Poll: Are we (people) animals?

Lets leave it to the Bloodhound gang:
(1670) DISCOVERY CHANNEL (lyrics) - YouTube

You’ve had enough of two hand touch
You want it rough, you’re out of bounds
I want to you smothered, want you covered
Like my waffle house, hash, browns

Comin’ quicker than Fed Ex
Never reaching apex like Coca Cola stock
You are inclined to make me rise an hour early
Just like daylight savings time

You and me baby, aint nothin but mammals
So lets do it like they do on the Discovery Channel
You and me baby, aint nothin but mammals
So lets do it like they do on the Discovery Channel

1 Like

are we?

Of course we are animals. We are just animals that have developed a very sophisticated level of culture, one that then make us much more capable of affecting our surroundings and of detailed communication with our fellows.

This communication includes abstraction and complex modeling, which then engenders things like religion, and selfishness, and a sense of specialness, that then allows some kinds of people to consider themselves above the other animals.

The Bible puts it well, in multiple instances where humans are 'told by God" that they have dominion over the birds and the bees.

and then that leads to stupid Cambridge dictionary definitions of the word that simply reposits the religious view of animals. the childish view of animals.

But we are not alone among the other animals in having things like tribes, warfare, language, communication, tool development and use, cultural differences between groups, centralised childcare, social hierarchy, group welfare, and even intelligence and self-awareness. just look at chimpanzees and gorillas, for example. it’s just a matter of degree that separates the various species from each other. any one claiming there is a hard cut-off line that suddenly makes humans not like other animals doesn’t know their ass from their elbow.


@Explant : you were being a little disingenuous there, only showing definition A1 of the entry in Cambridge. Definition B1 shows:

anything that lives and moves, including people, birds, etc.:

Humans, insects, reptiles, birds, and mammals are all animals.

But it is a view that still holds sway for cultural reasons, derived from a time before there was science that could prove otherwise, and before the decline of religion in people’s worldview.

and other languages are guilty of equally nonsensical linguistic hangovers, even though they are now aware of the facts of life. For example, in Japanese, and I guess to some extent, Chinese, pretty much everything that lives in the sea is considered a fish. Seaweed excepted.

You are right. I thought one terrible definition was enough. so heres the other :slight_smile:

Plants, animals.

Fungi, animals.

Haha. im just messing around pointing out how absurd that website is in its definitions. I was just shocked as i used to think Oxford was something of a well respected place of higher education. Normally we wouldnt expect such errors from that kind of place.

1 Like

I’d say so

Oxford is not Cambridge!

and the Cambridge Dictionary is aimed at a junior audience, lacking the gravitas and responsibility of the Oxford dictionary (which has set itself up as the true defender and final arbiter of the language).

Our ability to make plans and reason sets us apart.
But I feel it’s to our great folly that we ignore the biological and phycological realities, imagining that we are free of those constraints.

This is related to why i wanted to poll this. While living in Japan and ordering vegetarian, they would always give me seafood. i found that funny. I had to learn to tell them, no animals in my food haha, thankfully the kanje is close enough to mandarin. interestingly chains were easier and even mos burger can swap any burger to a veggie patty no problem. Wish taiwan, land of vegetarians, could do that. Thats besdies the point though.

I very much agree with your words on religious and cultural artifacts from more ignorant times hanging on till today. But i dont give universities that write dictionaries a pass…

Ahh damnit. I just saw that its Cambridge haha. thanks for pointing that out, what a dumb ass. Not sure how i got that wrong. off for some coffee and food now.

Edit. I feel guilty shitting on oxford instead of cambridge. Heee is oxfords main entries

It is 1.b type definitions i have serious issue with, hence the poll.

I am incredibly curious what justifies us not being animals, if not ego.

In Chinese animals mean any object that moves. So if an object moves, it’s an animal.

1 Like

Like a car.

1 Like

I have issues with that kind of definition as well. mainly, its a very dumb definition. However, in chinese language thats not really the case. If people from china think that, we have more to worry about than we thought.

動物定義 - Google Search

How about you spell out your definition / perspective of whatever you think is going on?

If it helps consider this:

Humans are animals and everything of lesser neurons by both count, and density are also animals.

Secondly, humans are “people”, and everything of lesser neurons by both count, and density are “animals”.

This doesn’t mean that “animals” cannot be respected by “people”, but it likely does mean that such respect cannot ever be symmetrically requited.

What else are you looking for?

I hear people say this about Chinese, that they think of animals as moving things, and then show examples of cruelty to animals in China.

I am here to read more perspectives. I am actually mostly interested in the reasobs people vited no as i truly do not understand the logic and want to know more. Otherwise, the conversation is good. Enjoy reading peoples perspectives.

@Taiwan_Luthiers like rickroll stated, like cars? I dont think any cultural Chinese norm is as simple as if it moves it is an animal hehe. They must have some more complexity to their thoughts.

If you put “people” in brackets in asking the question: Are we (people) animals? Then by definition we are people. No?

Are we human, or are we dancers?

Some voters clearly dont think so :slight_smile: people in brackets is to avoid confusion of the use of animal as an insult.

So you think people are animals?