linguist: language is what separates humans from animals
physicist: i think it's science which separates humans from animals
linguist: but lots of people don't do science. and anyway, how would people publish their research without language? language is a necessary precursor to science
physicist: i don't mean the specific ways that we do formal science and research, i mean more like how humans analyze their environment to learn, rather than relying on instinct
zoologist: well lots of animals are capable of curiosity and learning. some species are even known to make and use tools. and as for language, while no animal aside from humans has been known to be capable of the narrow linguistic definition of 'language', many of them are capable of quite advanced forms of communication, and really, it's pretty unfair to say that the communication methods that other animals use are 'lesser' just because they don't fit the human standard. if you tried to teach a human to use bee communication, they would probably struggle as well. in the end, i don't think that humans should be considered separate from animals
linguist: you make some interesting points, but i still think that human language is superior for communication compared to other forms of animal communication because human languages allow for infinite regresses of embedded metalanguages, which makes it possible to talk about any aspect of consensus reality, at least theoretically
physicist: your comparison with other animals lacks nuance. sure, there are animals aside from humans who are capable of reasoning and tool use, but humans are far cleverer and can create for more advanced tools than any other animal-
linguist (under her breath): because language allowed humans to pass on increasingly complicated information for how to create increasingly complex tools
physicist: -if you could show me an animal that was capable of advanced metallurgy or something of that ilk, then maybe i can believe that they're not so different from humans, but i don't think there is anything like that native to earth
zoologist: you're both biased because you're humans, and you want to have a rational reason to justify your instinctual feeling of kinship with other humans over other, non-human animals. yes, humans do have particularly good reasoning, tool use, and communication abilities, but even if humans are especially good at them, they're still all things that other animals do in a more general sense, so i still don't think that they should be sufficient for considering humans as separate from the rest of the animal kingdom
theologian: you're all talking around each other here. you all have different standards for what is and is not significant, so even if you can agree on the facts, you will never agree on the conclusions. but there is one thing that sets humans apart that none of you have considered: humans are separate because humans --unlike animals-- were given a higher purpose by god
physicist: wait, why did they bring a theologian on our mission to try to communicate with aliens? no offense, but i don't see how your field of knowledge will be relevant at all
titsay
baratheonpilled
romaincrisis
izzy806
kianamaiart
theartofmadeline
