RE: Confronting Friends and Family
November 14, 2012 at 3:48 pm
(This post was last modified: November 14, 2012 at 3:51 pm by Shell B.)
Viable is the wrong word.
It is not less anything, Hovik. It is meant to be used within the scope of your science. You realize that other scientists use a less exclusive definition? A biologist is much less likely to go all, "We're going to apply all of these criteria to language that only apply to humans, thus making it an exclusively human behavior." Animals communicate using sounds and gestures that are specific to their species' or even their own groups. That is good enough for me and quite a few others. By necessity, you have to make more of language than the average bear or you would be out an educational endeavor, would you not? Well, the truth of the matter is that a doctor may look at a liver and see all of the things it does and is made up of, while a layman looks at it and sees a bloody wad of tissue. Both are right.
How do you know that? That is my point and a number of other people's points. Can you understand monkey? I've always found that it takes quite a bit of hubris to assume human superiority in any endeavor. Frankly, you're the first atheist I have ever seen cough up this argument. I thought it was strictly a creationist boast.
It is not less anything, Hovik. It is meant to be used within the scope of your science. You realize that other scientists use a less exclusive definition? A biologist is much less likely to go all, "We're going to apply all of these criteria to language that only apply to humans, thus making it an exclusively human behavior." Animals communicate using sounds and gestures that are specific to their species' or even their own groups. That is good enough for me and quite a few others. By necessity, you have to make more of language than the average bear or you would be out an educational endeavor, would you not? Well, the truth of the matter is that a doctor may look at a liver and see all of the things it does and is made up of, while a layman looks at it and sees a bloody wad of tissue. Both are right.
(November 14, 2012 at 3:32 pm)Hovik Wrote: that isn't found in any other system of communication.
How do you know that? That is my point and a number of other people's points. Can you understand monkey? I've always found that it takes quite a bit of hubris to assume human superiority in any endeavor. Frankly, you're the first atheist I have ever seen cough up this argument. I thought it was strictly a creationist boast.
