Chris - it seems to me that consciousness is present everywhere in the universe and in all matter, and eneryg too for that matter, not just is some arbitrary collection of species. I'd like a cite to the vast majority you reference. Jim
On Jul 23, 9:50 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > Absolutely! > Consciousness is most likely (according to the vast majority of serious > research on the topic) a function of higher organization. You are correct to > assign consciousness to monkeys, but to delineate levels of such. > > Something to keep in mind here: It's a common misconception of those that > attack evolution that we're stating "Humans are descended from chimps" (or > Orangutans, as the case may be). In actuality, we're noting common > ancestors. Could Chimpanzees or Orangutans eventually evolve into Homo > Sapiens? It's highly improbable. > > So, back to your question...in our branch of development, more energy was > expended in prefrontal structure (i.e. the lobes, man.) This is the seat of > higher intellect, our personality, and likely, what we consider to be our > consciousness. The lesser apes? Not so much. > > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:53 AM, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Chris - I understand what you are speaking of when you reference > > people or persons to be the physical human being. While this body may > > well be related to some sort of monkey, the person is not the body but > > the consciousness within that body. There are many examples of this. I > > doubt if the level of consciousness humans have is much like whatever > > might be the sort of consciousness monkeys have. Any thoughts on this > > level? Jim > > > On Jul 22, 11:21 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From another list I'm on...chimps may not be our closest relative after > > all? > > > > From the Pittsburgh-Tribune Review. Anyone interested in a pdf of the > > > original article please let me know. John Grehan > > > *Pitt anthropologist argues humans more like orangutans than chimps* > > > A University of Pittsburgh anthropologist argues in a paper published > > today > > > that humans most likely share a common ancestor with orangutans, and not > > > chimpanzees, which is the prevailing belief. > > > > Jeffrey H. Schwartz hopes the paper will get researchers to practice > > > fundamental science and question some assumptions. > > > "What I'll be happy with is if people actually think out of the box and > > > consider alternative theories of human relationships with apes," Schwartz > > > said Wednesday in a phone interview from Zagreb, Croatia. > > > > He concedes it won't happen overnight, but the paper in the Journal of > > > Biogeography that he co-authored could help, said Schwartz, who's the > > > president of the World Academy of Art and Science. > > > > "We've done the analysis," said John Grehan, who is the paper's other > > > co-author, director of science at the Buffalo Museum in New York and a > > > research associate at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History. > > > > Jeffrey L. Boore, an adjunct biology professor at the University of > > > California-Berkeley who specializes in interpretive genome sequences, > > said > > > he knows of no strong reason to discount the DNA studies that have > > > demonstrated chimps and gorillas are more closely related to humans than > > > orangutans. > > > > "The overwhelming majority of those studies have given very strong > > support > > > to excluding orangutans from the human-chimp-gorilla group," said Boore, > > > who's also CEO of Genome Project Solutions, Inc., in Hercules, Calif. > > > > "If people disagree with it, they need to put out their evidence and let > > it > > > go back and forth," said Grehan, an entomologist who also studies the > > origin > > > and evolution of animals and plants. "But I think a lot of people are > > > incapable of dealing with it." > > > > That's because for years most of the scientific community accepted DNA > > > analyses that suggest humans are most closely related to chimps, Schwartz > > > and Grehan said. > > > > But an examination of fossil and other evidence shows humans and > > orangutans > > > share 28 features -- including reproductive systems, tooth structures and > > > mouth palates, the scientists say. > > > > Schwartz and Grehan write in their paper that humans share only two > > features > > > with chimpanzees and seven with gorillas. > > > "In science, you must integrate the fossil record with the living > > record," > > > Grehan said. "That's what we've done." > > > They propose a scenario that explains the migration of the > > human-orangutan > > > common ancestor from Southeast Asia, where modern orangutans are from. > > > > The molecular evidence that scientists commonly cite to demonstrate the > > link > > > between humans and chimps is flawed, Schwartz said. > > > > "Only 2 percent of the entire human genome can be verified," he said. > > "But > > > people are saying that chimps and humans share 98 percent of some portion > > of > > > that 2 percent to make their case." > > > > That's not good science, said Malte Ebach, a paleontologist at Arizona > > State > > > University's International Institute for Species Exploration, who, like > > > Grehan, studies the origin and evolution of animals and plants. > > > > "People think DNA data is better because they perceive it as > > technologically > > > superior and more progressive," Ebach said. "But technology doesn't make > > > data better." > > > > Schwartz proposed his human-orangutan theory in 1982. He wrote the book, > > > "The Red Ape: Orangutans and Human Origins," in 1986 that expanded on > > those > > > ideas. In 2005, Schwartz published and revised an updated version of the > > > book. > > > > The work was ignored as molecular studies came out that showed the > > > similarity between chimps and humans. > > > Grehan said alternative views should not be dismissed when a theory > > becomes > > > so accepted. > > > During the mid-20th century, scientists so fervently disagreed with > > Barbara > > > McClintock's theory that genes could move along a chromosome that she > > > stopped publishing, Grehan said. In 1983, McClintock won a Nobel Prize > > for > > > her research in "jumping genes." > > > > Subscription options and archives available: > >http://listserv.buffalo.edu/archives/anthro-l.html- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
