The Uniqueness of Mammals
Very interesting article.<p>&quot;Morality did not occur in humans spontaneously. It must have had animal precedents.&quot;<p>This statement has so much embedded in it, its hard to know where to start.  This comes after having listed a bunch of traits that we share with animals.<p>My view is that we mammals emote in the same wayas us.  Mentally though, human thinking and conceptualising is at an entirely different level.  We can think about concepts.  We are not the same mentally.  This is not a value judgement - it is not better or worse, and quite possibly it is far worse - without language, we would live in a world of lies or at best, mis-interpretations and mis-understandings.  But it is evidently orders of magnitudes different to animals.<p>Which brings me back to the quote.  Embedded in it is the belief in evolution, which I can re-state as &#x27;human morality arose out of animal behaviour via the process of evolution&#x27;.<p>Like the bible, evolution is just another story.  When we want to say &#x27;we know&#x27;, we need to have a direct path to a real situation - no steps can be missed!  But we don&#x27;t have that - we were taught stories as if they are true.  The reality is that they are hearsay.  I haven&#x27;t seen evolution.  Its just a story an explanation believed to be knowledge.<p>Perhaps the theory has some explanatory power, although it is also a possibility it is taught to confuse us and keep us intentionally ignorant.  We do not know.  However, when we say we know but do not, we are proudly and arrogantly wearing our ignorance as a badge of honour!<p>I love to hear about animal behaviour.  I don&#x27;t love to hear the back flips that ignorance masquerading as knowledge makes us do.  Eg, the author signs off with:
&quot;I would suggest that what makes us unique is that we are mammals—only more so. The mammalian characteristics have been amplified in human beings. This echoes Darwin’s supposition in The Descent of Man that humans differ mentally from animals in degree rather than in kind and that, as Giovanni Boniolo put it, it is only logical to suppose that human behaviour evolved from that of our non-human ancestors. Some people may not like this idea.&quot;<p>If you have to have a theory to explain the world, as if the world can be explained on scientific terms, then the go-to theory is evolution.  If you don&#x27;t agree with this &#x27;science&#x27; then the author will get all passive aggressive on you for lack of belief in &#x27;non-human ancestors&#x27;.  He smugly allows himself to say: &quot;Some people may not like this idea.&quot;  Unsaid is - &#x27;Those idiots.&#x27;<p>So, the science belief is actually a lever to feel superior, justified and empowered in his ignorance masquerading as knowledge, over those who, in their own ignorance believe in religion, or something other to him.  But there is no greater knowledge there.  Its ignorance all round.<p>The article is the sugar, to get you to swallow the pill of an assumed but still unproven belief in evolution.<p>Skepticism of everything is the answer.  Beware of believing anything regards the objective world, that does not match with personal experience.