[Verv]

What separates animals from humans?

Or is man just an animal?

And if he is an animal, what is it that makes man so dominant even against creatures which are superior in physique?

Is it fair to consider man 'above' animals, or is man merely 'different?

[Zyx]

Humans are just another part of nature (animals). The Christian god tells us that even the angels should bow to man, but in this I can see why Lucifer would rebel; man, another animal, doesn't seem like something to which an angel ought to bow. This Western idea of man owning and conquering nature elicits this question and I disagree with the Westerners (and [some] Marxists) here: man is a part of nature, like any other animal.

[Godstud]

We have computers.

We're animals too but we're different from other animals in that our intelligence is our survival adaptation. This adaptation appears the be one of the best, since man can function in all ecosystems and environments, because of it.

Instead of sharp claws/teeth or speed or camouflage, etc. we have the intelligence to make and utilize tools which can serve in these functions, or far exceed them. In this one respect, man is above all other animals on earth. We're the jack-of-all trades of the animal world with the difference in that we can actually master most of these trades.

Man really is only different than other animals. Humans are similar to most mammals in most physiology and genetics.

[Kman]

Really good question lol, its hard to answer, gonna have to think about this one for a while.

[Todd D.]

We're not scared shitless of the vacuum cleaner.

[Northern-Anarchist-X]

^lol.

I would answer that humans are animals (in your face, Kant!) but at the same time it's entirely irrelevent when considering morality because our minds are human and only really objectively understand human minds (noting humans as a distinct species).

[Average Voter]

Humans are not animals because animals refer to non-human species. What separates the two? There is not anything which separates them, except that animals cannot reproduce with humans.

[Lensky1917]

And if he is an animal, what is it that makes man so dominant even against creatures which are superior in physique?

Uh, weapons and the hands to make them?

We have computers.

How does pornography help?

[The Clockwork Rat]

The scale and development of intellect. I think that covers pretty much every base.

[Potemkin]

Humans communicate with each other using a language sufficiently complex to allow abstract symbolic thought.

That is all.

[Verv]

I have always thought even from a a non-religious perspective that humanity so dwarfs animals that we ought to not be in the same category other than for physical classification purposes.

I would have thought some of you atheists/agnostics to be humanists, to some extent, and admirers of our 'greatness?'

(Or is that not even what humaists do?)

Do you really think it is fair to downplay humanity, as it stands?

The greatest things that are achieved in the animal Kingdom are what? Spider webs and fox holes? Cocoons?

Think of it also that animals act only within one of the spheres of human thought:

The instinctual and unaware aspects of pack conformity and survival.

Humans can operate on levels that are far more profound, serving any number of goals -- goals larger than themselves and larger than their societies.

[Cookie Monster]

Our mental capabilities are superior, nothing more and nothing less.

[Abood]

According to evolutionary biology, species are a man-made construct done for practical reasons. Speciation is said to have occurred when two organisms have evolved so far apart that they can no longer reproduce, yet there is never a clear-cut line in the tree of evolution between different species; each generation is as similar to its preceding generation as a child is similar to its mother. Evolution is so gradual that there are only ever slight differences between consecutive generations. In other words, every generation is or would have been (in the case of extinct ones) able to reproduce with its preceding generation. Richard Dawkins actually says that it's fortunate that people haven't found fossils for every single generation in the tree of evolution, because otherwise categorizing species would have been impossible.

As for superiority, scientifically speaking, the argument doesn't hold ground. The claim for superiority rests on the premise that humans are on top of a ladder, when in fact evolution is more of a complex tree with a very, very large number of branches. For example, we aren't descended from chimpanzees (which is a common misconception), but rather share a common ancestor with them. So think of our common ancestor as a trunk which chimps and humans branched off of separately. We simply adopted to our environments, while they adopted to theirs. So we might be said to be superior relative to our environments, while chimps to theirs.

[Nattering Nabob]

What Separates Animals From Humans?

We have something besides instinct to rely on to guide our actions...

The Christian god tells us that even the angels should bow to man

Not sure where you got this...but it didn't come from the bible...

[Sybil]

It is because we can think about ourselves. Self-consciousness has lead us to develop society to make our lives more secure. Our opposable thumbs as primates put us in a unique position when matched with this raised consciousness to form tools, which get better as time goes on.

[Verv]

Abood, define 'superior' and tell us why humans cannot attain a concept of superiority.

In other words... WHERE IS YOUR HUMAN PRIDE?!

It isn't that we are just 'smarter' than animals... It is that we are profoundly more intelligent and capable of so much more.

It almost does not make sense that a species as us would exist.

Nature created a species that would eventually destroy nature.

Perhaps we are nature's way of committing suicide.

[Figlio di Moros]

There are plenty of distinctions between humans and animals, both physically and mentally. To say we're just another animal is to look at humanity from a single, narrow scope; what it is that makes us man places us on a different realm of existance than animals.

[Abood]

Abood, define 'superior' and tell us why humans cannot attain a concept of superiority.

Superiority means the superior ability to survival, of course -- and humans developed an intellectuality as a method of survival, considering this is what has shaped life on Earth since the very beginning.

I've already explained why humans cannot be superior.

It isn't that we are just 'smarter' than animals... It is that we are profoundly more intelligent and capable of so much more.

We're capable of different things.

It almost does not make sense that a species as us would exist.

Actually, statistically speaking, the likelihood of a species such as ours to arise was very high, in fact almost inevitable. It's also very probable that there are other conscious species in different parts of this infinite universe.

Nature created a species that would eventually destroy nature.

That's arrogant. No matter how much we colonize the Earth and other celestial bodies, it's all insignificant compared to the vastness of the universe. Every single thing humanity has ever done combined does not change nature in the slightest. One day, the universe will tell us, begone, and all of our existence and history will disappear without a trace. We're cosmically irrelevant.

[Figlio di Moros]

That's arrogant. No matter how much we colonize the Earth and other celestial bodies, it's all insignificant compared to the vastness of the universe. Every single thing humanity has ever done combined does not change nature in the slightest. One day, the universe will tell us, begone, and all of our existence and history will disappear without a trace. We're cosmically irrelevant.

You speak about everything we've done to date, but negate everything we will ever do; assuming we can get off this planet in the next several billion years, the only thing that could trully end humanity would be the slow dissolution of the universe.

The idea of the mortality of mankind seems to be a form of cultural nihilism, a projection of inner loathing on society. The reality is we're a uniquely sapient being capable of molding the world around us, on the threshold of self-transformation. We're not as insignificant as you wish we were.

[Le Rouge]

Efficient bipedalism. This is the only clear distinction between humans and other animals. I would say language but I don't think we can rule out the existence of animal languages in some other species.