(March 15, 2015 at 9:04 am)Ignorant Wrote: As for 1), what exactly is "freedom" in the context of reduction of everything, including ourselves, to the material evolutionary process? In the Free Will thread it seems that you reject the idea of the "self". What then is it about the human animal that is capable of realizing any sort of "freedom"?

As for the last sentence, I agree, and I assume it is due in whole or in part to your reasons expressed in 1).

I view freedom as the unimpeded expression of will or character, which we don't choose (we aren't free to will what we don't will) but can certainly be subject to the same influences as anything else (actually in this case more---reason).

(March 15, 2015 at 4:01 am)Ignorant Wrote: This seems like an important aspect. Are humanity's social aspects reducible to evolutionary traits resulting from a deterministic (although random) process?

As with many human traits, it results from the interplay between nature and nurture. Both are deterministic, but the element of nurture is a contingent one, varying depending upon where and to whom you are born.

Ignorant: you're welcome It's nice to see a theist discussion which does not have a god appeal shoe horned into it.

Sure, some animal slavery isn't as bad as human slavery has been, but it's still slavery to me.

(March 15, 2015 at 4:01 am)Ignorant Wrote: Are humanity's social aspects reducible to evolutionary traits resulting from a deterministic (although random) process?

I don't really know, though what would be the alternative? Of course the social aspects would have enhanced survival and so be supported by evolution. But what of it? Does it make any difference?

Would/should one disregard felt values on account of how we theorize about them? We wouldn't deliberately choose a flavor of ice cream we like less over one we like more based on any theory.

The saying "the unexamined life is not worth living" is not equivalent to "the life in which rationality does not dictate every decision is not worth living". I think I prefer "the unobtrusively examined life is not worth living", although I kind of suspect life is plenty worth living with or with out any examination at all.

---

(March 15, 2015 at 6:40 am)Ignorant Wrote: On what basis then, is there a "moral" distinction between owning animals for the sake of work (e.g. dogs, horses, oxen, cattle, etc.) and owning humans for the sake of work?

Before I answer, are you any good with a shovel or at pulling weeds?

---

(March 15, 2015 at 11:10 am)robvalue Wrote: Sure, some animal slavery isn't as bad as human slavery has been, but it's still slavery to me.

So I guess that would explain why the caged bird sings and why the kept dog enjoys having her belly rubbed.

My dog and I have a reciprocal relationship in that I try to train her and she does her best to train me too. Of course there are aspects of our relationship which are not 'level'. For example I prepare her meals and bag her shit while she accomplishes no useful work at all.

I don't call having a pet slavery, that's entirely different. We have pets and our lives revolve around making them happy

Assuming you look after them properly, that's more akin to adopting.

Or perhaps even willingly enslaving yourself to their well being.

That is pretty much what we've done

I'd rather go hungry myself than see my pets go hungry. I spend most of my day pandering to their whimsies We just finished building a shed in the garden for the bunnies to have a nicer indoor environment, and tubes for them to play in! They are very happy, we love watching them "binky" round the garden.

But enough about me and my masters

(March 15, 2015 at 2:38 pm)Jenny A Wrote:

(March 14, 2015 at 2:55 pm)Ignorant Wrote: I just wanted to know more about what your definition of human is. If someone asked you what it "meant" to be human, what would you tell them?

But consider this, do you think there is another species that ponders the question what is it to be us?

I would also like to know how the person asking the question answers it himself. In particular, I'm interested to know whether your answer is drawn from personal reflection or taken whole cloth from authoritative sources.

(March 15, 2015 at 1:06 pm)robvalue Wrote: I don't call having a pet slavery, that's entirely different. We have pets and our lives revolve around making them happy

Assuming you look after them properly, that's more akin to adopting.

-go ahead and tell yourself that, lol. See if it works with buying me, an adult human male. If you bought me, and your life revolved around "making me happy" - a generous assumption in the case of a pet, let alone a human being...would that be adoption or slavery?