[MD] Social level for humans only

[Horse]

  Hi Krim

On 18/08/2010 13:48, Krimel wrote:
> Horse,
> Ever since "Origin of Species" people have been trying to find something,
> anything that makes humans unique from the rest of God's creation, tool use,
> language, opposable thumb...

Yeah, I agree, and I'm not looking at it from this point of view. I'm 
not trying to imply that humans are necessarily superior to other 
animals and therefore have some sort of god given right to dominion over 
them and the way we treat them as the bible seems to imply, just that 
there is a different and additional level of development brought about 
through evolution and natural selection.

> Music and art? Maybe, except birds sing and so to whales.

Birds and whales make sounds which are, in general, fixed and limited in 
scope and range. There is little variation in their repertoire and it is 
generally for the purposes of attracting mates, alerting others to 
danger or summoning the offspring. Whale sound may sound like music but 
that is mainly human interpretation. You might as well say that a tree 
grows it leaves to create a certain type of musical rustling sound or 
that glaciers cut though the ground to produce echo chambers.
Humans music is highly varied in timbre, metre, pitch etc. and is more 
often than not produced using created implements. As far as I'm aware no 
other species is capable of creating the complexity of sounds that 
humans produce.

> Many species have "dances" built into their mating rituals.

Again, as with music, this is for specific purposes and not just 'for 
the hell of it'!

> With regards to art I am hard pressed to think of a species that produces art but
> I am also hard pressed to see how we would recognize it if they did. Another
> species' esthetics would in all likelihood be so different from ours, they
> might be singing, dancing and creating art all around us and we wouldn't
> notice anymore than other species recognize these capacities in us.

But this is just saying that because we haven't found their art, because 
we don't recognise it as such, therefore we can't say they don't have 
it! The same argument could be used to say that just because we haven't 
found chimps using cell/mobile phones, it doesn't mean they aren't doing 
so - we just don't recognise their design of mobile phones!

> Another side of this argument would be that even if we were to insist that
> humans have some characteristics that are unique in the animal kingdom, that
> in itself would not make us unique. You can look at any species and find
> that it has some trait that no other species has and this "special" trait
> makes them "special;" elephant trunks, giraffe necks, cheetah speed etc.

At a biological level I agree and even at a primitive (and sometimes not 
so primitive) social level I agree. But once we come to intellect then 
I'd disagree. There is no evidence for any animal, other than humans, 
that show this sort of advanced development.


> My concern is that this attempt to carve humans out from the rest of nature,
> is a byproduct of resistance to the historical dethronement of man as the
> "capstone" of creation and the center of God's creative effort.

Absolutely. Humans are what they are through the same processes of 
evolution and adaptation as applied to all forms of life on the planet. 
We are not to be 'privileged' because we are created in 'His' image or 
favoured because we we can create nifty digital watches. Everything 
about man and animals is equally from a natural cause.
Humans have their own type of biological and social uniqueness as do 
other members of the Animal kingdom and in particular areas there is a 
further qualitative uniqueness of intellect. This is not due to 
supernatural intervention but a variant of adaptation and natural 
selection. But I do believe that intellect is the route to Music and Art.

> But on a more practical note social behavior is an important strategy used
> throughout nature and our use of it is not so very different from the use
> other species put it to, survival. Social behavior or the emphasis on
> cooperation over competition give the lie to the idea that "survival of the
> fittest" means: nature writ in tooth and claw. "Fitness" does not mean the
> biggest and baddest.

No argument here either. Humans, as per other animals, group together to 
survive and share resources. We may go a step further and use those 
resources, when in excess of immediate need, for trade etc. but it is 
still essentially the same idea.
It's when you get to the use of intellect that I think we become 
qualitatively different - and especially as I have said, in our creation 
of Music, Art and as you mentioned, Dance.

I've never seen an Ant Marching Band, a Bee Picasso or a Termite Rudolph 
Nureyev!! Although, I may not have been looking in the right places! :)


Cheers


Horse


==================================================
>    Hi Krim
>
> Not sure I agree here. I think there are human attributes that aren't
> manifest in other species that are totally unique to humans and this
> sets us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom.
> I'm talking about music and art. As far as I'm aware no other species on
> the planet has either music or art and, as I said in an earlier post
> some time back, I think this is linked with our intellect and the
> intellectual level. Which in turn are linked to our language ability.
> It's one of the reasons that I also agree with David T that intellect,
> and the intellectual level, goes back thousands of years because the
> ability to produce art (or music) is so dependent on having an
> intellectual level. You only have to look at the Lascaux cave paintings
> to realise that intellect was alive and well at least 17000 years ago.
>
> I agree that we are a product of natural selection and that what we do
> is natural (I haven't got much time for the supposed 'supernatural') but
> I don't think it's arrogance to assume that there is something radically
> different about humans that allows us to produce music and art.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> Horse
>
>
> On 18/08/2010 04:46, Krimel wrote:
>> [Krimel]
>> Odd, it seems arrogant to me to assume that much of anything about us is
>> radically different than what we see in other species. We are a product of
>> natural selection and the same rules apply to us as to every other
> species.
>> Comparing our social manifestations to that of other species, looking at
> how
>> they arise from similar conditions and serve similar functions seems, what
>> the word I am looking for... natural.
>>
>> On the other hand assuming that we are unique seems to me, what's that
> other
>> word... supernatural.
>>

-- 

"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
— Frank Zappa