And we're straight back into Victorian colonialism again.
Whales & dolphins are so intelligent they deserve same rights as humans, say experts
- Thread starter Ayn Rand
- Start date
And we're straight back into Victorian colonialism again.
GhostWriter16
Deity
You misunderstand. I'm not talking about a physical weakness. Africans were weaker than we were technologically and so could not defend themselves when we enslaved them, but that didn't mean they didn't have rights. The thing about it is, Dolphins have no legal system, no courts, no technological advances. NONE of them do. Dolphins are not CAPABLE of such things. Being dealt bad terrain or a bad starting situation as the Africans were due to their land is not the same as an entire race not being capable to stand proud against the human race.
Quackers
The Frog
This is now my only condition!
wilycoyote
King
Are you suggesting that future slaves didn't have a society before/during/after becoming slaves with a similar level of complexity as Europeans? And before breaking down my use of "similar" surely you can see the difference between the worst you could ever possibly say about African/of whatever societies and the best that you could ever say about those of animals.
Regardless, I get no enjoyment out of this thread. It is like discussing religion and current events with that crazy guy yelling about the apocalypse on the street corner. Have fun.
When did humans start going around proclaiming "declarations of human rights?" That's a pretty recent concept, as I understand it. And I certainly wouldn't be in favor of letting people eat isolated groups of humans that lack the concept of human rights.
Not that I'm in favor of granting dolphins full human rights, but all of the arguments of the form "dolphins should get human rights as soon as they come up with [recent human technology or idea X]" need to be reconsidered.
Not that I'm in favor of granting dolphins full human rights, but all of the arguments of the form "dolphins should get human rights as soon as they come up with [recent human technology or idea X]" need to be reconsidered.
Please, people!
Nothing in the OP says anything about granting dolphins, great apes, or other animals equivalent Human Rights.
Get back on topic!
But what if they already have an ethical system of rights amongst themselves and other intelligent cetaceans, but we're the ones who haven't figured out how to listen to them? I'm not being all 'Age of Aquarius' here, I'm trying to show that communication is a two-way street.
And the corollary of your second sentence is that tigers and lions have every right to eat us, since we're not able to communicate our system of rights to them. Do you really think that??
Nothing in the OP says anything about granting dolphins, great apes, or other animals equivalent Human Rights.
Get back on topic!
innonimatu said:
But what if they already have an ethical system of rights amongst themselves and other intelligent cetaceans, but we're the ones who haven't figured out how to listen to them? I'm not being all 'Age of Aquarius' here, I'm trying to show that communication is a two-way street.
And the corollary of your second sentence is that tigers and lions have every right to eat us, since we're not able to communicate our system of rights to them. Do you really think that??
Whiskey_Lord
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 2,163
Essentially, the argument is that dolphins don't deserve rights because they lack the power of human speech. 
X-post.
X-post.
Maybe the specieists could explain why we should grant rights to those with Down's Syndrome? Now, be careful, because the specieist arguments don't seem to fly once we acknowledge that 'species' is a genetic definition
edit:
at xpost
edit:
at xpost
Maybe the specieists could explain why we should grant rights to those with Down's Syndrome? Now, be careful, because the specieist arguments don't seem to fly once we acknowledge that 'species' is a genetic definition
edit:
Yes!! This!!
I remember spending about 2 hours reading through all the different variations of the term 'species'. Depending on what discipline the word is used in (context, I guess), there are dozens of mutually exclusive definitions.
I had never thought about it before, but the whole exercise really brought home the notion of heredity and minute mutation. There is an unbroken chain of heredity extending from me back in time to a shared great-great-great^N ancestor that all living dolphins share with me. At no point did a parent give birth to an offspring that we'd classify as a different species, but given enough accumulations of minute variation, there they are (and here I am).
Truly impressive.
Silurian
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,567
Midnight-Blue766
The filidh that cam frae Skye
You think that's bad? The orcas we studied wouldn't stop saying stuff like "Nah-sumis-romanays", "Indijaymis oxeeleeatoom fee-eray homeenays" and stuff like that.
Narz
keeping it real
Reading thru this thread it's strange how downright angry people seem to get about the ideal that any animal deserves... well, any rights at all. I wonder what's the psychology behind that.
GhostWriter16
Deity
@El Mac- A Down Syndrome person is a person with a chromosomal disorder, not an different species altogether.
@Narz- I'm open to the idea that animals can have rights, at varying levels based on intelligence. We think nothing of killing a fly, but generally we won't kill a deer except for food or to control overpopulation (Necessary on Long Island
) and we'll try not to cause it excessive pain. We afford dogs some extra rights because we have them as pets, exc.
I don't necessarily have a problem with that. I'm not suggesting we legalize eating dog (Its just culturally wrong, you can't eat your pet) or that killing deer in the most torturous way possible or hunting endangered species just because their animals is OK.
But they are fundamentally LESS than humans. I get annoyed (Not angry) when people suggest that a dolphin is my equal.
@Narz- I'm open to the idea that animals can have rights, at varying levels based on intelligence. We think nothing of killing a fly, but generally we won't kill a deer except for food or to control overpopulation (Necessary on Long Island
) and we'll try not to cause it excessive pain. We afford dogs some extra rights because we have them as pets, exc.I don't necessarily have a problem with that. I'm not suggesting we legalize eating dog (Its just culturally wrong, you can't eat your pet
) or that killing deer in the most torturous way possible or hunting endangered species just because their animals is OK.But they are fundamentally LESS than humans. I get annoyed (Not angry) when people suggest that a dolphin is my equal.
Narz
keeping it real
I wasn't speaking of you in particular but what do you mean by "less"? Less capable to think/feel? Probably, even in the case of dolphins but I don't think it's a zero-sum game, granting rights to a dolphin doesn't take away yours. It's not like you're going to be competing with them in the job market.
Me? I've had whale, can't remember if I've had dolphin. Anyway, animals are dumb and ought to be eaten.
That´s what I can't figure out. Why do you think they are fundamentally less than humans? Why get annoyed when suggested that dolphins might be our equals?
What makes humans different from other animals? Surely nothing else but our advanced level of intelligence and cognition, brought about by development of our brains.
Why would one be so bent on rejecting the idea that brains of some dolphins might have reached a comparable level of development, even when there is data to suggest that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetacean_intelligence
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
Yes. I too was thinking of making that distinction to make cetaceans seem like an exception, but I suspect that he Hebrew word for fish is broader than ours. I know that the Hebrew word usually translated "birds" actually means "flying things" and includes bats, while that flightless birds like ostriches are considered beasts of the field like cows.
