Comment by vor_
3 hours ago
> Blows my mind that so many people just have this hardened internalized idea that we're somehow significantly different than any other animal.
But we are significantly different, and there's always a danger of anthropomorphizing other species to explain behavior that we assume we understand because it reminds us of how we feel about things. That's why the paper calls for more study of "post-mortem attentive responses" in animal behavior to gain more insight into their cognitive capabilities.
So by your logic we should not treat humans with impaired cognitive abilities as equals?
In what context? If I need my appendix out, I'd really prefer a surgeon who got passing grades in med school.
That's a very selective interpretation of what GP said, in fact I don't see how you even got to that conclusion.
"We" as a species is a far different entity than any single individual who is temporarily or even permanently impaired. And GP didn't even mention such impairment.
Babies, the comatose, people currently asleep ... this one is something about universal human rights, a protection against anybody appointing themselves judge and trying to micromanage who is or isn't an equal, which only causes trouble.
Holy category error Batman!
Why do you put baby brain activity next inactive coma or sleep?
It sounds like, "Rocks, sand, turtles: these don't experience $things." I don't see why babies belong in your list as much as turtles don't belong in mine.
4 replies →
I'll take "jumping to conclusions" for 500, Alex!