"What about those spiritual types, such as realised Zen Buddhists who claim they have no self."
Exactly who is it doing the claiming? "Having the human species reduced to the level of chimphood sounds like a move in the right direction, considering how we behave." We don't behave much differently from chimps really, the difference is in intelligence potential, developed culture, sophisticated technology and abstract language. No animal has shown a remotely similar level of either. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <anartaxius@...> wrote: What about those spiritual types, such as realised Zen Buddhists who claim they have no self. Are they persons? Exactly what is a person? Exxon, legally, is a person. So is Monsanto. Having the human species reduced to the level of chimphood sounds like a move in the right direction, considering how we behave. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote: Before you give rights to chimps you should work out if they are capable of understanding what is being offered. Anthropomorphism isn't any way to go about helping wildlife. Chimps aren't people, they are chimps and they can't fit into our world in the same way we couldn't fit into theirs. They aren't as "like us" as a lot of people think. We should only extend personhood to people as they are capable of learning a language and communicating their needs themselves, with obvious exceptions. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote: We're getting there. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/science/rights-group-sues-to-have-chimp-recognized-as-legal-person.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/science/rights-group-sues-to-have-chimp-recognized-as-legal-person.html?hp
