Announcement

Collapse

Anthropology 201 Guidelines

Anthropology is the study of groups of people, their beliefs, practices, values, ideas, technologies, languages, economies and more.

All are welcome to post in this section, even Geico Cavemen.

A couple of caveats-- (1) racism has no place in this forum, and (2) please show a little discretion. In other words, if an attachment violates policy on the rest of TWEB, it violates policy in this forum as well, even if it depicts a highly interesting and unique aspect of some obscure culture. Keep it reasonably clean, folks.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Human Beings

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • shunyadragon
    replied
    Originally posted by Paprika View Post
    Featherless bipeds.
    Featherless [hairy] bipeds.

    Leave a comment:


  • shunyadragon
    replied
    Originally posted by nico View Post
    It's a quasi-parody thread. I thought it was kind of obvious. It was never meant to make convincing arguments. You know...partially uniformed tidbits about life mixed in with exaggerated conclusions. I wasn't actually saying that families kill from within, grammar ambiguities I guess, but families kill other families, etc, etc, as opposed to, say, bringing them a leg, or a liver, to welcome them into the neighborhood instead. But, if you insist, feel free to argue the superior merits of virtue in the animal kingdom. Could be interesting?
    Not obvious at all.
    Then why put this thread here where it would belong in the "Padded Room"

    Anthropology 201 is not the place for a parody thread
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 12-06-2018, 07:48 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jedidiah
    replied
    Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
    Why are humans considered to be the most dangerous animal? Our brains? We can defeat anything with prep time(batman joke)?
    Human beings in prime shape are pretty dangerous physically. They can outrun a horse over the long run, even though a horse will leave them behind in the short run. A friend of mine killed a Kodiak Brown Bear with a knife and walked away, he still survives. Men have been attacked by big cats and killed them.

    Leave a comment:


  • shunyadragon
    replied
    Originally posted by nico View Post
    Well, they don't sound very kosher do they? How about this though, every other species on the plant has zero diplomatic relations. Families/clans attack one another on sight for no apparent reason. They could all just work together but instead they kill without prejudice. At least humans try, right? Or if they kill it's often driven by hate rather than directive. I couldn't imagine a much better scenario if lions were to suddenly acquire a human intellect. Goodness, they'd round up all living and eat them 53 days flat. End of story.
    Note highlighted above: The reality of genetic studies of the diverse variety of human variations is that different human tribes and clans made more love with each other than war. We are a product of hybridization of many varieties including Neanderthal.

    Leave a comment:


  • 37818
    replied
    To be made in God's image of being a creative creature.

    Leave a comment:


  • shunyadragon
    replied
    Originally posted by nico View Post
    It's a quasi-parody thread. I thought it was kind of obvious. It was never meant to make convincing arguments. You know...partially uniformed tidbits about life mixed in with exaggerated conclusions. I wasn't actually saying that families kill from within, grammar ambiguities I guess, but families kill other families, etc, etc, as opposed to, say, bringing them a leg, or a liver, to welcome them into the neighborhood instead. But, if you insist, feel free to argue the superior merits of virtue in the animal kingdom. Could be interesting?

    quasi-parody? If so send it to the poop deck. If not, the thread question is a valid question. What does it mean to be human?

    Leave a comment:


  • nico
    replied
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    What would be the attributes that would classify a primate as human? Homo Sapiens Sapiens are indeed human, recent discovery and research has broadened the definition. The following would be attributes of humans: (1) Bipedal locomotion. (2) Manual Dexterity. (3) A larger complex brain. (4) Tool making. Maybe add (5) Capable of speech?

    If you consider these attributes, a number of our ancestors older then Homo Sapiens Sapiens could possibly be considered human such as: Homo sapiens neanderthalensis and possibly Homo (sapien?) antecessor.
    You forgot sexual reproduction. How could you forget that? I'll let it slide...

    Leave a comment:


  • shunyadragon
    replied
    What would be the attributes that would classify a primate as human? Homo Sapiens Sapiens are indeed human, recent discovery and research has broadened the definition. The following would be attributes of humans: (1) Bipedal locomotion. (2) Manual Dexterity. (3) A larger complex brain. (4) Tool making. Maybe add (5) Capable of speech?

    If you consider these attributes, a number of our ancestors older then Homo Sapiens Sapiens could possibly be considered human such as: Homo sapiens neanderthalensis and possibly Homo (sapien?) antecessor.

    Leave a comment:


  • Christianbookworm
    replied
    Are we to pretend a alien/robot/animal view of humans???
    polar/grizzly Bear: small crunchy creatures. slow and yummy. Can shoot back.
    Great White Shark: tried them, too bony

    Leave a comment:


  • nico
    replied
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    This needs more explanation, and reasonable description of natural behavior of different species. Avoid hypothetical stuff, and offer more real references on animal behavior. The only animals other then humans that are known to attack in clans or families their own kind are our closest living relatives, chimpanzees. Some animals do selectively kill their own in individual combat like stallion horses. Some species have male infanticide of the competing offspring from other males.
    It's a quasi-parody thread. I thought it was kind of obvious. It was never meant to make convincing arguments. You know...partially uniformed tidbits about life mixed in with exaggerated conclusions. I wasn't actually saying that families kill from within, grammar ambiguities I guess, but families kill other families, etc, etc, as opposed to, say, bringing them a leg, or a liver, to welcome them into the neighborhood instead. But, if you insist, feel free to argue the superior merits of virtue in the animal kingdom. Could be interesting?

    Leave a comment:


  • shunyadragon
    replied
    Originally posted by nico View Post
    Well, they don't sound very kosher do they? How about this though, every other species on the plant has zero diplomatic relations. Families/clans attack one another on sight for no apparent reason. They could all just work together but instead they kill without prejudice. At least humans try, right? Or if they kill it's often driven by hate rather than directive. I couldn't imagine a much better scenario if lions were to suddenly acquire a human intellect. Goodness, they'd round up all living and eat them 53 days flat. End of story.
    This needs more explanation, and reasonable description of natural behavior of different species. Avoid hypothetical stuff, and offer more real references on animal behavior. The only animals other then humans that are known to attack in clans or families their own kind are our closest living relatives, chimpanzees. Some animals do selectively kill their own in individual combat like stallion horses. Some species have male infanticide of the competing offspring from other males.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-16-2014, 07:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • nico
    replied
    Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
    You've said more than enough. Let's recap:




    This is false. I've already mentioned elephants. Chimps, bonobos, dolphins, lions, and other species all have fission-fusion societies where members may split into smaller groups or leave to join another group only to return later.




    This too is false. No apparent reason? Even disputes over territory are a reason, and they're not that hard to see. It's not accurate that all families/clans attack one another on sight, either.




    Except that most cases where they do kill are either rivals or the offspring of rivals. That's not without prejudice. Further, examples of altruism in animals have been amply documented.




    This is silly, too. Lions don't just eat everything in sight. There's no reason whatsoever to suggest that acquiring an intellect would cause them to suddenly gorge themselves. This mostly sounds like so much hyperbole.
    Human beings make much ado about nothing.

    Also, I stand by what I said. 53 days flat, if not before.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carrikature
    replied
    Originally posted by nico View Post
    Oh boy...here we go. I said "directive" sir, read above, specifically not hate.
    You're right, I misread it. My mistake.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carrikature
    replied
    Originally posted by nico View Post
    Anyway, I haven't said enough on the subject for your opinion about my off the markness to mean much.
    You've said more than enough. Let's recap:


    Originally posted by nico View Post
    How about this though, every other species on the plant has zero diplomatic relations.
    This is false. I've already mentioned elephants. Chimps, bonobos, dolphins, lions, and other species all have fission-fusion societies where members may split into smaller groups or leave to join another group only to return later.


    Originally posted by nico View Post
    Families/clans attack one another on sight for no apparent reason.
    This too is false. No apparent reason? Even disputes over territory are a reason, and they're not that hard to see. It's not accurate that all families/clans attack one another on sight, either.


    Originally posted by nico View Post
    They could all just work together but instead they kill without prejudice.
    Except that most cases where they do kill are either rivals or the offspring of rivals. That's not without prejudice. Further, examples of altruism in animals have been amply documented.


    Originally posted by nico View Post
    I couldn't imagine a much better scenario if lions were to suddenly acquire a human intellect. Goodness, they'd round up all living and eat them 53 days flat. End of story.
    This is silly, too. Lions don't just eat everything in sight. There's no reason whatsoever to suggest that acquiring an intellect would cause them to suddenly gorge themselves. This mostly sounds like so much hyperbole.
    Last edited by Carrikature; 02-14-2014, 12:14 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Christianbookworm
    replied
    Sound's like Ra's ah Gul... except without the reduce the population by 90%.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by shunyadragon, 12-01-2020, 03:19 PM
7 responses
22 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Working...
X