What is the point of separation between Homo sapiens sapiens and other animals?

[Lheticus]

Over several instances of casually researching the subject, I've seen it said that what makes us truly different from other species on planet Earth is not sentience or self-awareness, and upon looking into the term "sapience" I find that it's actually well on the human side of the line, rather than being itself the line.

If you accept, like I do, the premise that there truly IS something that truly separates us from the rest of the animal species that can be expressed in words, then please help me express it.

[Kalmageddon]

No other animal would be able to ask "What is the point of separation between Homo sapiens sapiens and other animals?", that's good enough for me as an answer.

[Chen]

It's basically level of intelligence. I don't think there's anything inherently different besides that. Our brains have developed in a such a way that we are capable of more complex reasoning, thought etc than other animals.

[Telonius]

Over several instances of casually researching the subject, I've seen it said that what makes us truly different from other species on planet Earth is not sentience or self-awareness, and upon looking into the term "sapience" I find that it's actually well on the human side of the line, rather than being itself the line.

If you accept, like I do, the premise that there truly IS something that truly separates us from the rest of the animal species that can be expressed in words, then please help me express it.

The explanation I'm thinking of can be expressed in letters, but it would take an awfully long time to write out all those A's, C'S, G's, and T's.

[Lheticus]

It's basically level of intelligence. I don't think there's anything inherently different besides that. Our brains have developed in a such a way that we are capable of more complex reasoning, thought etc than other animals.

That isn't acceptable to me as a "point of separation"--not something that we have MORE of than other animals, but something that we have that other animals DON'T have is what I'm looking for.

[Zyzzyva]

Bipedalism, mammal (primate) but with extremely limited hair, opposed thumbs, probably a bunch of organ and skeletal structure things I'm not enough of an anatomist to know. There, distinctions between H. sap and the rest of the animal kingdom, easy.

[Serpentine]

Oh, you mean things like "What separates Man from the animals!"? Eh, I don't think anything. Anything that makes us distinct is just a matter of scale, of degrees. Saying we're "different" from "the animals" because we're more intelligent is like saying that the cheetah is different from the animals because they're fast, or the blue whale is different from the other animals because it's the biggest. Our intelligence is just another evolved adaptation, like all the rest.
I really wish I could find it again, but in one of my classes at uni there was a diagram looking at all the "[X] is what separates Man from the animals!" claims over history, and every single one of them had been debunked. Ability to feel pain, ability to feel emotion, ability to form memories, problem solving, tool use, altruism, abstract thought, now even culture... Every single one of these things only humans could supposedly do, other animals have been found that do them too. People keep shifting the goal posts, and researchers keep hitting them anyway. We are not uniquely unique, we are special snowflakes just like every other species.

What I want to know is, why do humans insist on proving to themselves that they are any different to other animals? What is so bad about being an animal? It doesn't make our intelligence, creativity or any of our achievements any less real or significant. Why insist those goalposts are there at all, much less continually shift them in the face of evidence? Why not take our place within all the incredible wonder of nature, instead of insisting that we must, MUST be above and outside it?
Which, interestingly, is just another way of asking the title question: not, "what is the feature that separates Homo sapiens from other animals?", but "why bother trying to separate Homo sapiens from other animals?"

[Lheticus]

Oh, you mean things like "What separates Man from the animals!"? Eh, I don't think anything. Anything that makes us distinct is just a matter of scale, of degrees. Saying we're "different" from "the animals" because we're more intelligent is like saying that the cheetah is different from the animals because they're fast, or the blue whale is different from the other animals because it's the biggest. Our intelligence is just another evolved adaptation, like all the rest.
I really wish I could find it again, but in one of my classes at uni there was a diagram looking at all the "[X] is what separates Man from the animals!" claims over history, and every single one of them had been debunked. Ability to feel pain, ability to feel emotion, ability to form memories, problem solving, tool use, altruism, abstract thought, now even culture... Every single one of these things only humans could supposedly do, other animals have been found that do them too. People keep shifting the goal posts, and researchers keep hitting them anyway. We are not uniquely unique, we are special snowflakes just like every other species.

What I want to know is, why do humans insist on proving to themselves that they are any different to other animals? What is so bad about being an animal? It doesn't make our intelligence, creativity or any of our achievements any less real or significant. Why insist those goalposts are there at all, much less continually shift them in the face of evidence? Why not take our place within all the incredible wonder of nature, instead of insisting that we must, MUST be above and outside it?
Which, interestingly, is just another way of asking the title question: not, "what is the feature that separates Homo sapiens from other animals?", but "why bother trying to separate Homo sapiens from other animals?"

The answer to your "why bother" question, for me, is that with all we've accomplished, civilizations, societies, art, science...I have to think there's SOMETHING other than mere degree of intelligence that DOES actually separate us. Otherwise the only thing preventing someone from someone making the dolphins a race as advanced as the version of them in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy are the extreme difficulties of artificially enhancing dolphin brains. I CAN'T believe that. We ARE special, it's NOT just a degree of intelligence or anything else. I can't even contemplate the possibility of that premise being false. But it's attitudes like this that get me dangerously close to such contemplations, so I want to find just what this is. I want to prove my view.

[Crow]

I am absolutely with Serpentine, and would like to add that some humans still have a long way to go before they can begin to claim they've truly separated themselves from the animals. I think this constant desire to separate ourselves and prove that we are somehow different stems from guilt and denial of this fact.

edit: Though now that I think of it, are there any other animals that commit suicide (and not in a "protecting their cubs" sort of way)?

[Donnadogsoth]

Over several instances of casually researching the subject, I've seen it said that what makes us truly different from other species on planet Earth is not sentience or self-awareness, and upon looking into the term "sapience" I find that it's actually well on the human side of the line, rather than being itself the line.

If you accept, like I do, the premise that there truly IS something that truly separates us from the rest of the animal species that can be expressed in words, then please help me express it.

We are the creative species. We reflect the creativity of the universe in general, unlike the beasts. We can use our creativity to willfully increase our relative potential population density, through application of technology and development of new social forms. What beast does this? Beasts make tools, beasts communicate, beasts build cities, but they are all enchained to their genetic destinies; they lack free minds. We, on the other hand, can use our minds to transform our practise through the discovery of universal principles of light, nuclear power, astronomy, biology, etc. This has allowed us to improve the Earth increasing its hominid carrying capacity 600-fold. That's the difference between us and animals.

[Lheticus]

We are the creative species. We reflect the creativity of the universe in general, unlike the beasts. We can use our creativity to willfully increase our relative potential population density, through application of technology and development of new social forms. What beast does this? Beasts make tools, beasts communicate, beasts build cities, but they are all enchained to their genetic destinies; they lack free minds. We, on the other hand, can use our minds to transform our practise through the discovery of universal principles of light, nuclear power, astronomy, biology, etc. This has allowed us to improve the Earth increasing its hominid carrying capacity 600-fold. That's the difference between us and animals.

THANK YOU! For a minute there I was concerned that I'd walked into the Playground's Cynic Zone. +2,000 YES points.

[warty goblin]

We're animals. We're born, eat, excrete, breed, die. So does every other animal on earth. Nothing special about us doing it. We've got more complicated brains in some aspects - not in others - which lets us do things that other animals can't, but other animals can do things we can't. Humans for instance really suck at catching giant squid. Sperm whales are very good at it. Sperm whales don't do eigenvector analysis; (some) humans do. I see no reason that the first is any more or less special than the other.



I confess I don't understand the need for humans to be special or uniqe in order for things to 'mean' something. Probably because I'm pretty sure nothing really 'means' anything in a cosmic sort of sense. Meaning is very local. A male peacock fanning out his tail means he's trying to attract a mate; I don't think this is particularly relevant to the hypothetical slime-beings of Zeta-12, anymore than the Mona Lisa is. But it's a fairly pressing issue for the peacock, and given the dense wad of people around the Mona Lisa studiously ignoring the 'no flash photography' sign printed in every language since ancient Sumerian, I got the sense it was pretty important for themselves as well. Really I think this mostly suggests a certain degree of humbleness in the way a person approaches the world.

[Lheticus]

We're animals. We're born, eat, excrete, breed, die. So does every other animal on earth. Nothing special about us doing it. We've got more complicated brains in some aspects - not in others - which lets us do things that other animals can't, but other animals can do things we can't. Humans for instance really suck at catching giant squid. Sperm whales are very good at it. Sperm whales don't do eigenvector analysis; (some) humans do. I see no reason that the first is any more or less special than the other.



I confess I don't understand the need for humans to be special or uniqe in order for things to 'mean' something. Probably because I'm pretty sure nothing really 'means' anything in a cosmic sort of sense. Meaning is very local. A male peacock fanning out his tail means he's trying to attract a mate; I don't think this is particularly relevant to the hypothetical slime-beings of Zeta-12, anymore than the Mona Lisa is. But it's a fairly pressing issue for the peacock, and given the dense wad of people around the Mona Lisa studiously ignoring the 'no flash photography' sign printed in every language since ancient Sumerian, I got the sense it was pretty important for themselves as well. Really I think this mostly suggests a certain degree of humbleness in the way a person approaches the world.

It's not about "meaning something" to me. It's not a NEED for humans to be special or unique, to me. It's a belief that we ARE, and an exploration of WHY we are. If you really believe that are species is no more capable of ridiculously incredible things than say, a dung beetle, then your mindset is too alien to me for any possibility of my comprehending it.

[Serpentine]

THANK YOU! For a minute there I was concerned that I'd walked into the Playground's Cynic Zone. +2,000 YES points.

I resent the implication that acknowledging that humans are just another animal makes me a "cynic". There's nothing cynical about it. It's beautiful and empowering, in fact. We're a part of the glorious diversity and wonder of nature, testament to the infinite potential of the universe. It feels me with wonder and awe at the power of nature and the potential of the universe, not... whatever emotion cynicism is meant to create.

We are the creative species. We reflect the creativity of the universe in general, unlike the beasts. We can use our creativity to willfully increase our relative potential population density, through application of technology and development of new social forms. What beast does this? Beasts make tools, beasts communicate, beasts build cities, but they are all enchained to their genetic destinies; they lack free minds. We, on the other hand, can use our minds to transform our practise through the discovery of universal principles of light, nuclear power, astronomy, biology, etc. This has allowed us to improve the Earth increasing its hominid carrying capacity 600-fold. That's the difference between us and animals.

Other animals create. Other animals apply technology and develop social forms. More and more we're learning just how "free" animal minds are, and more and more it's much of a kind with ours. Other animals transform their practice. And all the rest is just a quantitative change in intelligence, not qualitative.

There is one thing I've been able to think of that might "separate man from the animals". That is humans being capable, as a species, of consciously limiting themselves, in terms of resource use, reproduction and the like, for the sake of other species, biodiversity, and the health of the planet. There are some ways that some individuals are getting there, but as a species? Maybe someday, but not yet, and until we do, we're just another animal.
But "just another animal" is awesome, in both the modern and antique sense of the word. I find far more beauty and meaning in being "just another animal" than being some special snowflake fancypants nonbeast.

If you really believe that are species is no more capable of ridiculously incredible things than say, a dung beetle

Relative capability of ridiculously incredible things seems like a poor basis for qualitative difference to me. We are capable of different incredible things, certainly things that seem more "incredible" to us than what dung beetles do. But at the same time, you are sorely selling the humble dung beetle incredibly short. For example, I've heard that without the introduction dung beetles alongside livestock, Australia would be knee-deep in dung. That's pretty incredible to me. There's a reason the ancient Egyptians were big fans.

then your mindset is too alien to me for any possibility of my comprehending it.

The feeling is mutual.

[Coidzor]

If you want some real SCIENCE! you'll just have to check back in 50 to 100 years.

[Serpentine]

If you want some real SCIENCE! you'll just have to check back in 50 to 100 years.

More like 50 to 100 years ago, really. Like I said, we've been systematically debunking every "separating man from beast" goal post shift since people started studying this stuff properly.

[Coidzor]

More like 50 to 100 years ago, really. Like I said, we've been systematically debunking every "separating man from beast" goal post shift since people started studying this stuff properly.

The intelligence cut-off for personhood was defined with anything we'd reasonably want to use and be intellectually honest about it back during Dubya Dubya One or the 60s?

[warty goblin]

It's not about "meaning something" to me. It's not a NEED for humans to be special or unique, to me. It's a belief that we ARE, and an exploration of WHY we are. If you really believe that are species is no more capable of ridiculously incredible things than say, a dung beetle, then your mindset is too alien to me for any possibility of my comprehending it.

Hey, have you tried hatching offspring from a ball of elephant dung bigger than you are? Because from where I'm sitting, that's pretty incredible. I mean I can't even roll a ball of crap bigger then myself, and I sure couldn't live on it as a newborn.

Which is to say I think we're exactly as capable of ridiculously incredible things as a dung beetle. Mostly because I concluded some time ago the only reason to think we're more so is an entirely internal, subjective over-valuation of ourselves. For a truly disinterested outsider, why would the fact we are the 'creative species' be any more interesting than the dung beetle being the dung-rolling species*? The dung beetle is certainly more interested in other dung beetles than it is me; probably because beetle/human romance isn't such a happening thing. I confess a similar disinterest, probably for similar reasons. Which makes it rather hard for me to think that we're the most special thing going in any universal sense.

*Technically family.

[Lheticus]

I resent the implication that acknowledging that humans are just another animal makes me a "cynic". There's nothing cynical about it. It's beautiful and empowering, in fact. We're a part of the glorious diversity and wonder of nature, testament to the infinite potential of the universe. It feels me with wonder and awe at the power of nature and the potential of the universe, not... whatever emotion cynicism is meant to create.


Other animals create. Other animals apply technology and develop social forms. More and more we're learning just how "free" animal minds are, and more and more it's much of a kind with ours. Other animals transform their practice. And all the rest is just a quantitative change in intelligence, not qualitative.

There is one thing I've been able to think of that might "separate man from the animals". That is humans being capable, as a species, of consciously limiting themselves, in terms of resource use, reproduction and the like, for the sake of other species, biodiversity, and the health of the planet. There are some ways that some individuals are getting there, but as a species? Maybe someday, but not yet, and until we do, we're just another animal.
But "just another animal" is awesome, in both the modern and antique sense of the word. I find far more beauty and meaning in being "just another animal" than being some special snowflake fancypants nonbeast.


Relative capability of ridiculously incredible things seems like a poor basis for qualitative difference to me. We are capable of different incredible things, certainly things that seem more "incredible" to us than what dung beetles do. But at the same time, you are sorely selling the humble dung beetle incredibly short. For example, I've heard that without the introduction dung beetles alongside livestock, Australia would be knee-deep in dung. That's pretty incredible to me. There's a reason the ancient Egyptians were big fans.

The feeling is mutual.

But "just another animal" is awesome. Now that...I REALLY don't understand. How is being "just another" ANYTHING at all awesome?! It's like you propose a world where, to quote The Incredibles, everyone's special and no one is. That just doesn't make any damn sense to me!

As for the rest...why be a PART of something when you can be beyond it? I believe we are separate and distinct from the "natural" world, not outside of it in the cold, but above it with the capacity and potential to bend it to our will. That previous attempts to do so ended in tragedy only spoke that as a civilization we are not ready, not developed, not wise enough to succeed yet. I still believe that the potential exists for this to someday happen. We are a "testament to the infinite potential of the universe" not because we are LIKE other creatures, but because we are not, because we are BEYOND them.

And for this part:

Other animals create. Other animals apply technology and develop social forms. More and more we're learning just how "free" animal minds are, and more and more it's much of a kind with ours. Other animals transform their practice. And all the rest is just a quantitative change in intelligence, not qualitative.

I'm going to need an example of animals developing social forms and actually coming up with an innovation that lasts beyond the lifetime of that one animal, because I can't think of any myself. And yeah, maybe the dung beetle does some pretty incredible things in its own way, but the only way a dung beetle would go to space is if WE take it there (probably for an experiment). And the dung beetle wouldn't know what the hell is going on, it wouldn't know what space IS. Would even a dolphin be able to formulate the kind of thinking to come up with such concepts that we have? Do NOT presume to tell me humanity isn't special.

All right, now I've calmed down a bit I'd like to clear something up. I don't intend to claim, even with my pronouncement that humans have the potential to bend nature to our will, that we are *better* than other animals. "Better", "worse", and "equal" people is a flawed concept that we humans invented that does not actually exist. The only "better" or "worse" is how effectively something performs their designed function, something that with living creatures of even moderate complexity is near impossible to definitively assign. I mean that we humans are DIFFERENT from animals in nature, our function/functions is/are so indescribably complex to such an extreme degree that we're entirely distinct from them.

[Flickerdart]

It's our *****. Compared to other primates, we have massive penises compared to body size.

[Lheticus]

It's our *****. Compared to other primates, we have massive penises compared to body size.

LOL, I needed that. +1,000 YES points.

[SiuiS]

That isn't acceptable to me as a "point of separation"--not something that we have MORE of than other animals, but something that we have that other animals DON'T have is what I'm looking for.

Metafaculty. You can think about thinking and alter the systems that you think with thereby. A squirrel can think, but it cannot think about how it thinks and optimize it's thinking.


In tests, a chimpanzee can be taught to drive a car. They can even be taught to use traffic lights. They cannot be taught future preparation or any of that though. If a chimpanzee is driving a car, and the light in front of it turns red, it will stop. It will not pull up to the light and stop. It will not go through the intersection it is in the middle of. It will just stop. "Stop at the line only, while the light is red" is not something they can do.
And how could they? How would you explain preparing to stop for some future event that may not be in effect upon arrival at that future, to someone who doesn't also have that ability?

[Coidzor]

It's our *****. Compared to other primates, we have massive penises compared to body size.

Also, boobies 24/7/365.25 after pubescence.

[SiuiS]

It's our *****. Compared to other primates, we have massive penises compared to body size.

Even the women?

I resent the implication that acknowledging that humans are just another animal makes me a "cynic". There's nothing cynical about it.

The trouble here is semantic. "Just" another animal is a limiter. It reduces humans down to animals. Your later stuff in this post instead elevates the worth of animals to human level. That tends to work better. It's an irrational emotional reflex, but it's a powerful one.

Other animals create. Other animals apply technology and develop social forms. More and more we're learning just how "free" animal minds are, and more and more it's much of a kind with ours. Other animals transform their practice. And all the rest is just a quantitative change in intelligence, not qualitative.

There is one thing I've been able to think of that might "separate man from the animals". That is humans being capable, as a species, of consciously limiting themselves, in terms of resource use, reproduction and the like, for the sake of other species, biodiversity, and the health of the planet. There are some ways that some individuals are getting there, but as a species? Maybe someday, but not yet, and until we do, we're just another animal.
But "Also another animal" is awesome, in both the modern and antique sense of the word. I find far more beauty and meaning in being "just another animal" than being some special snowflake fancypants nonbeast.

Interesting.

I made a minor change. :)

What do you mean by both modern and antique sense?

[Serpentine]

But "just another animal" is awesome. Now that...I REALLY don't understand. How is being "just another" ANYTHING at all awesome?! It's like you propose a world where, to quote The Incredibles, everyone's special and no one is. That just doesn't make any damn sense to me!
As for the rest...why be a PART of something when you can be beyond it? I believe we are separate and distinct from the "natural" world, not outside of it in the cold, but above it with the capacity and potential to bend it to our will.

What we want to be so doesn't have much to do with what actually is so. But if that's what we're talking about, then I would absolutely prefer to be a part of the natural world than so-called "beyond" it. What a lonely existence that would be.
Just because it doesn't make any sense to you doesn't mean it's not so, nor that it doesn't make sense to others. And yes, that's exactly what I'm saying: every species is "special", if that's the word you want to go with, in its own ways. That's part of what makes nature so incredible to me. Nature is amazing, why on Earth wouldn't we want to be a part of that?

I'm going to need an example of animals developing social forms and actually coming up with an innovation that lasts beyond the lifetime of that one animal, because I can't think of any myself.

Crows and apes are among the animals we've studied so far that have revealed culture, and the passing on of innovation and discoveries. And that's just the animals we've been able to study directly.

And yeah, maybe the dung beetle does some pretty incredible things in its own way, but the only way a dung beetle would go to space is if WE take it there (probably for an experiment).

Going into space is just an extension of technology and intelligence, not a distinctly separate feature.

And the dung beetle wouldn't know what the hell is going on, it wouldn't know what space IS. Would even a dolphin be able to formulate the kind of thinking to come up with such concepts that we have?

If they could, how would we know it? How do you know dolphins don't have philosophy?

Do NOT presume to tell me humanity isn't special.

We are definitely special. Just like cheetahs and dolphins and dung beetles are special. We're just not special in any way that makes us something other than animals.

I mean that we humans are DIFFERENT from animals in nature to such an extreme degree that we're entirely distinct.

And I disagree with that premise, and every time someone has tried to point out some feature that "separates man from the animals", we've found other animals that have that feature as well.

edit:

What do you mean by both modern and antique sense?

As in both "totally awesome dude", and "inspires awe".

[Tvtyrant]

I will let a cleverer man than myself argue my position.

“For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.”
― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

[Telonius]

But "just another animal" is awesome. Now that...I REALLY don't understand. How is being "just another" ANYTHING at all awesome?! It's like you propose a world where, to quote The Incredibles, everyone's special and no one is. That just doesn't make any damn sense to me!

As for the rest...why be a PART of something when you can be beyond it? I believe we are separate and distinct from the "natural" world, not outside of it in the cold, but above it with the capacity and potential to bend it to our will. That previous attempts to do so ended in tragedy only spoke that as a civilization we are not ready, not developed, not wise enough to succeed yet. I still believe that the potential exists for this to someday happen. We are a "testament to the infinite potential of the universe" not because we are LIKE other creatures, but because we are not, because we are BEYOND them.

And for this part:



I'm going to need an example of animals developing social forms and actually coming up with an innovation that lasts beyond the lifetime of that one animal, because I can't think of any myself. And yeah, maybe the dung beetle does some pretty incredible things in its own way, but the only way a dung beetle would go to space is if WE take it there (probably for an experiment). And the dung beetle wouldn't know what the hell is going on, it wouldn't know what space IS. Would even a dolphin be able to formulate the kind of thinking to come up with such concepts that we have? Do NOT presume to tell me humanity isn't special.

All right, now I've calmed down a bit I'd like to clear something up. I don't intend to claim, even with my pronouncement that humans have the potential to bend nature to our will, that we are *better* than other animals. "Better", "worse", and "equal" people is a flawed concept that we humans invented that does not actually exist. The only "better" or "worse" is how effectively something performs their designed function, something that with living creatures of even moderate complexity is near impossible to definitively assign. I mean that we humans are DIFFERENT from animals in nature, our function/functions is/are so indescribably complex to such an extreme degree that we're entirely distinct from them.

I don't think you can get "beyond" something that's still part of you. We've developed and improved over a few billion years of evolution. That's going to continue to be true, as long as we're in the universe. Our current state is not what it was, and not what it will be; but that doesn't change the fact that we all have our basic origins in simpler animals. Even if we learn how to manipulate our own genetic material, or upload our consciousness into immortal machines, we'll still be made of the same stardust.

[Elderand]

Crows and apes are among the animals we've studied so far that have revealed culture, and the passing on of innovation and discoveries. And that's just the animals we've been able to study directly.

Whales too, different groups of whales, from the same specie but in different part of the wolrd, will communicate using a different language that has evolved over several generation. They have their own names too.

[Serpentine]

Whales too, different groups of whales, from the same specie but in different part of the wolrd, will communicate using a different language that has evolved over several generation. They have their own names too.

Heck, even cattle develop accents.

[Elderand]

Heck, even cattle develop accents.

Cows have best friends, they get stressed out when you separate them from their best friends. They also like "Everybody hurt" best of all music and tend to align themselves along the north south magnetic axis. Cows are awesome.