Seems to me that those who don't feel safe will not speak up against authoritarianism and fascism because of this very concern or else fear. Whereas those who don't see any problems with authoritarianism and fascism - maybe due to believing these to work in their favor - will not have any reason to speak up against them. — javra

Thank you. Firing people for saying something that is not liked seems the most threatening thing that can happen to our democracy. It was how Hitler and the fascists gained unstopable control of the masses. Only those loyal to Hitler and fascism got jobs. People who were not in agreement with fascism and Hitler didn't dare speak of their opposing views. Jews didn't dare make it known they were Jews because they would lose everything, including their lives. ID cards were essential for any rights or privileges. AI says this; "During WWII, German membership in organizations like the Wehrmacht (military) and the SS (elite paramilitary organization) was essential for the Nazi regime's military and ideological goals, including rearmament, expansion, and the enforcement of racial policies." (how different is our present treatment of immigrants even when the have green cards, and people with different sexual notions than the label on their birth certificate?)

The problem was well documented in the book "the NAZI Officer's Wife; How One Jewish woman Survived the Holocaust by Edith Hahn Beer with Susan Dworkin.

When I was a child, my family talked about how this use of ID cards was what happened in evil Europe, as though such a thing would never happen in the US. Well, today we can be denied flights unless we have special ID's that provide far more information than successfully passing the driver's test. When the school told us to inspect our homes for fire hazards and report to the school, my parents became unglued! Germans reported their families and neighbors, not US citizens, but today not only are some states encouraging reporting people to authority, they encourage reporting their families and neighbors to authority and the state even pay the snitch. These are good Christians who forgot Jesus stood against reporting people to authority.

What is happening did not start with Trump, and we might look behind the curtain to see what is really going on and who is in control.

Back to the question of this thread: Could we function without consciousness? Machines function without consciousness, and animals are preprogrammed, so they can function without consciousness.

Going with the reading about thinking that I have done, we mostly operate without thinking, and we run on automatic. We drive best and dance best when we can do these things without thinking. We might even write better without being aware of why we think as we do. Great inventions have been the result of intuition or a dream.

When we do think, there is no assurance we are doing that well and with the correct information. Our decisions may be based on childhood memories of which we are not aware. Discussing our childhoods with a brother or sister may result in very different stories that do not agree. We are conscious only of our own point of view, and learning of our past by accepting someone's story is as legitimate as ours, may be life-changing.

I realized that, but since you mentioned it again, I wonder, was it easier for you to do such work when you were younger or do you feel your years have improved your thinking? I miss the energy I once had but think I am developing a better understand of meaning. I just don't have the energy for all the work you did. I wish we lived at least 300 years with a constant feeling of energy. I think we could come up with some awesome thinking.

Hello, I am extremely worried about human civilisation collapsing, with the current world leaders we have. I have been depressed about it since November and December. At first, I was it was affecting my mental health and I dreamt of the end of civilisation a couple of months ago. Then, I got ill physically and have ended up in hospital with a chest infection, on oxygen. I also still feel worried about civilisation collapsing, while lying in hospital.

If I do write an essay for this, I think, it may be hard to formulate this topic into a clear philosophy argument, as I saw by the response by RussellA. Part of the difficulty is translating experience, the anecdotal and intuition into the formula of philosophy arguments. This may be the biggest challenge of the competition, as opposed to literary writing in creative writing activities. — Jack Cummins

To me, you are totally awesome because you trigger so many thoughts in my head. Your thinking and my thinking go together like a left and right hand.

If philosophy is good for anything, it is good for dealing with life. You are not the only one dangerous effect by what is happening in the world today. Trust me, I have been awake in the middle of the night because of some darn thing I saw in the news. Those of us who are so affected by what is going on are doing good because at least we not committing senseless murders or mass murders. I can so empathize with the desperation of those people who need to effectively turn things around, so they behave rashly instead of rationally. I am keeping my fingers crossed that my cold is not turning into pneumonia, but seriously, we can not be the only ones affected by the stress of the day

So, what can philosophy do for us now? There have been really bad times in history, and surely some people here can bring that past into the present with the wisdom of philosophers. Socrates gave his life to defend freedom of speech and democracy as he understood it. Back in the day, there was serious conflict about teaching rhetoric versus the higher thinking of philosophy. Asian philosophers have given us much to think about in developing ourselves into better human beings. I think we can make a difference if we work together and build a shared understanding of how philosophy can get people through hard times.

The good thing about a philosophical essay is that the author needs to defend their thesis using a clear and well structured argument, critically analyse the evidence and show that their premises are true and that their argument is valid. — RussellA

:lol: I don't think that is a discussion for this thread. I just wanted to explain that my mind has been highjacked by current events. I have some difficult choices. What I want to talk about is best in a political forum, but the folks in that forum are emotional reactors, not intellectual thinkers. That puts me in this forum, and the issue of elitism was brought up. That is a hot cultural/political issue right now but it isn't exactly philosophical. I am just not in the mood for talking about love.

I have a problem with philosophy. It is a great source for some important thinking about life and everything else, but it can be way out there in la-la land and not of practical or useful. Philosophical elitism is more like a dog show where unimportant things really matter, instead of judging the value of a working dog. Thinking of the best way to talk about love and meet the standards of a good argument is like caring if a dog exactly matches the features of its breed when the building is burning down. I may be wrong, but I think we could use philosophy for more important things than being in the best form.

Yes, a critique of academic elitism may be worth exploring. I am not sure whether I feel up to it, but you never know and, maybe, someone will. — Jack Cummins

Jack, you know you are one of my favorite people, but civilization as we know it may collapse. In the US, rule by law has crumbled, and many of its highest order to citizens are quaking in fear. I am sitting here in total horror of universities giving in to Trump instead of uniting and opposing his power over reach. Our reaction to 911 led to fascist overreach and asking libraries to keep information about patrons and make this information available to the like of the CIA. There has been a deep and fundamental change in the US citizenry, and focusing on "love" may lead us in the wrong direction. This is not the time for escapism!

However, academic elitism and the meaning of being self-governing with protected human rights and duties has substance. The new thread of consciousness is excellent for thinking about what we think and why we think it.

I have heard of animals saving humans from serious danger because the animal is aware of things that do not register in the human experience. Such as a deer blocking a road and doing its best to prevent humans from moving forward. Those humans who obey the animals' warning survive, and those who do not die because the animal is aware of a landslide about to happen, or earthquake, or a tidal wave.

The more dependent we are on modern thinking, the less sensitive to nature we can be. A low IQ person can be more perceptive than a high IQ person. For example, I was visiting a nursing home with a low IQ friend. On our way out, it was obvious we had to have a code to open the gate. I began to turn to get the code, while my friend reached through the gate and opened it from the outside. That is an example of civilization making us stupid as we stumble through life thinking too much and not getting desired results. :lol:

That was a lot of work defining different aspects of consciousness. A neighbor had a sign on her door that said "Just because you thinking it, it doesn't make it so." Especially
Daniel Kahneman is well known for writing a book about why our judgment can be so bad.

This quest to understand how we think is very old, and two of my favorites are William James and John Dewey, who are known for their books and leadership in education. We changed how we teach children to think in 1958 with the National Defense Education Act, and now Chris Hedges's book "EMPIRE OF ILLUSION- THE END OF LITERACY AND THE TRIUMPH OF SPECTACLE" explains why Hitler and Trump are so popular.

There can hardly be a more complex subject than human thinking and control.

Your self-awareness and monologue may be the strongest barriers to your consciousness. Buddhists strive a achieve a very different consciousness. Imagine your thinking with no biases limiting your awareness. Through meditation, you can liberate your mind and gain a higher level of consciousness.
But most of us prefer to busy ourselves with interesting distractions, and we don't want to put in the effort to become enlightened.

If you want to know more google for a set of 14 disc titled "the SCIENCE of ENLIGHTENMENT- Teachings & Meditations for Awakening Through Self-Investigation" by Shinzen Young. After listening to about 4 discs, I lost interest and went on to something else. I am more attracted to economic, political, and cultural matters. I flunk Buddhism. My brain is like a chattering monkey that never shuts up.

https://www.pbs.org/video/exclusive-how-fascism-works-author-jason-stanley-plans-to-leave-the-us-eimxcb/

Here is an interview with Professor Jason Stanly. author of How Fascism Works.

What do you mean by "we are spiritual beings in a spiritual reality"? — Truth Seeker

Sorry for taking so long to reply. How I understand spiritual matters is in part is about understanding the Eygptians had a trinity of the soul. The first part of the trinity dies with the body. The second part of the trinity is judged and may or may not enter the good life in a heaven like place. The third part of the trinity always returns to the universal spirit. Like we are part of this dough separated like a biscut, and return to the spiritual dough we are made of. Christians separated us from this trinity and made the trinity, God, son, holy ghost. Making us mud that breaths, but not one with the spiritual reality of all living things.

Hum, that brings us an interesting question. As mud that breathes, how or what is all that sinfulness of humans? It is not the nature of mud to be sinful so what is it that makes us sinful? Why in heck are well-loved people so devoid of sin, and those born to suffer, prone to cruelness/sin? Like, :chin: can science give us a better understanding of our nature?

Is there a Christian who can give us a better understanding of sin?

I don't think we can change the past but we can change our interpretation of the past. Our wishes might change after a major event causes us to reflect on them.

Our survival depends on how well we work together. Donating our energy, money, and even our blood is vital to a healthy society. Women were socialized to care for everyone, the young, old, and sick without charging for it. Men also give of themselves, such as getting a neighbor's car running without charging for it. This is not only the morally right thing to do, but one of the best ways to increase our happiness is to do something for others. But some people have no understanding of that. As life events change them they may wish they had done things differently.

Back to the OP, I think if there never was Judaism, Christianity, Islam or any other religion that makes God external, making us human beings instead of spiritual beings. What if we all believed we are spiritual beings in a spiritual reality?

At the moment, I have moved on to the Mayan belief system and need to start a thread for that. Then write myself a note so I don't forget I started a thread.

The Mayan rationale is soooo different from our Greek/Roman rationale. If human beings can have very different rational systems, we have to question what rational thinking is.

Christians moving their rationale into China is perhaps more disruptive than a causal judgment might understand. We take our calendar and mode of thinking for granted. But this is a different subject from comparing how our minds work with how animals' brains work.

What is behind Trump's success is the Christian mythology of the westward movement being the will of God and churches believing Trump is God's chosen leader.

If you are interested, this book explains it..
Western Places, American Myths: How We Think About The West (Wilbur S. Shepperson Series in History And Humanities)

Did you notice when Trump took the oath he did not touch the Bible? He is not a man of God but maybe the Anti-Christ. Christians want to believe he is God's chosen leader, and that the whole earth will come under the more direct control of Jesus and his chosen people.

During the Iraq invasion, Billy Graham did a Christmas show telling parents God wanted them to send their sons and daughters into that war. Reading "Western Places, American Myths; How We Think About The West" makes that more understandable. At this time in history, the Christian Mythology and economic interests of the US share the same goals. This is as good for the world, as the westward movement was good for Native Americans and then the Chinese and the rest of the East.

Interesting that Satan is tied to a lie and the snake and humans wanting more than God wants them to have, and today our leader may be the Anti-Christ promising more than our fair share. Can you see Jesus on the mount telling his people how much more they can have if they follow him?

I appreciate everything you said. I am reading a book about the Christian mythology of being God's chosen people and what this has to do with the westward movement and assuming China would improve as Christian missionaries spread Christianity through China. The explanation of our entrance into China and how we screwed that up is interesting, and the screwup was due to the Christian delusion that is also the Trump delusion of power.

I think that's a bit harsh. I would say that humans are a mixture of rationality and irrationality, just like other animals. But their capacity to harm the world around them is greater than animals, so their irrationality is more damaging than the irrationality of other animals. — Ludwig V

Trump has announced he would use military force to take control of Greenland and the Panama Canal.
This is not any worse than the Neo-Cons and invading Iraq and Afghanistan. However, Christians got this man into office and it is Christian mythology that a god favors the US and that is irrational thinking based on a false belief. No animal could sin more than the human one. Our belief in the Biblical god is a curse.

Your argument, 'honest awareness of war can end war' is important to consider. That is because it is the devastating consequences of war which lead to it being stopped. If those engaged in it do not reflect it can be continued mindlessly. Ideas of patriotism and fighting for entitlement may blind people to be the suffering involved physically and psychologically. — Jack Cummins

I am horrified by Trump's announcement that he intends to take Greenland and Panama Canale and will use military force if need be. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/07/trump-panama-canal-greenland

It is paramount right now that we mobilize an anti-war movement!

Americans are perhaps the stupidest people on earth because they ignore things like what the National Defense Education Act did to the culture of the US. They ignored the Neo-Cons who used our military to take military control of the Middle East.

To be honest, Americans live a Christian Myth of their special relationship with God and their wonderful Christian nation and they do see the warmongering until they are embedded in war, and even then, they can be in war and because it does not disturb their morning coffee, they can ignore the warmongering of their nation and see themselves as the savior of the world.

War is then natural, man being by nature a warmaker — Jack Cummins

I chose this sentence because of the last two terrorist attacks in the US. Both men served in the armed forces when the US was taking military action in Afghanistan. It is believed post trauma syndrome played a part in these men taking such violent action. In the past it seems we ignored what war was doing to those who fought in them, but today we are aware of how war can affect a person and especially our long wars are not human nature. Human nature demands a break from war and possibly years of counseling.

We talk less about war does to civilians and children. We don't want to think about the children and raped women so we don't. The media covered the Vietnam War on the front lines and in no time war protest were everywhere and the US participation in the war came to an end. It is our nature to be horrified by acts of war and I know I am not the only one who has stopped watching the news because of the repeated scenes of war.

I believe honest awareness of war can end war.

That's a big, even central, issue about language. For example, there is some sense in saying that if my dog's name is Eddy, "Eddy" stands in as proxy for the dog. But I don't think it helps to insist that "1" stands in as proxy for the number 1 or "Pegasus" as proxy for Pegasus. The philosophical issue of nominlaism vs realism as an account of universals (abstractions) is precisely about this. — Ludwig V

Wow, you used a word I never came across before and did not know the meaning. Without the knowledge I could not understand what you said so I looked it up...

nominlaism- the doctrine that universals or general ideas are mere names without any corresponding reality, and that only particular objects exist; properties, numbers, and sets are thought of as merely features of the way of considering the things that exist. Important in medieval scholastic thought, nominalism is associated particularly with William of Occam. Oxford Languages

That is the perfect word for what I think is important to this thread. Humans behave as though their thoughts are accurate, concrete information when the thought is not reality. Making humans the most irrational animals.

Yes. That's part of it. There's also the transition between. There are also different kinds of languages consisting of different kinds of meaningful behaviours, marks, utterances, etc.

Indeed, what counts as language matters in more than one way. — creativesoul

How about smells? That is one of the major elements of communication. I think I smell a god. Well, maybe that doesn't work. However, we can believe someone will be a good mate because of how that person smells.

The theory is that individuals are subconsciously attracted to the body odors of potential partners with dissimilar MHC genes. This preference is believed to be detected through scent, which serves as a cue for genetic compatibility.
https://myotape.com/blogs/articles/the-intriguing-science-behind-smell-and-partner-choice#:~:text=The%20theory%20is%20that%20individuals,related%20odors%20influence%20mate%20choice.

Perhaps what is going on in our subconscious also counts and is closer to animal thinking with messages that mean something but have no language for rational thinking. Just a smell and a reaction.
Or a movement and shooting in fear without thinking, thereby killing one's son. The book Emotional Intelligence uses a story of a man killing his son, as an example of our reaction system that does not involve thinking.

Knowing where to get food is not the same as knowing that one's own belief is false.

The claim was that walking away from an empty food bowl counts as recognition that the prior belief(that the bowl had food in it) was false.

What is involved in the process of recognizing that one's own belief about whether or not there is food in the bowl is false? It requires drawing a distinction between one's own belief and what the belief is about. This process, at a bare minimum, requires thinking about one's own belief as a subject matter in and of itself, which in turn requires a way to do so. We do that with words, which stand in as proxy, for the belief. How can an animal without naming and descriptive practices invent/create a meaningful utterance which stands in place of its own belief? That must be done prior to comparing that belief to the world. It is only via such a comparison that one can recognize that their own belief is either true or false. — creativesoul

I do not understand why you made that argument. An expectation is not the same as a belief. An expectation is thinking with the gut (feeling) not the brain (language).

I find it curious that you agree and then immediately misattribute meaning to the dog, based upon the dog's behaviour. Your dog's walking away from an empty food bowl may count as a recognition that it's
belief was false according to your criterion for what counts as such belief, but not mine. — creativesoul

I think @Ludwig V is right because the dog remembers the bowl is where it found food, but that memory is not equal to believing food magically appears in the bowl. We are discussing the difference between living with language and without language. It seems impossible for me to think like an animal because every thought in my head is words, words, words. I make myself crazy with constant words, a lot of mind chatter that prevents me from directly experiencing life.

No-one seems to recognize that punishment only works if the person being punished takes it the right way. — Ludwig V

Perhaps even thinking punishment is a teaching skill is a mistake. Our culture is based on having a jealous, revengeful, and punishing god. Imagine beginning with having a creator who loves us. I know Christians have come around to Jesus loving us, but that has not changed the effect of believing in a punishing god. May I say here, that animals just do not make up stories and revolve around what those stories tell them of life.

Our instincts are mediated through the social and practical rules that we have learnt, — Ludwig V

You are absolutely right and while animals fight for territory we fight for an imaginary god who favors us. That is rational thinking that might be improved with an understanding facts and how we determine if a fact is true or false. And this why this forum is essential. We do more thinking than other animals. My argument hangs on language being essential to rational thinking.

e can explain the instincts as rational, not from the point of view of the animal, but from the point of view of the evolutionary pressure to survive and reproduce. — Ludwig V

This is my favorite explanation of what you said...

That is probably the biggest difficulty. I have some ideas about how to respond to it, but will have to try to articulate them later. — Ludwig V

Thank you so much for your good social and thinking skills. In a completely different forum things do not go so well as people (mostly males) compete to prove they are right and those who don't agree are idiots. Their approach prevents thinking because they put people on the defensive. Again and again I have experienced it is futile to have enjoyable discussions with poorly informed people. They think they are being rational, but because they don't know enough, how do I say? The discussion just can not past what they do not know and will consider.

Oh my goodness, I see sunlight and blue sky. :grin: It has been so long since we have had sunlight and a blue sky I am giddy. I want to run outside and enjoy this before the clouds cover it up again.

He also needs to understand that (2) if he does not kill chickens, Janus wll not be displeased with him. — Ludwig V

That is such a wonderful thought! A woman in Canada developed a method for teaching virtues that can be used in schools or by families. She is very clear that it is not enough to punish a child for doing wrong. The child must learn what is the right way to do things. I feel so much pain for all the children who are punished again and again and don't just magically realize how to avoid punishment. I have seen parents and schools fail to teach what is right.

That's very helpful. It clarifies what you meant when you said that all belief and thought consists of correlations. — Ludwig V

Creatures are capable of those things. If logical/valid conclusions contradict that, then the presuppositions/unspoken assumptions underwriting that train of thought are somehow mistaken. — creativesoul

Those last two quotes go together but I am a bit overwhelmed by all the thinking that has gone on while I was gone. What are the correlations? Is the argument that animals without language are rational thinkers? Hum, :chin: I am thinking what would motivate me to go out in the old? I am thinking I would like myself a whole lot better if acted on the notion I should check on a neighbor and telling you about this increases my motivation to do the right thing. Are those thoughts the correlations?

Herewith my last post on the opening question
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=are+crows+smarter+than+your+seven-year-old — Vera Mont

That was fascinating!

I want to refer back to a book about math that I am reading because it really made me think about thinking math. What is thinking math?

Thinking 1, 2, 3, and 35 is a language skill. Looking at a plate of cookies and determining which one has the most cookies is not a language skill. A person can count all the cookies on all the plates and use math to determine which plate has the most cookies, but we can also judge which plate has the most volume of cookies. Animals can do that without having the language for math.

Now when I multiply simple numbers like 2x2 or 7x8 I am thinking how I think. 2x2 is so easy but 7x8 is not. Why is it so much harder to figure 7x8? I am learning our ability to do math includes knowing the relationship of numbers. Animals don't have the language of math so they can not think through the relationships of numbers. Does anyone know what I am talking about or am I being too weird?

Please help. I am trying to understand animal thinking that is done without language, by being aware of my own thinking. besides thinking of math, I am also thinking I am depressed because the cold weather makes going outside so unpleasant and that can become isolating and how do I think through this problem instead of playing a computer game all-day to avoid life. :lol: I can think I really need to knock on a neighbor's door and be neighborly, but my body screams, no I don't want to go outside. Where is the rational thinking? My body does not want to go outside but my head knows better.

I don't think anyone seriously wants to reject the idea that the male bird of paradise builds his bower in order to attract a female. But creativesoul is also right to observe that that purpose is not necessarily the bird's motivation. We ought to know this, since the same issue can be observed in human beings. Display behaviour can be observed in both males and female human beings, but it does not follow that they are motivated by the desire to make babies (though they may be, sometimes). Human beings can tell us what their motivation is, but the birds cannot. It seems to me, in fact, most likely that the birds just feel like building a bower, finding it a satisfactory and worth-while thing to do - just as so much display behaviour in human beings is done only because they feel that it is a worth-while thing to do.
But there is no doubt that such behaviour serves an evolutionary purpose. What's more, it explains the behaviour as rational; "feeling like it" doesn't explain anything. — Ludwig V

I love the work everyone has put into posting and this one is very interesting.
When nature changes the hormones the behavior will change.

I strongly think many female humans are unaware of wanting a baby when they start putting on lipstick, and possibly dressing and otherwise using body language, to attract the opposite sex. They might even be really against getting pregnant.

What they want is to be attractive and human females can be as competitive about this as different species of males strut their feathers, or another species will beat their chests. :grin:

Perhaps we have not stressed hormones enough?

The sexual response cycle refers to the sequence of physical and emotional changes that occur as a person becomes sexually aroused and participates in sexually stimulating activities, including intercourse and masturbation. Knowing how your body responds during each phase of the cycle can enhance your relationship and help you pinpoint the cause of any sexual problems.
https://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/sexual-health-your-guide-to-sexual-response-cycle

Sexual behaviors occur when the animal has enough of the hormone that causes the animal to be sexual. Bonobos and Humans are the most sexual and are not as controlled as most animals that have very short periods of being sexually receptive.

If you are a farmer wanting to breed your animals you need to know estrus.

[/quote]or “heat” is a period during the
reproductive cycle when female animals
become sexually receptive, signaling they
are ready for mating. In most cases, this
can also be referred to as “standing heat”
because the female will stand to be mated
by the male (Figure 1).
Estrus is caused by estrogen being
produced within developing follicles on
the ovary, and ovulation usually occurs
after the initial signs of estrus are detected. Duration of estrus and the time
of ovulation in relationship to the onset
of estrus vary with the species (Table 1).
If behavioral or physical signs are not
obvious, estrus may even pass unnoticed.
Successful recognition of the signs of
estrus for mating, just prior to the time of
ovulation, can result in increased conception rates for the herd or flock.
https://www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/as/as-559-w.pdf [/quote]

My point is we need to stop thinking animals decide to things for a reason and thinking about how unreasonable humans are. :lol:

What messes with our thinking is that social rules add another dimension to sexual behaviors. :chin: We can question what rules are playing, the social or hormonal ones? To what degree is the animal controlled the social rules or the hormonal ones what what part of this is thinking?

Yeah, that sucks. That's never a good thing. Some people are incapable of calmly expressing themselves. The current state of American culture/politics is making things far worse. Complete and total disrespect for others is not only glorified, its financially rewarded.

You seem like a nice person. Hopefully your days improve. — creativesoul

Thanks as I said above, what I thought was almost too terrible to bear has turned into a good thing. However, I am still pondering what you have said about the spirit of our times and what is happening in families. I might want to transfer this to a thread about the fall of civilizations.

Look at what I found because the posts in this thread pushed me to understand more...

https://chimpsnw.org/2023/02/conflict-and-reconciliation-2/

But perhaps most importantly, I want to show you how they make up afterwards. Chimp societies wouldn’t hold together very long if the individuals within them didn’t have the capacity to reconcile, and that is the saving grace for both the chimpanzees themselves and our own ability to care for them. Because no matter how bad things get, they usually find a way to move forward together.

Thank you, thank you everyone! Sometimes I worry that this thread is getting too far from topic but then I see a possible connection and I am blown away by the expansion of my mind. This is why I come here.

Sorry about your Thanksgiving. Indeed, a lot of negative possibilities come along with our mental capacity. And the negative crap is, like Yoda said about the Dark Side, quicker, easier, more seductive. — Patterner

Thanks but the bad thing turned into a good thing. :grin: It seemed like an end-of-the-world event but now I see it as the beginning of wonderful new opportunities.

I was wondering how animals handle such events and decided their relationships change and their position in the troop can change, especially when they transition to adulthood.

Were you still speaking to me when you said this? — Patterner

I was just thinking out loud and reacting to what others have said, including someone in a completely different forum and a TV show about a Native American creation story. I may have an overactive mind.

My Thanksgiving blew up into an emotional drama and I feel very fragile this morning. I don't think animals come even close to the insanity of humans except maybe when a dog has rabbis. I think today I am holding a completely different perspective of humans. We have been arguing about humans being rational but they can also be completely irrational and destructive making the notion of being possessed by a demon seem plausible.

Let me rephrase. There is a significant difference between our species and every other species.

Bats are the only mammals that can fly. I'm not saying bats are not mammals. — Patterner

Amazing what a difference a word can make. I think we have an agreement.

The scientific name for modern humans is Homo sapiens.
Explanation: "Homo" refers to the genus "human" and "sapiens" means "wise" in Latin, so "Homo sapiens" translates to "wise man"

Homo (from Latin homō 'human') is a genus of great ape (family Hominidae) that emerged from the genus Australopithecus and encompasses only a single extant species, Homo sapiens (modern humans), along with a number of extinct species (collectively called archaic humans) classified as either ancestral or closely related to modern humans; these include Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis. The oldest member of the genus is Homo habilis, with records of just over 2 million years ago.[a] Homo, together with the genus Paranthropus, is probably most closely related to the species Australopithecus africanus within Australopithecus.[4] The closest living relatives of Homo are of the genus Pan (chimpanzees and bonobos), with the ancestors of Pan and Homo estimated to have diverged around 5.7-11 million years ago during the Late Miocene.[5]

I don't think that explanation comes up in any creation stories.

When other species have been in close contact with us for millennia, watching and hearing the things we do and how we do them, us attempting to teach them, what other explanation could there be? — Patterner

Baboons do not learn from chimpanzees. The baboon can see the chimpanzee stick a twig in a rotting log and get termits but it never attempts to do so. Interestingly, the female chimp learns a lot from her mother but male chimps are less likely to pay attention to what their mother is doing until they get older.

Here is a lecture on animals and social learning.

I'm just saying there is a significant difference between humans and animals. — Patterner

Most mammals don't fly but bats do fly. Would that difference mean a bat is not an animal? It appears you are saying humans are not animals. We have a larger cortex than other apes and vocal cords that apes do not have. We are different but how does that difference equal humans are not animals?

philosophers think that linguistic behaviour is, in some way that escapes me, something different from behaviour. I can't think why.
— Ludwig V

Might have something to do with the fact that not all behaviour involves using language. All linguistic behaviour does. — creativesoul

Thank you both of you. As I was working on my previous reply I started to wonder why I think language and thinking are so important. Humans can be incredibly destructive and that is far from being intelligent. Our creation story making us to be not animals but as angels made separate from the animals. ? What is that? Might that creation story be harmful?

I think we need to understand we are evolved as are the rest of the animals. Equally important is our heart. If our hearts are not in tune with nature might be an evil force on earth?

However, my speech acts are meaningful to myself and others (including my dog), so there may well be something to the comparison. — Ludwig V

I believe we share much in common with other animals because we are evolved animals. Aboriginal people around the world learned about life by studying animals. Life lessons came from the crow and the wolves. etc..

Wolves mean a lot to the Native American community and it is a dominant role in the Ojibwe tribe. In the Ojibwe tribe creation story, wolves are often described as family members to the tribe. Wolves were referred to as a brother or sister along with a perception that if whatever happens to the wolves, it will happen to one of the Ojibwe tribe, they also traveled the world together and spoke the same language.[4] They have a strong relationship tied with the wolves because wolves are a symbol of their culture and tradition. https://wildwisconsinwolves.omeka.net/natives#:~:text=In%20the%20Ojibwe%20tribe%20creation,and%20spoke%20the%20same%20language.

Could this be the simple basic building blocks of societal constructs such as language like ours? — Ludwig V

I will say "no." Sound is not the only way animals communicate. They also communicate with smells and behaviors. The reaction is as automatic as jumping when one hears a loud crashing sound. We would not have survived if we didn't react automatically to threats when a fast reaction is essential. However, unlike the dog, we are not going to continue barking and growling when we realize the mailman is not a threat. However, some humans do react by grabbing a gun and pulling the trigger and expect to be exonerated no matter who they shoot. The point is like animals we react without thinking and that is not equal to having language.

We slip into language when we start making pictures and then start telling stories with pictures. This is the development of conceptual thinking. True, there are some animals that paint pictures when given paint brushes and paint, but these pictures are splashes of color, not portraits of other animals and objects.

Animals may learn human language but it is not instinctive. However, I suspect if a group of bonobos learn a language and teach their children language, over many generations the ability to use language will either end or become part of their inborn abilities. Abilities can be passed on through parents and genes. We are on the same evolutionary branch as Chimpanzees and Bonobo and not all humans are like modern man but were more a transition from ape to human.

Which god are you talking about? I am cool with logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe, but I do not believe the god who walked with Adam and Eve in the Graden of Eden is believable.

I reread Orwell's '1984' recently and it does seem that what he spoke about has come true, almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy. But, what I find worse is that so many people don't seem bothered in the least, as if they find that 'Big Brother' is a protective force. Also, it seems that so many see AI as if it an all-wise benevolent system, like gods or God. — Jack Cummins

Without education for higher-order thinking skills, we are not exactly thinking. We are reacting to stimuli just as animals do. To rapidly advance technology, we gave up education for independent thinking and replaced it with memorization and proceeded to prepare our young for industry. An education that has very little to do with being humans.

Christianity teaches people to be dependent on God. How different is that from being dependent on AI?

Truth be told I was naive and ended up watching those fear-mongering videos about AI with clickbaity titles like 'Sam Altman predicts AGI by 2027' and "It's gotten a lot worse" etc, etc. Looking back, it was dumb to believe those sorts of things, but yet again, that was a new form of technology, at least to me. I know AI was developed way back in the 1960s or something, so it's not entirely brand new. But like, where does this technology keep going? They keep saying it will improve our lives, and lead us to an utopia, but I don't see that. It might be an utopia to them, but not to most of the population. — AlienVareient

In the US we fought the American Revolution against Britain's monarchy. Our Declaration of Independence could also be called a Declaration of Responsibility. The Enlightenment and improvements in math and science led people with means to believe we could create a better reality, and we have.

AI could not do what humans have done. But neither can the people educated for technology instead of having a liberal education. Without liberal education, we are lost and don't have a map for a better future, so we are willing to give up our individual power and liberty, to be ruled by AI. We are creating a robotic/mechanical nightmare that crushes individual power and liberty. I don't this will become a utopia.

From the standpoint of Buddhism, love would be the act of mindfulness—the inner peace and interconnectedness we reach when we momentarily touch Nirvana. In a more mundane sense, loving kindness in our thoughts, words, and deeds is a consequence of love. I would say it's not necessary to "know" the person or thing that receives love; simply being aware makes it possible to express and share this mind state. — Alonsoaceves

Sorry for the delay in replying. I recently attended a meeting where someone promoted using a psychedelic mushroom to release the fear of death, addictions, and depression. This would be guided in a clinical situation and it is very expensive. I would love to try it but I don't have that kind of money.

His explanation seemed similar to the Buddhist/Hindu releasing of ego and touch of Nirvana. I meditate and have had a transcendental experience of oneness. I think this has value but I am prejudiced in favor of family love. Family love involves a lot of ego, while Nirvana is a release of ego, right?

"Several years later"? Don't I wish! :rofl: I'm 60. — Patterner

You are still a kid. However, you are old enough to start experiencing some awesome mental activity! Our brains change as we age and it is not all bad. When we are young we learn facts but not so much their meaning. In our later years, thoughts start coming together and we get a greater sense of meaning. This is really cool especially when it involves family and a stronger feeling of meaning. I am good with my life coming to an end if I can pass some of the good stuff on to the young.