Chris_Sleeps Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 OK, maybe using the word "better" is not correct. But humans are fare more advanced and ultimately hold far more value to this planet than cats do. Opinion, again. Scientifically and philosophically, humans are superior to animals. For what reasons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerrangaroo Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 A cat wouldn't last 2 days without being fed. It might get lucky and kill a bird, or a mouse, but all it does then is play with it because it's too stupid to eat it! Your dislike of cats is apparent and obviously overalls any understanding of them as a survivor. As mentioned before, ferals are a fine example of their abiity to overcome and adapt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerrangaroo Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 The domesticated cat, as we know it, only even really exists because of humans breeding them anyway. Well you're close to the truth. They ony exist in such numbers because of our breeding them, they are adapt at multiplying without our assistance however and equally adapt at surviving without us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 The domesticated cat, as we know it, only even really exists because of humans breeding them anyway. Rubbish. They're perfectly capable of mating without our help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 Scientifically and philosophically, humans are superior to animals. In my opinion. neither scientifically or philosophically then. Scientifically doesn't rely on opinion, it relies on evidence, philosophy relies on reasoning, all you have given is opinion without evidence or reason that humans are the superior animal (we are not superior to animals, as scientifically speaking we are animals). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 neither scientifically or philosophically then. Scientifically doesn't rely on opinion, it relies on evidence, philosophy relies on reasoning, all you have given is opinion without evidence or reason that humans are the superior animal (we are not superior to animals, as scientifically speaking we are animals). In a fight to the death, a human could defeat any other animal on this planet. We would just shoot them, and, to cut a long story short, that's what makes us the superior species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 In a fight to the death, a human could defeat any other animal on this planet. We would just shoot them, and, to cut a long story short, that's what makes us the superior species. That's not entirely true though is it? Taking most average humans and placing them with the materials to make even the most basic of weapons doesn't give them the ability to actually make those weapons. A human who has a gun that has never operated one isn't guaranteed to win a fight to the death with, let's say, a lion. Even with the technological advances we have made (over hundreds of years and with the minds of many hundreds, if not thousands of humans working together) we're still a bit poo compared to many other species. What scale exactly are we using to measure this superiority by? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonzo77 Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 That's not entirely true though is it? Taking most average humans and placing them with the materials to make even the most basic of weapons doesn't give them the ability to actually make those weapons. A human who has a gun that has never operated one isn't guaranteed to win a fight to the death with, let's say, a lion. Even with the technological advances we have made (over hundreds of years and with the minds of many hundreds, if not thousands of humans working together) we're still a bit poo compared to many other species. What scale exactly are we using to measure this superiority by? It would be a really big gun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 It would be a really big gun! Well who can argue with that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Light sonic Posted August 4, 2012 Share Posted August 4, 2012 For what reasons? neither scientifically or philosophically then. Scientifically doesn't rely on opinion, it relies on evidence, philosophy relies on reasoning, all you have given is opinion without evidence or reason that humans are the superior animal (we are not superior to animals, as scientifically speaking we are animals). Lol, I can't believe that I'm having to argue the case with you tools, its self evident that humans are superior; we're not as strong as bears and gorrila's, we dont have the sharp teeth of Lions and crocodiles, or the eyesight and stealth of birds of prey, yet we are at the top of the food chain, and we are at the top of the food chain because of our superior intelligence. (I dont care about any spelling mistakes I may have made here so spare me ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.