Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
We started with a purpose. Why don't you pick up a 10-year-old computer and write a research report on it?
No. The criterion is that human "can" "use" fire. It is valid based on animals "can not" raise or use fire.
For some people who can not "use" fire ... frankly, I can not come up with such an example. Can you? (Don't tell me that baby is not human. Otherwise, the conversation will end.)
You give fire to chimp, what would "he" do to it? Cooking?
Why don't you write the paper?
If you are going to exclude a species from a kind because it has behaviors or features not found in other species of that kind, then you will have no kinds. Every species has unique features. Every one of them.
I have explained this three or four times or more in this thread. So I am NOT going to do it again.
I've already provided the video of a bonobo making a camp fire and using it to toast marshmallows. As for a human who can't use fire, excepting children for some reason, we have the infirm, those with mental or physical handicap, and those without access to fire making supplies. I assume that you consider all those groups to be human as I do.No. The criterion is that human "can" "use" fire. It is valid based on animals "can not" raise or use fire.
For some people who can not "use" fire ... frankly, I can not come up with such an example. Can you? (Don't tell me that baby is not human. Otherwise, the conversation will end.)
You give fire to chimp, what would "he" do to it? Cooking?
Every species has unique features. Every one of them.
[serious];65689735 said:I've already provided the video of a bonobo making a camp fire and using it to toast marshmallows. As for a human who can't use fire, excepting children for some reason, we have the infirm, those with mental or physical handicap, and those without access to fire making supplies. I assume that you consider all those groups to be human as I do.
I also said, they are all exceptions. It happened in all schemes of classification. No big deal.
A man without hands can raise and use fire? Of course, use his feet.
[serious];65689735 said:I've already provided the video of a bonobo making a camp fire and using it to toast marshmallows.
Oh I get it. Because that's how we define species. Clever dog.
[serious];65693031 said:If you know when to make those exceptions, then you have another definition of kind that you are not stating. So what is your real definition of kind that tells you when to make exceptions to your pretend definition?
If the exceptions do not interfere the practical use of the classification, then they are allowed. Otherwise, the system should be refined. So, ONE chimp "learned" to light the match should be an exception, at the best.
I wonder if we taught 100 such chimps to raise fire, how many of their kids will be taught the same skill by the adults? My prediction is: None. Very sad species. It seems another smart chimp movie is coming up. Kind of looking forward to see it.
If a chimp were capable of raising fire and they had practical use for it I guarantee that successive generation would learn the skill. Juvenile chimps routinely learn skills from their parents.
So, why does it not happen? Where is your guarantee?
If the exceptions do not interfere the practical use of the classification, then they are allowed. Otherwise, the system should be refined. So, ONE chimp "learned" to light the match should be an exception, at the best.
I wonder if we taught 100 such chimps to raise fire, how many of their kids will be taught the same skill by the adults? My prediction is: None. Very sad species. It seems another smart chimp movie is coming up. Kind of looking forward to see it.
Why can't humans and chimps be in the same kind even if humans are able to use fire and chimps aren't?
A chihuahua is not able to herd sheep like a collie, so does that put them in separate kinds?
Are "kinds" nothing more than preference?
If the exceptions do not interfere the practical use of the classification, then they are allowed. Otherwise, the system should be refined. So, ONE chimp "learned" to light the match should be an exception, at the best.
I wonder if we taught 100 such chimps to raise fire, how many of their kids will be taught the same skill by the adults? My prediction is: None. Very sad species. It seems another smart chimp movie is coming up. Kind of looking forward to see it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?