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.
GEddie said:
One can admit of moral responsibility toward animals without calling them “people” or claiming that they have rights.

ICXC NIKA
Click to expand...
That’s true - one can. But then there’s the question what allows us to grant humans higher moral consideration over other animals. And that leads to more problems.
 
Rhubarb said:
That’s true - one can. But then there’s the question what allows us to grant humans higher moral consideration over other animals. And that leads to more problems.
Click to expand...
Only if you are determined to see human and animal as equals. I am not. If you are, I am willing to disagree amicably.

The physical human species is a nice, well-defined border for personhood. Let the borders out even slightly and arguments will be presented to keep on doing so.

ICXC NIKA.
 
Rhubarb said:
There are lots of people bothered by it beyond the animal-rights crowd. Ethicists grapple with these issues, even the ones that aren’t the PETA pounding lefties. Precisely because when you look at an anthropocentric theory of ethics it can lead to problems if one is willing to critically examine their intuitions on “animal rights.” A few simple thought experiments are enough to show that. They could be rattled off for pages, problems that aren’t even as controversial as considering animals persons.

When I say “moral” I mean it academically. Interpersonal ethics may be for people but there are legitimate moral claims that affect animals and even inanimate objects. There’s reasons why if someone was stomping puppies to death in the streets we’d stop them - because there’s some moral issue at play. It’s true that animals aren’t moral agents in the way people are - but that’s not the point. If we restrict moral consideration to moral agents than children, the mentally disabled, the infirm, and many other groups of humans would not qualify for moral consideration. Of course we could add caveats, but it’s very difficult to come up with an ethic that restricts moral consideration to humans without biting some serious bullets.
Click to expand...
The sick,the mentally disabled are moral agents as long as they are human. They may be hindered by their handicap what ever it might be, but they are persons with an immortal soul, spiritual intelligence and wills(which apparently you do not accept o r understand) I also stated that we are to be good stewards of the animal kingdom, and to threat them humanely. This in keeping with our own morality even towards animals. So who is restricting moral considerations towards animals, except some humans who do not act according to the laws of morality but act like animals themselves.
 
ChainBreaker said:
*(PhysOrg.com) – Scientists studying dolphin behavior have suggested they could be the most intelligent creatures on Earth after humans, saying the size of their brains in relation to body size is larger than that of our closest relatives, the chimpanzees, and their behaviors suggest complex intelligence. One scientist said they should therefore be treated as “non-human persons” and granted rights as individuals.

The behavioral studies showed dolphins (especially the bottlenose) have **distinct personalities ***
Click to expand...
(Emphasis added.)

This is ridiculous. My two dogs have incredibly distinct ‘personalities’ – they couldn’t be more different in their behaviour and (expression of) liveliness – but there is no evidence that they can engage in rational, abstract thinking which, as others have pointed out, is fundamental to being a person. Thay they have distinct ‘personalities’ does not make them persons. This is confusion on a fundamental level by these scientists. Their statement in this respect is not one from science, but from personal (misguided) gut feeling.
 
Faith1960 said:
What if they do?
Click to expand...
Yes, what makes us so certain that only we have something immortal which we call soul.

I cannot imagine a proto human mum and dad looking down on the first homo sapiens baby which suddenly got a soul.
 
The fact that we have rational intelligence, and free will to choose. We also have individual self-directing abilities (autonomous activity) Also we get clues as to a spiritual soul by
examining the nature of human knowledge, and thought which is not physical but spiritual
Also we know that we know, not possible to animals who do not have rational intelligence.
Did you ever have an intelligent conversation with an animal and discussed it’s opinions?
Animals do not have to be taught how to behave they instinctively know, programed to behave as they do. We can tell what an animal will do, but we don’t really know what a human will do, because we know that he can change his mind. An animal has a physical, material soul and sense memory, instincts, and senses, but no rational, spiritual soul. God programs them to act the way they do. We can choose to against what God wants us to do because we have free will which is a spiritual faculty of the soul.
 
Al_Moritz said:
(Emphasis added.)

This is ridiculous. My two dogs have incredibly distinct ‘personalities’ – they couldn’t be more different in their behaviour and (expression of) liveliness – but there is no evidence that they can engage in rational, abstract thinking which, as others have pointed out, is fundamental to being a person. Thay they have distinct ‘personalities’ does not make them persons. This is confusion on a fundamental level by these scientists. Their statement in this respect is not one from science, but from personal (misguided) gut feeling.
Click to expand...
Here is an excerpt from Scientific American Mind Volume 25, Issue 3:

Many Animals Can Think Abstractly
Several species can think conceptually about the things they see
May 1, 2014 |By Andrea Anderson

Dogs, too, seem to have better than expected abstract-thinking abilities. They can reliably recognize pictures of other dogs, regardless of breed, as a study in the July 2013 Animal Cognition showed. The results surprised scientists not only because dog breeds vary so widely in appearance but also because it had been unclear whether dogs could routinely identify fellow canines without the advantage of smell and other senses. Other studies have found feats of categorization by chimpanzees, bears and pigeons, adding up to a spate of recent research that suggests the ability to sort things abstractly is far more widespread than previously thought.
scientificamerican.com/article/many-animals-can-think-abstractly/
Now regarding the topic “Scientists say dolphins should be treated as non-human persons”:
*
Hal Whitehead, who studies whale and dolphin social systems at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said dolphins are among the few animals known to live in multicultural communities, in which groups of individuals that have been taught to do things – such as catch prey – in different ways live together.
“**Whales and dolphins are at least as sophisticated as the nonhuman great apes”*Whitehead said, noting that Japan has been a leader in gaining protections for monkeys and apes.
Because dolphins learn from one another, he said, major cullings can have a serious impact on surviving individuals’ ability to persevere. “When you remove a bunch of animals, you remove not only them but the knowledge that they have.”
The World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, which represents more than 12,000 zoos and aquariums globally, passed a resolution in 2004 prohibiting the procurement of cetaceans from dolphin drives. But a number of smaller enterprises, many of them in Asia, have reportedly continued to do so.

animalliberationfront.com/Philosophy/Morality/Speciesism/DolphinIQ.htm
actfordolphins.org/washington.html

William E. Evans, Ph.D. University of Notre Dame is also supporting act for dolphins.
actfordolphins.org/washington.html

Hope this helps. I am a researcher and examine more than 400 hundred scientific articles 5 days a week. 🙂 I love my job.😃
 
LogisticsBranch said:
Here is an excerpt from Scientific American Mind Volume 25, Issue 3:

Many Animals Can Think Abstractly
Several species can think conceptually about the things they see
May 1, 2014 |By Andrea Anderson

Appreciate the offer, but how did Andrea Anderson ever arrive at those conclusions
This should be interesting.
Click to expand...
 
ynotzap said:
Appreciate the offer, but how did Andrea Anderson ever arrive at those conclusions
This should be interesting.
Click to expand...
Hello:D She read the July 2013 Animal Cognition Journal.😃 You can find it on
Springer International Publishing AG, Part of Springer Science+Business Media
link.springer.com/
 
The glorification of animals is a logical step with a materialist society. Your humanity is calculated by your brain. That means smarter animals are going to be put on a pedestal, while their dumber cousins - who can feel pain every bit as much as they can - not as much. The suffering of a dolphin allegedly matters more than the suffering of a sheep, which has the misfortune of being a much dumber creature.
 
TK421 said:
The glorification of animals is a logical step with a materialist society. Your humanity is calculated by your brain. That means smarter animals are going to be put on a pedestal, while their dumber cousins - who can feel pain every bit as much as they can - not as much. The suffering of a dolphin allegedly matters more than the suffering of a sheep, which has the misfortune of being a much dumber creature.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s about materialism… it’s about humility. it’s about recognizing that we’re not the only creatures out there that matter.

Maybe dolphins are as smart as humans; maybe they aren’t. I don’t claim to know. But either way, it’s a question for the scientists, not for the theologians. We shouldn’t make any presuppositions based on doctrine.
 
Bran_Stark said:
I don’t think it’s about materialism… it’s about humility. it’s about recognizing that we’re not the only creatures out there that matter.

Maybe dolphins are as smart as humans; maybe they aren’t. I don’t claim to know. But either way, it’s a question for the scientists, not for the theologians. We shouldn’t make any presuppositions based on doctrine.
Click to expand...
I’ll believe that oceanic mammals have human class minds when they argue it successfully on our terms.

Until then, we should humble ourself before God and each other, not the beasts or the planet.

All living beings “matter”, but not all are persons.

ICXC NIKA.
 
dolphins , as smart as they are do not have an immortal soul

would you give a dolphin any of the sacraments? no, of course not; they are incapable of receiving the slightest hint of the catholic faith

dolphins are essentially aquatic german shephards
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top