How humans relate to other species

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by LuckyR »

Great thread Greta. I would add a lot more detail to the idea for clarity.

In the interactions between organisms, of different species for the sake of this thread, there are both active and passive events. For example, if I walk around a magpie to avoid disturbing it, that is an active "positive" interaction. If I brusquely walk through a group of birds skattering them, that is a passive action (since I would have walked straight ahead birds or no), perhaps a "negative" one in the nomenclature of the OP. OTOH, there are too many cases of active "negative" interactions that make the rounds on YouTube: the pitbull with it's snout taped shut with electrical tape such that the dog required extensive surgery to save it's nose and the like. The animal kingdom would be much, much better served by the halting of active "negative" events than by having more active "positive" interactions with humans. After all, animals were doing just fine before Homo Sapiens ambled upon the scene a short while ago.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Sy Borg »

Fir point about advice and passive events. I was just thinking that if I was standing around and a group of huge footballers bustled obliviously past, forcing me to get out of the way or risk being trampled I'd be hostile. After all, the group wouldn't bully past a rhino.

I always felt there was a fault line in human morality in how the powerful are given respect and the weak trodden on. The ghost of Karen Silkwood tells us what can happen when we fail to show due disrespect to the powerful and it's true that when one shows respect for the weak it's not unheard of for them to take advantage and bring you down - such is the competitive nature of survival. There's nuance in these relationships - a queasy balance of ethics and self-preservation.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by LuckyR »

Greta wrote:Fir point about advice and passive events. I was just thinking that if I was standing around and a group of huge footballers bustled obliviously past, forcing me to get out of the way or risk being trampled I'd be hostile. After all, the group wouldn't bully past a rhino.

I always felt there was a fault line in human morality in how the powerful are given respect and the weak trodden on. The ghost of Karen Silkwood tells us what can happen when we fail to show due disrespect to the powerful and it's true that when one shows respect for the weak it's not unheard of for them to take advantage and bring you down - such is the competitive nature of survival. There's nuance in these relationships - a queasy balance of ethics and self-preservation.
I don't see it as a balance. To me, if I help someone or something out, be it a homeless person or an animal, sure they get some help, but I am the big winner, that feeling of gratification (let alone the concept of karma) is my pay off, so it may as well be described as a "selfish" act geared towards "self-preservation".
"As usual... it depends."
Logic_ill
Posts: 1624
Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Logic_ill »

Lucylu wrote:
Logic_ill wrote:Likewise, human consciousness may not seem to be a major risk factor for other humans, yet it probably is the biggest threat. A person's anatomy may not change under the threat of a nuclear strike, although their consciousness might. They first become aware, and later try to develop their intelligence. Some have argued that physical changes might take place, due to physical trauma. I agree, hormones most likely are released and if the person is in a setting that seems more threatening than what they were accustomed to, they will change (morph) to a certain degree. They will become more aggressive too, and perhaps less rational.
I agree. This is why it is so damaging (not just for the individual, but for humanity as a whole) for children to be raised in war zones. Our early years are a critical window of learning and it may take generations before this damage to a person's core beliefs and world view is overcome.

Another issue this OP has made me remember is the news that pandas raised in captivity are being artificially inseminated. This was reported to be a great humanitarian act, in rebuilding the numbers of pandas. Personally, my first thought was that it was horribly disrespectful of animals. If some alien species took over Earth and I was confined to a cage to be looked at as one the last remaining humans, the last thing I would want would be to be forcibly made pregnant. Likewise, I don't drink dairy milk as I think its awful the way that cows are treated; repeatedly impregnated and pumped with hormones, their offspring removed, so they can be impregnated again and again to produce unending milk.
So true, Lucy. I love milk, and I blind myself to the fact that animals are indeed being mistreated. I acquired the taste for both meat and milk at too early an age and have never really quit. This is very telling of our conditions as humans. We live in a world that we do not fully question because much of it has been long established and has become the norm. This may be why societies are also segmented. Changes gradually take place as information and knowledge spread and the ideologies that spring from them begin to take hold. But because there is resistance to change, due to interests a people might have in keeping the older ways and their habits, different groups form and they might even fight one another.

"Remember, evolution favors those qualities that help a species to survive and reproduce AT THE TIME WHEN CHANGES ARE TAKING PLACE. Evolution doesn't care about later on. Now if there were a God, he would have seen the future and would have designed us better for survival at this point".


It's interesting that you mention this, Wilson. A person who studies evolution should be interested in the role of consciousness. Part of the reason I mentioned I was puzzled at the design that doesn't seem to favour survival was because as a "knowledgeable" being, I get to see or understand how instincts do not seem to work in favour of all organisms. I get to apply human logic to all these behaviours, that of other animals, and our own. My human consciousness seems to work better at this point, than evolutionary mechanisms. I do believe, however, that we (humans) are still in a process of learning how to use our consciousness too, and we still have to deal with our instincts. But I get what you're saying with what seems to be one of evolution's major strategies: reproduction. However, it did also produce and reproduce consciousness (as we know it).

The thing that strikes me the most is how what seems to be evolutionary mechanisms (epigenetics) in feral pigs are only brought about by abrupt changes or immediate dangers that the feral pigs sense. These mechanisms are not triggered or don't seem to be triggered upon the dangers of a higher consciousness. Immediate sensory knowledge of danger can cause physical changes in a short term, but the threat and knowledge of a "higher intelligence" or "a hidden/unkown consciousness" do not. I wonder if the latter is also true between humans, and I suspect it is not...
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Sy Borg »

LuckyR wrote:I don't see it as a balance. To me, if I help someone or something out, be it a homeless person or an animal, sure they get some help, but I am the big winner, that feeling of gratification (let alone the concept of karma) is my pay off, so it may as well be described as a "selfish" act geared towards "self-preservation".
Then again, you could exploit them and gain more benefit. You might save your time and money and support political parties that strips rights and benefits from the underprivileged which superficially acts to improve others' financial positions. You might save your time and energy with the nonhuman animal and eat it, or perhaps you might sell it so its body parts can be used as a placebo for superstitious Chinese men with erectile dysfunction.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
Wilson
Posts: 1500
Joined: December 22nd, 2013, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eric Hoffer
Location: California, US

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Wilson »

Logic_ill wrote: "Remember, evolution favors those qualities that help a species to survive and reproduce AT THE TIME WHEN CHANGES ARE TAKING PLACE. Evolution doesn't care about later on. Now if there were a God, he would have seen the future and would have designed us better for survival at this point".

It's interesting that you mention this, Wilson. A person who studies evolution should be interested in the role of consciousness. Part of the reason I mentioned I was puzzled at the design that doesn't seem to favour survival was because as a "knowledgeable" being, I get to see or understand how instincts do not seem to work in favour of all organisms. I get to apply human logic to all these behaviours, that of other animals, and our own. My human consciousness seems to work better at this point, than evolutionary mechanisms. I do believe, however, that we (humans) are still in a process of learning how to use our consciousness too, and we still have to deal with our instincts. But I get what you're saying with what seems to be one of evolution's major strategies: reproduction. However, it did also produce and reproduce consciousness (as we know it).

The thing that strikes me the most is how what seems to be evolutionary mechanisms (epigenetics) in feral pigs are only brought about by abrupt changes or immediate dangers that the feral pigs sense. These mechanisms are not triggered or don't seem to be triggered upon the dangers of a higher consciousness. Immediate sensory knowledge of danger can cause physical changes in a short term, but the threat and knowledge of a "higher intelligence" or "a hidden/unkown consciousness" do not. I wonder if the latter is also true between humans, and I suspect it is not...
I'm not quite following. Are you saying that some of the adaptive characteristics of various animals, including us, don't appear to make sense? Or that it's hard to see how consciousness would have developed, since it doesn't resolve an immediate threat? Happy to discuss it further if you'll clarify.
Logic_ill
Posts: 1624
Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Logic_ill »

Wilson, Yes, I am in a certain sense saying that our designs do not make sense, or do not seem to be entirely conducive to survival, especially "quality living". The most evident piece of a survival strategy is replication/reproduction. There may be too much unnecessary inter-species competition, though. ¨Perhaps it is to perpetuate certain genes but that will very much depend on how adaptable they are to environmental conditions. As you mentioned earlier, evolution does not know future conditions, life simply adapts or dies.

Then, there's the matter of consciousness, which in many species responds to immediate threats, but not to the knowledge of possible future threats, although some species other than human do. For example, some adult animal species have experience with their predators and seem to intuit possible future dangers, even if the risk is not imminent. They are able to plan an escape. Anyhow, consciousness resolves long term threats for humans too. Perhaps changes at the cognitive level and other changes take place in response to these dangers, as opposed to animal vs. human. The former do not seem to respond adequately to human intelligence or to future bad intentions.

Which brings childhood cognitive development into question. An adult is usually much more intelligent or experienced/knowledgeable than the younger, even than the younger childbearing ones. If consciousness plays an evolutionary role, why is it that the older, perhaps less fertile. have the cognitive advantage? The young will have too much to learn, in order to catch up with the adult. The reason why I ask this question is because it is in line with the idea stated earlier. The idea that the higher the intelligence, the higher the threat posed. But if the adults, less fertile ones are the more knowledgeable, what advantage could consciousness give to the childbearing? I suppose that will vary by the circumstances or conditions. While intelligence or knowledge can help adults find solutions to possible future dangers, if they fail to guard off the dangers, their bodies might let out. The younger may be able to adapt or survive better through the physical environmental changes. (bad climate, lack of food, water, shelter, etc.) Well, the thing is that human consciousness is not as developed in children or adolescents, as in adults.

Overall, I'm simply exploring the role of consciousness in evolution. I do not necessarily believe in a designer, but the development of life and its different forms, especially species behaviours seem flawed. This lack of rationality apparent in many living beings makes me believe so. It's funny how humans who are themselves products of evolution get to realize this. But I suppose a biologist simply views life as it was/is, not as it should be. It makes a person think that it was a chance happening. :)
Wilson
Posts: 1500
Joined: December 22nd, 2013, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eric Hoffer
Location: California, US

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Wilson »

Intelligence and problem solving ability aren't in the human brain at birth. The capacity for developing intelligence is there, but not the specifics. Implanting specific instructions in the form of instincts was not the strategy of evolution for humans as it was for say insects. Somehow certain animal species developed the ability to learn new ways of dealing with the environment, and humans adopted that strategy from their ancestors, and with larger brains became more intelligent. So I think that the ability to learn more and more complicated things was what made us ultimately more intelligent than other animals.

Because our brains took longer to reach their potential, due to the fact that the process took time and experience, we get better at problem solving and common sense over time. In some ways we are smartest before 20, in terms of quickness and creativity, though our judgment takes longer to mature. Most of the great scientists did their best work before 30. So from the standpoint of evolution (and I speak of evolution as if it's an intelligent creator, even though it's an impersonal natural process) it wasn't that it wanted older people to be the smartest humans, it's just that the process took time.

And since children aren't smart (and strong) enough to take care of themselves, evolution made us social creatures who empathize with each other, and the adults take care of the youngsters until they can take care of themselves. And because teenagers lack good judgment, for the most part, in most cultures they are under the partial control of adults.

We may be getting a little off track here. Intelligence isn't exactly consciousness, to my way of thinking.

If you have another example of an evolved trait that doesn't make sense, we can try to figure out what advantage it might have had originally.

Of course there are some characteristics that probably came about by chance rather than offering survival advantages.
Logic_ill
Posts: 1624
Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Logic_ill »

I dont know whether the traits some species possess have evolved or not, but some instincts give rise to "unnecessary" behaviors"". How is it to a species advantage to be so aggressive with one another? It might work to an individuals advantage within a group, but not to the group itself, especially when the reasons behind the aggressive behavior seem pointless. There are what may seem other strange behaviors within the animal kingdom, but all we do is describe these behaviors, not suggest anything different. Nature is the way it is, but some of it seems flawed. It doesn't cease to amaze me, even though some aspects do not look like "quality living". It's all a huge mystery, simply because we are a product of evolution ourselves and get to reflect on this.

-- Updated September 7th, 2015, 11:28 pm to add the following --

I actually got these ideas from an earlier thread on predation. In some ways humans view life as flawed, but they may be be due to are inability to understand. Too many species who don't die off can cause problems.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Sy Borg »

Logic_ill wrote:I dont know whether the traits some species possess have evolved or not, but some instincts give rise to "unnecessary" behaviors"". How is it to a species advantage to be so aggressive with one another? It might work to an individuals advantage within a group, but not to the group itself, especially when the reasons behind the aggressive behavior seem pointless.
This comes down to game theory and evolution, kin selection and group selection. There is competition between groups and competition between individuals within those groups. A group with a high level of cooperation and low levels of internal competition will tend to out-compete a less cohesive group with more internal competition. Even though the more internally competitive group may produce more robust individuals, their lack of teamwork in challenging times will result in them tending to be less successful than more coordinated groups. Note: "tending to be less successful" as opposed to "are less successful". The smallest of subtleties can play out profoundly over very long time scales.

It's ultimately a tension between individual and the collective - systems within larger systems, each with their own agenda. It plays out in every sphere of existence. At present human systems are outcompeting those of other large animals with inevitable results. This is breaking down balanced ecosystems that developed over millennia. If humanity does not want to operate like a virus or cancer then it won't only break down the larger systems but will replace them with different systems that are capable of their own sustainability.

IMO if we are to replace evolved systems with technological ones, and if we wish to claim that our system represents an advance on "brute nature", then we will aim to minimise animal suffering along the way.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
Wilson
Posts: 1500
Joined: December 22nd, 2013, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eric Hoffer
Location: California, US

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Wilson »

I agree with Greta. We evolved to divide the world into "us" and "them", and during hunter-gatherer days "them" was other groups, and "us" was one's own group. So aggressiveness and hostility toward some, and cooperation with and sympathy for some would promote a group's survival and prosperity. Plus cooperation within one's group was beneficial to the survival of the group, but selfishness within the group was also beneficial for the survival of the individual. Evolution had to do a tricky dance in selecting those qualities that promoted survival. We are not programmed to operate by instinct but by what our personalities direct us to do in individual situations. So some behaviors by individuals may be counterproductive but overall those personality traits in the species were beneficial.
Logic_ill
Posts: 1624
Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Logic_ill »

Aggression in my view is a way of getting rid of some and a form of protection for others, whoever happens to be fortunate for whateve reasons. It may be nature's way of keeping a balance for the living. But human aggression coupled with its consciousness can and has, in many cases, removed itself from instinctive aggression to more subtle and perhaps sometimes more dangerous ones, for what it believes to be future security or assurance. The problem is that human consciousness is not too rational either because of the narrow mindedness of the individual(s), or more likely because it cannot predict the future. It may try to protect itself through acts of aggression, due to future possible attempts against what it deems, its protection and security. On the other hand, some people are simply irrationally violent or happened to have a violent outburst. The only purpose I see it serves is in keeping that impersonal balance for the living, even though the consciousness of the living will or do intervene with future "unfair" violent outbursts, in the forms of laws, planning, social conditioning, etc.

Human beings are able to observe, change or modify according to what they deem fair, although what they deem fair may be relative to the individuals involved or could be completely irrational. All in all, we are always victims to the assurance of death and aggression is one of nature's mechanisms for both protection and the possibility of death. Human consciousness may try to guard it off or postpone it as a result of its knowledge (faulty or good) and that may be part of its role. That is, if it wants to.

It is probably our slightly developed consciousness as individuals in a group that has allowed for more group cooperation or better cooperation. Aggression may be used both as a strategy for survival and death. That may account for instances of suicide, although the suicidal are not always aggressive against self. I mean other emotions may be involved.

Of course, I'm just speculating...:)
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Sy Borg »

The aggression is a hangover of our evolution. Only 10,000 years ago we started to settle down and 7,000 years ago there was organised agriculture. We were mostly pretty wild and vicious just a couple of hundred years ago. In evolutionary time all this is no time at all. I find it more surprising that humans have civilised to the degree they have in such a short time, somehow sublimating our deep-seated competitive and aggressive instincts to a fair degree. In time, I expect that increasingly efficient, measured strategic action will replace fear and aggression.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated—Gandhi.
Logic_ill
Posts: 1624
Joined: August 21st, 2012, 7:26 pm

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by Logic_ill »

If by measured and strategic action you mean wars, that's still an organized type of aggression. It is a highly dangerous and very unfair type too. If you mean social conditioning, education, better living conditions for all, maybe fear and aggression can slowly subside on average. Even so, I still see plenty of it today, and observe too many people nourishing them. I also think it's done for the wrong reasons.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: How humans relate to other species

Post by LuckyR »

Evolutionary forces as relates to human existence has essentially been supplanted by technology. Currently a timid intellectual man can have as many children as an aggressive brute can. He probably won't but his chances are much, much better than they were on the savannas of Africa 10,000 years ago.

Currently aggressive behavior is learned de novo based on current responses to aggression, which of course varies dramatically from society to society. Thus the violence differential between neighborhoods and countries.
"As usual... it depends."
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021