Scientists say dolphins should be treated as non-human persons

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChainBreaker
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Aloysium said:
When I was a kid, I wired up a couple of batteries, some switches and flashlight bulbs on a board on which one could play tic-tac-toe. No programming was involved but every possible move was accounted for in the wiring sequences. Clearly the rationality resided in the creator, who set it up so that it would win or draw. No one would imagine it to be a rational creature, although in it’s completely limited way, it mimicked rationality.

Animal souls appear to come in many varieties. It is anthropomorphizing to see them as having a spirit.

Now, a peahen may look at a peacock and instinctively be turned on by its colours. It does not see beauty.
That said, some people will argue that their reactions towards the opposite sex are no different than those of animals, and I will not disagree.

As smart as is any dog, cat, dolphin or monkey, if they were to enter into my library, they would have no clue as to what it is. Any human being, whatever the culture, can come to understand what are books, computers, globes, art, etc.
Click to expand...
However…what if you/us are wrong?
 
oldcelt said:
However…what if you/us are wrong?
Click to expand...
I’ll worry about that when it happens.

Honestly, the feelings of Dolphins, if any, are not high on my list of concerns. I live 200 miles inland and have never yearned to swim with them. 🙂

The day one taps morse code (by nose) on the GIUK sonar line to demand we treat its species as people, then and only then will I be concerned with their putative minds. Not before. :):)🙂

ICXC NIKA
 
Oh. And it has to be one that has not been taught by human beings.

ICXC NIKA.
 
epan said:
There are credible estimates that more then two thirds of all life in the oceans has been killed through overfishing and pollution. It is also possible that the oceans will all be dead within 40-50 years. So, the discussion of animal rights in the sea are becoming more and more irrelevant, without wholesale commitment to change by every maritime and industrial country.

Blood mercury levels are hundreds of times higher than “safe” levels in most seagoing mammals. There are cases of baby whales now dying from drinking their mothers’ milk.

On a brighter note, my personal attorney chose to represent porpoises against the fishing industry. He prevailed as far as the 9th Federal Circuit Court, and the fishing industry, which was seeking legislative approval to kill more porpoises, backed off, choosing not to appeal to the US Supreme Court. He did this on his own dime, obviously. The porpoises were never presented with a bill for his services.

As has been said many times, a measure of our moral fiber is to what degree we protect the weakest and most vulnerable among us.
Click to expand...
This is correct.

Protection of dolphins is a major step in the right direction.

Evil is to turn living beings into objects.

This is a move away from evil.

People who want all other life forms to be commodities are moving toward evil.

There is evidence that the treatment of animals individually or collectively can be transferred to the treatment of people.

If a person is cruel to animals, he / she will likely do the same to people.
 
dedo said:
This is correct.

Protection of dolphins is a major step in the right direction.

Evil is to turn living beings into objects.

This is a move away from evil.

People who want all other life forms to be commodities are moving toward evil.

There is evidence that the treatment of animals individually or collectively can be transferred to the treatment of people.

If a person is cruel to animals, he / she will likely do the same to people.
Click to expand...
I am looking for a Catholic philosopher that has published their views on this.
And the evidence that treatment of animals individually or collectively in this argument after the knowledge of the localized flooding is what?
 
dedo said:
This is correct.

Protection of dolphins is a major step in the right direction.

Evil is to turn living beings into objects.

This is a move away from evil.

People who want all other life forms to be commodities are moving toward evil.

There is evidence that the treatment of animals individually or collectively can be transferred to the treatment of people.

If a person is cruel to animals, he / she will likely do the same to people.
Click to expand...
Who is arguing for deliberate cruelty to animals?

There is a sea change, pun intended, of difference between not being gratuitously cruel to an animal (which cruelty I oppose) , versus granting it “personal rights” (which I also oppose.)

ICXC NIKA.
 
GEddie said:
Who is arguing for deliberate cruelty to animals?

There is a sea change, pun intended, of difference between not being gratuitously cruel to an animal (which cruelty I oppose) , versus granting it “personal rights” (which I also oppose.)

ICXC NIKA.
Click to expand...
There are many ways to argue or support cruelty to animals without specifically saying it.

So the answer to your question, is many people.

In general, it is a good idea to keep trying to do better today than we did yesterday.

If we don’t do this, we are doomed, literally.

So, when someone is clearly trying to move the ball forward, which is true in this case, then I applaud the effort.

I fully support the effort to grant personal rights to dolphins.
 
Aloysium said:
Animal souls appear to come in many varieties. It is anthropomorphizing to see them as having a spirit.
Click to expand...
Only if they do not show signs of having one.
As smart as is any dog, cat, dolphin or monkey, if they were to enter into my library, they would have no clue as to what it is. Any human being, whatever the culture, can come to understand what are books, computers, globes, art, etc.
Click to expand...
If i had never been in a library and had never read a book before, neither would i know what a library is. Do you understand the complex language of dolphins? No.

But in any case i am just responding to the article honestly. I have no vested interest in them being right or wrong about dolphins.

One things for sure, After reading this article i would never eat or kill a dolphin because of the attributes it possesses.
 
dedo said:
There are many ways to argue or support cruelty to animals without specifically saying it.

So the answer to your question, is many people.

In general, it is a good idea to keep trying to do better today than we did yesterday.

If we don’t do this, we are doomed, literally.

So, when someone is clearly trying to move the ball forward, which is true in this case, then I applaud the effort.

I fully support the effort to grant personal rights to dolphins.
Click to expand...
Fine. We can agree to disagree.

I don’t get how we are “doomed” if we are not nice to dolphins. Are you thinking that aliens from space will punish us in order to rescue them?? 🙂

(That being a science-fiction plot line from the 1900s)

ICXC NIKA
 
Personal rights for oceanic mammals? So you want to see those who catch whales or Dolphins executed for murder???

While our societies increasingly become a slaughterhouse for human beings?

Forgive me, but I will **never **see things your way.

ICXC NIKA
 
GEddie said:
Personal rights for oceanic mammals? So you want to see those who catch whales or Dolphins executed for murder???

While our societies increasingly become a slaughterhouse for human beings?

Forgive me, but I will **never **see things your way.

ICXC NIKA
Click to expand...
I don’t see how anybody in their right mind would want to see anybody executed
 
I think we’re all a little more aware of the rights of animals than our parents were. I can’t even recall such a concept when I was growing up. But now…

I’ve just come back from shopping and getting some eggs off the supermarket shelf I automatically reached for the free range ones. I’m not sure you could grant personhood to a dolphin. It sounds odd. But fifty years ago, the idea of Chicken Rights would have been risible.

Animal rights, abortion, fossil fuels, the very planet itself…our grandchildren will look on us in the same way as we look upon earlier generations and wonder why we didn’t appreciate what we were doing.
 
Bradski said:
I think we’re all a little more aware of the rights of animals than our parents were. I can’t even recall such a concept when I was growing up. But now…

I’ve just come back from shopping and getting some eggs off the supermarket shelf I automatically reached for the free range ones. I’m not sure you could grant personhood to a dolphin. It sounds odd. But fifty years ago, the idea of Chicken Rights would have been risible.

Animal rights, abortion, fossil fuels, the very planet itself…our grandchildren will look on us in the same way as we look upon earlier generations and wonder why we didn’t appreciate what we were doing.
Click to expand...
Chicken rights will never take hold. Fried chicken is just too good!!!:)🙂

ICXC NIKA
 
Bradski said:
I think we’re all a little more aware of the rights of animals than our parents were. I can’t even recall such a concept when I was growing up. But now…

I’ve just come back from shopping and getting some eggs off the supermarket shelf I automatically reached for the free range ones. I’m not sure you could grant personhood to a dolphin. It sounds odd. But fifty years ago, the idea of Chicken Rights would have been risible.

Animal rights, abortion, fossil fuels, the very planet itself…our grandchildren will look on us in the same way as we look upon earlier generations and wonder why we didn’t appreciate what we were doing.
Click to expand...
There is still no viable alternative to fossil fuel, so it will remain quite understandable for some time.

“The very planet” does NOT need saving. It was a living world long before us and will be after us.

ICXC NIKA.
 
GEddie said:
“The very planet” does NOT need saving. It was a living world long before us and will be after us.

ICXC NIKA.
Click to expand...
Well, that’s quite true. I read something similar recently. Along the lines of: the planet will be just fine whatever we do to it. It just might not be entirely suitable for us.
 
GEddie said:
There is still no viable alternative to fossil fuel, so it will remain quite understandable for some time.

“The very planet” does NOT need saving. It was a living world long before us and will be after us.

ICXC NIKA.
Click to expand...
What does viable mean in relation to Alternatives? Why are they not viable? I thought it was about those in power making sure that they retain power.
 
ChainBreaker said:
What does viable mean in relation to Alternatives? Why are they not viable? I thought it was about those in power making sure that they retain power.
Click to expand...
There is no energy source dense enough to replace fossil fuel in making things move.

None is even thought of at present.

ICXC NIKA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top