From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Sun Jul 24 2005 - 16:32:19 BST
Hi Ham,
I said...
> But Neanderthals are not our ancestors. There is no evidence of
> gene flow between them and H. sapiens. You've just admitted that a
> species other than H. sapiens is self-conscious and capable of
> rational thought. So, how does this square with your claim that
> self- consciousness and the ability to reason are the features that
> set our self-exalting selves above the rest of the animal world?
ham 7-23-05:
Here's the concluding paragraph of an anthropological article on
"Neanderthals" I found on the Internet. While Neanderthals are today
regarded as a "sub-species" of Homo-sapiens, there's still some doubt
as to their possible common ancestry with "modern humans". In other
words, Science is open to new empirical evidence.
msh 7-24-05:
Point taken. The case is not closed but, from what I've read, seems
at this point to lean toward no common ancestry. Anyway, no case is
ever really closed in science, so you are right.
ham 7-23-05:
My point is simply that the cognitive functions exhibited by human
beings (even humanoids in transition) far exceed those of lesser
creatures. This, to me, suggests a teleology, a "biological
momentum" as it were, to create a higher, "psychic" species.
msh 7-24-05:
And mine is that your anthropocentric philosophy includes the idea
that this higher psychic species is H. sapiens, as if we are the
teleological end-point of evolution. We are a very young species and
may very well go extinct, either through our own "cleverness" such as
nuclear annihilation or environmental destruction, or as a result of
some natural catastrophe, such as what hit the dinosaurs. In either
case, evolution will begin again, maybe with the spiders next time,
and will arrive at highly self-aware creatures who will create
arachnocentric religions and philosophies.
ham 7-23-04:
The fact that self-consciousness exists and is unique in nature is
the philosophical issue we're discussing here, not the evolutionary
mechanism behind it.
msh 7-24-05:
I see no reason to believe that self-consciousness is all that
unique, and certainly no reason why it should be limited to a single
species. But I agree that this is off-point for this thread. Maybe
someone will want to take it up in another thread, later.
Enjoy your vacation.
Best,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
-- InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983 Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com "The shadows that a swinging lamp will throw, We come from nowhere and to nothing go." MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archives: Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/ Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jul 24 2005 - 19:06:04 BST