Are humans unique?

[Robbie]

Walter:  as far as I know, only humans can do this

https://youtu.be/-dCln8n0i5g

Phallic, Walter?

[SusanDoris]

Susan

I think that sums it up. In fact, I think we see these kinds of phenomena paralleled many times in evolution. Sometimes a mutation will produce a particular life form with a considerable potential for variation, and other mutations will produce a life form which has little innate capacity to adapt and evolve, which will then lead to its evolutionary stagnation and likely eventual extinction.

Interesting post - the more we can  learn about evolutionary biology, the better.

I have attended quite a few talks over the years about the TofE and all point out that no life form can choose an adaptation, or a random mutation, or any DNA alteration. Even the limited use of stem cells etc nowadays is not going to lead to a general natural selection of such things. Species survive if they happen to have mutations that happen to enable them to survive changes of environgment or circumstances of any sort.
The Ancestor's Tale by RD was one of the most interesting books I've read. Unfortunately a complete and unabridged audio version was not available at the time.

[Steve H]

But the human species does what it does with the abilities it has because it has been lucky enough to have had the random mutations which have produced those abilities. Other species cannot choose to have those mutations.



ty.

Exactly. I'm not trying to make any kind of theological argument on this thread; humans are unique because of lucky mutations in or ancestors' DNA, but the fact remains (I contend, at any rate) that we are.

[Nearly Sane]

Exactly. I'm not trying to make any kind of theological argument on this thread; humans are unique because of lucky mutations in or ancestors' DNA, but the fact remains (I contend, at any rate) that we are.

Still not really seeing what you are trying to claim. As I already mentioned there is a difference between unique evolution and evolution of uniqueness.

[Steve H]

Every species is unique in a trivial sense, because that's more or less the definition of a species. Humans, though, are unique in a non-trivial way, because we have importsnt abilites which are not shared by any other currently-living species: complex language and complex tool-making. Chimps' and gorillas' limited ability to use human languages, and simple human tools if they're shown what to do, is not evidence against this: they've never come up with a language, or complex tool, of their own. We are also the only species, as far as I know, to come up with religion. Some on here will think that's a bad thing, but that's not the point; only we have done it. No other species has important abilities unique to it.

[Nearly Sane]

You are defining non trivial in a circular manner. Again I don't understand what you are trying to say. Is human evolution in any sense unique? Or do you agree that it is rather that human uniqueness has evolved?

[Steve H]

Of course it's evolved. What's that to the purpose?
What's circular about my non-trivial uniqueness definition?

[Nearly Sane]

Of course it's evolved. What's that to the purpose?
What's circular about my non-trivial uniqueness definition?

You haven't really answered or indeed understood the question.

Are you claiming that in some way the evolution of humans is unique i.e. that the form of evolution is unlike anything else. Or as would be classically understood that how humans have evolved as humans is just uniqueness as any species?

As to your circularity, if you say the way is non trivial because the abilities are important, then you just define differences as being significant because you use circular terms for important. The entirety of the thread is confused because it isn't clear what you are trying to say.

[Roses]

Every species is unique in a trivial sense, because that's more or less the definition of a species. Humans, though, are unique in a non-trivial way, because we have importsnt abilites which are not shared by any other currently-living species: complex language and complex tool-making. Chimps' and gorillas' limited ability to use human languages, and simple human tools if they're shown what to do, is not evidence against this: they've never come up with a language, or complex tool, of their own. We are also the only species, as far as I know, to come up with religion. Some on here will think that's a bad thing, but that's not the point; only we have done it. No other species has important abilities unique to it.

Using the word 'trivial' to describe the uniqueness of other animal species is rather silly, imo. 

[Steve H]

Using the word 'trivial' to describe the uniqueness of other animal species is rather silly, imo. 

You obviously haven't the faintest idea what I'm talking about.

[Roses]

You obviously haven't the faintest idea what I'm talking about.

I am not the only one by the looks of it! It appears your understanding on this topic is rather limited. Never mind dear have a cycle ride, wearing a helmet and high viz jacket of course, it might help your brain cell to focus.

[Steve H]

You haven't really answered or indeed understood the question.

Are you claiming that in some way the evolution of humans is unique i.e. that the form of evolution is unlike anything else. Or as would be classically understood that how humans have evolved as humans is just uniqueness as any species?

As to your circularity, if you say the way is non trivial because the abilities are important, then you just define differences as being significant because you use circular terms for important. The entirety of the thread is confused because it isn't clear what you are trying to say.

I meant trivial because it's part of the definition of a species. It's not that difficult to understand, but let me try again: all species are unique by definition. That's why that kind of uniqueness is trivial. I was trying to avoid the phrase "by definition", because it is much abused, and is often little more than a vague intensifier. Here, though, it is meant in the strict sense. What I mean by "unique" in this thread, though, is "having properties shared by no other species", which makes humans unique for their language and tool-making abilites, amongst other things. Other species may be unique in other ways, but not the male egg-laying ability of seahorses, the example offered by LR, beause there are over 40 different species of seahorse, and the feature is shared by pipefish, to which seahorses are related.

[Roses]

The meaning of the word 'trivial' is of little value or importance. That cannot be used to describe animals of other species, many of which are of great value and importance to either this planet, the human animal, or both.

[Steve H]

The meaning of the word 'trivial' is of little value or importance. That cannot be used to describe animals of other species, many of which are of great value and importance to either this planet, the human animal, or both.

It's the sense of the word "unique", as applied to all species, that is trivial, because it is part of the definition of the word "species", so is indeed of little value or importance.

[Roses]

It's the sense of the word "unique", as applied to all species, that is trivial, because it is part of the definition of the word "species", so is indeed of little value or importance.

?

[Steve H]

I can't put it much simpler than that, so if you still don't understand, I suggest you give up posting on this thread, as you are not giving a good impression of your intelligence.

[Walter]

It's the sense of the word "unique", as applied to all species, that is trivial, because it is part of the definition of the word "species", so is indeed of little value or importance.

Steve H

I've been following this thread and can now say I think I  understand what you are asking in the title .
I think others here are being purposefully disingenuous in their misunderstanding .   

[Roses]

Steve H

I've been following this thread and can now say I think I  understand what you are asking in the title .
I think others here are being purposefully disingenuous in their misunderstanding .

Well then you explain what Steve is trying to say.

[Gordon]

I'd say, for what it's worth, that that when applied to evolution a term like 'unique' is redundant when describing species since, as has been noted, all species have, or had if no longer extant, particular 'unique' attributes that distinguish them from other species and are relevant to their environment, activities and survival.

Humans have evolved particular intellectual attributes that are relevant to the activities and survival of our species, including being able to adjust our environment (and not always beneficially for ourselves or other species), in exactly the same way that, say, eyesight and flying attributes are to the activities and survival of raptors: they have no use for our attributes, and we have no use for theirs.

I suspect that some might tend to see our species as perhaps 'more' or 'better' evolved that other species, and if so that view isn't consistent with the TofE.

[Walter]

Well then you explain what Steve is trying to say.

nope, have a go at working it out for yourself . Get back to me with what you think and we'll see if we have a match 

[Udayana]

...
I suspect that some might tend to see our species as perhaps 'more' or 'better' evolved that other species, and if so that view isn't consistent with the TofE.

Indeed, but on the other hand we have a ToE and can discuss it, something other species will never achieve - at least without our help/meddling.

[Gordon]

Indeed, but on the other hand we have a ToE and can discuss it, something other species will never achieve - at least without our help/meddling.

True: but then we can't fly, breath underwater or hear sound frequencies that dogs can.

[Roses]

nope, have a go at working it out for yourself . Get back to me with what you think and we'll see if we have a match 

That says it all!

[Walter]

That says it all!

in that case your mind reading abilities are about as accurate as your presumptions 

[Roses]

in that case your mind reading abilities are about as accurate as your presumptions 

Gobbledegook!