HUMAN BEINGS

[Stealth]

But yet, we all still drive cars and debate on our computers.

I'm not sayin I'm any better than anyone else. Are humans fuckin shit up by using computers and driving cars? Fuck yeah. Am I a part of the problem too? Fuck yeah. That's part of being human...we're wayyyy too greedy.

Which kind of leads me on another tangent...are animals greedy? Do they enact revenge? Do they have negative emotions the way we do?




But back to what you were saying...I do think that we are not as intelligent as we think, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm also not saying that we arent' smarter than any other animals.

All I'm saying is that...for us being this smart...is it really getting us any further along than the rest of the animals. Yeah we have technology and cities and communication and everything else...but my question is...where is this higher level of thought going to get us? If in the end, all of our intelligence is paid off by a clean ecosystem and enough resources for everyone then so be it.

But for every species we kill off and for every environment we destroy, we're not making progress. And the whole argument was that our intelligence puts us in a better position to stay alive and be the top dogs. I just think our intelligence puts us in a better position for the time being, but eventually we're going to kill ourselves and everyone along with us...so we're not really helping our survival out LONG TERM.


But if you want to get into the argument that humans use technology for medical advances, then I wont argue with you. Animals can't do that shit.

 

[EDJ]

DECEPTEKAHN,
I SUgKEST YOU DON'T DEBATE WITH ME THEN, CAUSE YOU'RE JUST CONFUSIN' YOURSELF WITH YOUR BIAS AND ACCEPTANCE OF A THEORY THAT HASN'T BEEN PROVEN.

 

[Dirty Shoez]

You are "smart" but you're not smart.

More or less....Yes. I'm not smart, I'm fortunate. Fortunately, that happens to be smarter than you, and being SMARTER than other people is infinitely more important than fitting some non-existant ideal of what `smart' really means.

 

[DeceptaKhan]

^^^once again i dont know where the hell your comming from.first you say apes have thumbs but cant use there thumbs as good as humans.i dont know why i even tried to argue with you cause it seems like such a pointless debate,so then i came back and gave you some thoughts of mine why i think that apes could use there thumbs jus like we could if not better,then you said that im changing my points and contradicitng my bias,when this whole time im holding my ground at sayin that humans arnt the only species with thumbs,and that other species with thumbs could use them like us.personaly i think this is a fuckin retarded argument.were gettin all confused on who can use thumbs better or some shit,i dont even know where this is goin,but this thread started as tryyin to examine if humans are in fact "animals"so lets jus drop the thumb thing,cause i dont think its goin any where.ill give it to ya EDJ.Humans can use there thumbs better then anybody or thing else

 

[saladbowlking]

^^LMAO!!

 

[DeceptaKhan]

DECEPTEKAHN,
YOUR BIAS AND ACCEPTANCE OF A THEORY THAT HASN'T BEEN PROVEN.

actually wait,wait theory is this?

 

[HERESY]

Here is an interesting read:

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=540280

 

[Stealth]

That was a worthwhile read until he got to his conclusion and arbitrarily decided that we are "98% and 2% nonhuman". He then went on to say that we will be a new breed "homo civilized" in which we understand that all other are inherently equal. That's bullshit.

The dude took a good argument about classification systems, totally abandoned it right when he was making a point, and then threw out an insane claim that right now we are forming a new species. Bullfuckingshit.

 

[I AM]

If by refuting my point, you are arguing that we are not as smart as we may think, then point well taken.

Yes, this is all that I was getting at.

 

[I AM]

@DeceptaKhan

That's what he does. Tries to confuse you into thinking some other shit. That's why he's worthless in a debate. A good debater doesn't need to try and manipulate an argument because he can win on points alone.

 

[DeceptaKhan]

A good debater doesn't need to try and manipulate an argument because he can win on points alone.

spoken like a champ

 

[HERESY]

@DeceptaKhan
That's why he's worthless in a debate. A good debater doesn't need to try and manipulate an argument because he can win on points alone.

This is not reality. A good debater WINS by manipulating the argument and doing anything he or she can do to sway the vote. Good debators don't rely on points alone because those points can easily be argued. In fact ANYTHING in a debate can be argued.

 

[I AM]

^^My point in case again.

If you are arguing for something it god damn well better be something that you can make points on and logically contruct an argument. People that can't debate do anything to win because they have to do that because they're points are FUCKING BULLSHIT.

 

[DeceptaKhan]

theres a difference between an argument on facts,and an argument on thoughts

 

[HERESY]

^^My point in case again.

If you are arguing for something it god damn well better be something that you can make points on and logically contruct an argument. People that can't debate do anything to win because they have to do that because they're points are FUCKING BULLSHIT.

Ok, here is the deal. I am a debate student. My teacher has won national championships, and my school has been the national champs for the last five years. Just curious have you ever taken part in a debate? Have you ever judged a debate? If you answer no to either of these questions I have another question for you. Where are you getting your info pertaining to what debators do and how they win?

 

[HERESY]

theres a difference between an argument on facts,and an argument on thoughts

So what are the rules that regulate the two?

 

[I AM]

I have been in real debates before. I'm speaking own personal opinion though. Manipulation is negative in my opinion, if you feel otherwise that's your deal, feel free to believe it. But let's leave it at that because nothing you say is going to change my mind. I didn't say you can't win from manipulation either, it's more common that people follow those who manipulate them. Kind of like in a bad relationship.

But now we're off topic...Human beings are animals.

 

[DeceptaKhan]

So what are the rules that regulate the two?

since your a debate student,you could probably figure that one out your self,or atleast come up with something better to say then my definition

 

[XxtraMannish]

More or less....Yes. I'm not smart, I'm fortunate. Fortunately, that happens to be smarter than you, and being SMARTER than other people is infinitely more important than fitting some non-existant ideal of what `smart' really means.

you're "smarter" than me but you're not smarter than me.

 

[XxtraMannish]

ok im convinced, humans are not animals.