On 5/15/2013 12:02 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 14.05.2013 21:45 meekerdb said the following:
On 5/14/2013 12:29 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 14 May 2013, at 19:12, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 14.05.2013 16:51 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 14 May 2013, at 15:33, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
If you are monist, that distinction is quite artificial,
because humans have no special status.
They have the special status of being humans.
If you are dualist and anthropomorphic, then you can absolutize
the distinction (but this seems ad hoc to me).
I don't see what is has to do with dualism. If you can distinguish
"humans" from "not-humans" then you can distinguish "made by humans"
from "not made by humans". It's as scientific as any concept:
table, chair, tiger, star, amoeba,...
What is a scientific difference between "humans" and "not-humans"? How would
you define it?
What difference does it make? Why do you have this obsession with definition of words?
Are you going to try to prove a theorem about humans?
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.