellectual pursuits opens up a multitude more possibilities, I'm sure that it's qualitatively a different kind of unique to the others.  I don't think we have special uniqueness, just a versatile one.

O.

[Steve H]

And another thing: only humans can debate whether they are unique!

[Roses]

Male seahorses are unique as they give birth.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Steve H,

No other species that I'm aware of, apart from humans, has abilities unique to it...

See Reply 4. Lots of species have characteristics unique to that species. Either way though, so what? 

[jeremyp]

I might have known this thread would rapidly decend into smart-arsery, dim-wittery, missing-the-pointery and irrelevancy. We are talking about life on earth, not hypothetical extra-terrestrial life; Hom sap is only about 200,000 years old, as far as we know; My opening post gave various reasons for thinking humans unique, so I didn't "just assert it"; and what the fuck have cockroaches got to do with anything? Sometimes I despair of this forum.

I think the problem is the implication that often comes with the phrase "humans are unique" which is that "humans are best". Humans are unique in several ways that are important to humans, but then other animals are also unique in many ways that are important to them.

[Robbie]

Male seahorses are unique as they give birth.

Yes and fish or at least some species of fish can spontaneously change their sex. I didn't know that until recently, watching 'Secret Life of the Zoo', in which a clown fish called Polo changed sex. Polo was very pretty. I got this from 'Discover Animals' :-

There’s also plenty of drama among the clownfish too as male, Polo, is injured while fighting with other males for the attentions of dominant female, Rosie.  Clownfish have the amazing ability to change sex, and Polo’s recovery time away from the rest of the group leads to unexpected consequences.

Polo became female.

I couldn't find apicture of Polo but these are clown fish (for anyone interested who doesn't already know):- https://a-z-animals.com/animals/clown-fish/

[Walter]

Steve H,

you're not. Does that help?

[Sriram]

I would say that the human ability for self awareness, self analysis and self discipline. Our ability to go beyond our own animal nature....is what is special.

Traditionally, humans are believed to be a mix of the animal and the 'divine'...though animals do have the 'divine' too...but to a lesser extent.  We can choose to control our base instincts and develop our universal qualities.  We can become Self Realized.

[SusanDoris]

The phrase 'go beyond', the idea that we can do things our physical body with all its evolved traits and characteristics  cannot do, is a fanciful idea, created, as all ideas are, in the mind/brain.

Unless, of course, someone can explain in rational terms that it means something really significant that science has entirely missed.

[Outrider]

I would say that the human ability for self awareness, self analysis and self discipline. Our ability to go beyond our own animal nature....is what is special.

Traditionally, humans are believed to be a mix of the animal and the 'divine'...though animals do have the 'divine' too...but to a lesser extent.  We can choose to control our base instincts and develop our universal qualities.  We can become Self Realized.

Yeah, but 'traditionally' humans are made out of sand and earth and brought to life by being blown into...

O.

[Sriram]

Yeah, but 'traditionally' humans are made out of sand and earth and brought to life by being blown into...

O.

Well...I am talking of the tradition where the development of human consciousness from animal forms of consciousness is fairly well understood.  Close similarities between humans and animals is acknowledged in the Hindu tradition. 

Hindus believe that we all have lived earlier as animals and then as other humans before living this life. Our Consciousness is believed to have evolved and developed over several lifetimes.

You could check out the Dasavatars and their correlation to human evolution here.....

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2012/07/03/evolution-and-spirituality/

[Outrider]

Well...I am talking of the tradition where the development of human consciousness from animal forms of consciousness is fairly well understood.  Close similarities between humans and animals is acknowledged in the Hindu tradition.

You suggested that humanity was considered to be a mixture of animal and divine - if you're citing divinity, I'd suggest that it's not in any way understood at all. It might be claimed, it might be held without really being considered in depth, but in the absolute absence of any reliable definition of 'divine', any clear evidence of anything 'divine' and the absence of any need for a concept of 'divine' to explain reality, I'd suggest that it's about as far from 'fairly well understood' as you can get. 

Hindus believe that we all have lived earlier as animals and then as other humans before living this life.

Oh, I forgot the 'well understood' phenomenon of reincarnation...

Our Consciousness is believed to have evolved and developed over several lifetimes. You could check out the Dasavatars and their correlation to human evolution here...

I'm sure there's a logical progression, but that logical progression is founded upon precepts that have no basis; there is no evidence for reincarnation, or spirits, or divinity.  That's not a definitive 'it doesn't exist', but it puts it on a par with the Flying Spaghetti Monster (and their separatist cult, the Leprechaunists)

O.

[Sriram]

'Divine' does not necessarily mean God (though we think of God as just the highest level of Consciousness) . It simply means levels of consciousness that are universal, inclusive and futuristic that have a vision beyond narrow survival and reproduction.

You people could keep going around in circles about...evidence and definitiveness and so on and so forth...but the traditional belief is valid because we are indeed capable of 'divine'  levels of emotional and intellectual capabilities...and these are growing. And.... as a society, we do consider people with such 'divine' capabilities as better and more civilized than those people who display largely competitive and survival related traits.

In other words...divinity better than animal, is the mantra.  And this is a unique trait in humans.

[Steve H]

'Divine' does not necessarily mean God (though we think of God as just the highest level of Consciousness) . It simply means levels of consciousness that are universal, inclusive and futuristic that have a vision beyond narrow survival and reproduction.

You people could keep going around in circles about...evidence and definitiveness and so on and so forth...but the traditional belief is valid because we are indeed capable of 'divine'  levels of emotional and intellectual capabilities...and these are growing. And.... as a society, we do consider people with such 'divine' capabilities as better and more civilized than those people who display largely competitive and survival related traits.

In other words...divinity better than animal, is the mantra.  And this is a unique trait in humans.

“When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

[Sriram]

The point is that 'traditional' does not mean only Christian traditions. There are 1 billion people (1.5 if you include Buddhist, Jain etc) on this planet who have a different tradition. It is time you guys got used to that.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

'Divine' does not necessarily mean God (though we think of God as just the highest level of Consciousness) . It simply means levels of consciousness that are universal, inclusive and futuristic that have a vision beyond narrow survival and reproduction.

And for which you have no logic or evidence of any kind. If you want to claim universality you can, but it's just an unqualified faith belief.

You people...

"You people"? Presumably "you people" are the people who won't just accept your unqualified claims of fact as true because you said them right?

... could keep going around in circles about...evidence and definitiveness and so on and so forth...

You've tried this nonsense before, but just run away when the problems it gives you are pointed out. Without reason and evidence all you have is guessing an opinion. If you want them to be more than that and you abjure reason and evidence, then find another method to investigate your claims. (Oh, and no one insists on "definitiveness" either by the way - that's another of your straw men.)

...but the traditional belief is valid because we are indeed capable of 'divine'  levels of emotional and intellectual capabilities...and these are growing.

Another failure in reasoning. Things aren't true because you assert them to be true.

And.... as a society, we do consider people with such 'divine' capabilities as better and more civilized than those people who display largely competitive and survival related traits.

That's debatable, but either way that doesn't for one moment indicate that people do in fact have "divine" qualities as you assert. 

In other words...divinity better than animal, is the mantra.

No doubt it's a mantra for some. "Cheese and onion is better than salt and vinegar" is mine. So?

And this is a unique trait in humans.

Poor reasoning is a unique trait for humans? Well, maybe. [/quote]

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

The point is that 'traditional' does not mean only Christian traditions. There are 1 billion people (1.5 if you include Buddhist, Jain etc) on this planet who have a different tradition. It is time you guys got used to that.

Another straw man. No-one's not "used to" lots of people having different faith traditions. 

[Sriram]

Sriram,

Another straw man. No-one's not "used to" lots of people having different faith traditions.

Oh really?!! And yet, when I say 'traditional'...you assume a Christian tradition, knowing very well that I am a Hindu...!!  Why?!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Oh really?!! And yet, when I say 'traditional'...you assume a Christian tradition, knowing very well that I am a Hindu...!!  Why?!

Another straw man. I've never assumed any such thing. Why do you think otherwise?

[Sriram]

Sriram,

Another straw man. I've never assumed any such thing. Why do you think otherwise?

Ah....so, you don't speak for others when it is inconvenient.....?!!      Right!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Ah....so, you don't speak for others when it is inconvenient.....?!!      Right!

No, I don't "speak for others" because I have no mandate to do so and because I've never claimed to do so. You're very confused - when I detonate your wrongheadedness I speak only for myself of course, and convenience has nothing to do with it.   

[Outrider]

'Divine' does not necessarily mean God (though we think of God as just the highest level of Consciousness) . It simply means levels of consciousness that are universal, inclusive and futuristic that have a vision beyond narrow survival and reproduction.

So still not something that's 'well established'.

You people could keep going around in circles about...evidence and definitiveness and so on and so forth...but the traditional belief is valid because we are indeed capable of 'divine'  levels of emotional and intellectual capabilities...and these are growing.

We don tend to go in circles, yes - from phenomenon to hypothesis to evidence to refutation and back to hypothesis.  Occasionally, though, we break out from evidence to theory.  By contrast, with faith-based positions on ideas like 'spirit' we've spent several thousand years going precisely nowhere.  In what way is traditional belief 'valid'? How can you establish that we are capable of 'divine' levels of anything when you can't come up with a definition of 'divine' that actually means anything - 'levels of consciousness that are universal'... what do you offer by way of any sort of demonstration that such a thing exists?

And.... as a society, we do consider people with such 'divine' capabilities as better and more civilized than those people who display largely competitive and survival related traits.

Which 'we' is this?  I don't look at the Pope, or Archbishop Welby, or the Coptic Princep (or whatever his title is) as being particularly 'better' or 'more civilized' and I certainly wouldn't apportion those sorts of descriptions to the likes of the Iranian Mullahs or the Westboro' Baptists or any other number of extremist nutbags.

In other words...divinity better than animal, is the mantra.  And this is a unique trait in humans.

And flibbles are better than nunkings, except when they're kumquat flavoured or it's a no-trump hand...

O.

[Dicky Underpants]

They've made no progress in millions of years, so how likely are they to start now?

In "The Prehistory of Mind" by Prof Steven Mithin, he argues that the minds of the higher primates (other than humans) developed in quite a different way from Homo Sapiens. If this is true, whatever further evolution they make will certainly not take a similar direction to the one that humans took. It may be indeed be that these primates' evolved mentality has backed them into a dead-end (he suggests that this happened with most of the Neanderthals, except those that passed on their genes by cross-breeding with Homo Sapiens).

I tend to agree with you, but a lot of the arguments in the above book are highly speculative.