Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users.
Forum rules
General Discussion is a bonus forum for discussion of non-phpBB related topics with other phpBB.com users. All site rules apply.
User avatar
god0fgod
Registered User
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by god0fgod » Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:41 pm

We kill small animals all the time and do we care. Smaller animals lack intelligence and souls.

Darth Wong
Registered User
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2002 5:20 am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by Darth Wong » Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:16 pm

It's ridiculous to say that animals lack intelligence. They just have less intelligence. Intelligence is a sliding scale, not an on/off proposition. At some point, you draw a line in the sand and decide that animals below this line have so little intelligence that we don't need to worry about their feelings. Different people draw that line at different points; the higher the line, the less empathy the person appears to have. That's why serial killers and sociopaths often have a history of cruelty to animals.

As for lacking "souls", that's not a meaningful term. No one has ever devised a testable definition of "soul", so it is impossible to say whether an animal has a "soul". What precisely is a soul, and how do you know animals don't have any?

User avatar
god0fgod
Registered User
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by god0fgod » Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:27 pm

By soul, I mean self-awareness. The conscious being. It's a subjective thing but it makes sense it is linked with intelligence.

By "lack intelligence" I meant little intelligence.

Animal testing is best done on the smaller ones first like mice. Before it moves onto human testing, animals that have a closer similarity to humans can then be tested. Nothing wrong with that right for medical research. It's worth for saving human lives. It may also help save animal lives as well. The result may be transferrable to many other species.

Is animal testing on cosmetics okay? I don't think so. This is moving to another discussion however. Has there not been a topic about this before?

ToonArmy
Former Team Member
Posts: 4608
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 5:29 pm
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Name: Chris Smith
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by ToonArmy » Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:38 am

god0fgod wrote:By soul, I mean self-awareness. The conscious being. It's a subjective thing but it makes sense it is linked with intelligence.
I wouldn't call it a soul, and neither would a lot of people. Especially considering that popular opinion is that the soul 'lives' on somehow after the death of the organic part, which I don't agree with.
Chris SmithGitHub

User avatar
DavidIQ
Customisations Team Leader
Customisations Team Leader
Posts: 17078
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 1:30 pm
Location: Fishkill, NY
Name: David Colón
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by DavidIQ » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:09 pm

ToonArmy wrote:popular opinion is that the soul 'lives' on somehow after the death of the organic part, which I don't agree with.
Neither do I...
Apply to become a Jr. Extension Validator
My extensions | In need of phpBB services? | Was I helpful today?
No unsolicited PMs unless you're planning on asking for paid help.

User avatar
god0fgod
Registered User
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by god0fgod » Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:42 pm

It doesn't matter is you believe in an afterlife or not, you can still call it a soul.

User avatar
Phil
Former Team Member
Posts: 10403
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 4:11 am
Name: Phil Crumm
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by Phil » Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:22 am

Moving on, with the wind. | My Corner of the Web

Darth Wong
Registered User
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2002 5:20 am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by Darth Wong » Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:18 am

god0fgod wrote:It doesn't matter is you believe in an afterlife or not, you can still call it a soul.
Only in the loosest sense of the word "soul", which is used for terms like "soul food". In the context you used above, "soul" refers to certain religions' belief in a supernatural spirit.

In any case, I still don't see how you know that animals lack such a thing, regardless of whether you choose to call it a supernatural entity or not.

User avatar
god0fgod
Registered User
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by god0fgod » Wed Feb 24, 2010 10:15 pm

iWisdom wrote:No, you can't.
"the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonlyheld to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part."

Sounds close to what I mean.

Here's a word I like - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pedant

User avatar
Phil
Former Team Member
Posts: 10403
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 4:11 am
Name: Phil Crumm
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by Phil » Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:26 am

god0fgod wrote:
iWisdom wrote:No, you can't.
"the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonlyheld to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part."
Yes, exactly, that directly contradicts what you said:
god0fgod wrote:By soul, I mean self-awareness. The conscious being. It's a subjective thing but it makes sense it is linked with intelligence.
god0fgod wrote:Here's a word I like - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pedant
I do not appreciate that. This is a discussion forum, if you say something that makes no sense or is blatantly incorrect I or anyone else has the right to call you on it.
Moving on, with the wind. | My Corner of the Web

User avatar
god0fgod
Registered User
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 5:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by god0fgod » Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:46 pm

Well it was blatantly obvious what I meant and I didn't think this was discussion about words.

Going back to my point, doing tests on dinosaurs is ridiculous when we have animals today which fit the purpose much better and requires no pointless investment.

Hence the whole idea makes no sense to me.

User avatar
noth
Registered User
Posts: 2481
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 7:10 pm
Location: North Surrey
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by noth » Sat Feb 27, 2010 9:58 pm

did anybody notice that when the fat computer geek guy had 10000 lines to debug he had phpBB.com minimised :D cool

SamG
Former Team Member
Posts: 3221
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:35 pm
Location: Beautiful Northwest Lower Michigan
Name: Sam Graf

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by SamG » Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:12 pm

noth wrote:had phpBB.com minimised
Seriously?
iWisdom wrote:No, you can't.
Well, strictly speaking, you probably can. In philosophy of the mind and in discussion of the mind-body problem, use of the word "soul" doesn't have to directly engage the question of an afterlife or religious views about it. Philosophers can affirm or deny the existence of the soul (whether human or non-human) within these narrow confines, something along the lines of Dictionary.com's first definition, where an afterlife plays no direct part in the discussion.

Of course, the question of an afterlife naturally arises from the discussion indirectly if the soul does exist, but it doesn't have to follow religious views of it. If religious views of an afterlife are mistaken, but if there is a soul and it survives the death of the body, I suppose we can talk about a non-religious afterlife and be well off shore and into pure speculation. Hence the more concrete discussion generally coming out of philosophy of the mind.

If we're not strictly speaking, then all bets are off. :)
We should talk less, and say more.

User avatar
DavidIQ
Customisations Team Leader
Customisations Team Leader
Posts: 17078
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 1:30 pm
Location: Fishkill, NY
Name: David Colón
Contact:

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by DavidIQ » Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:48 am

SamG wrote:
noth wrote:had phpBB.com minimised
Seriously?
Not unless he took a time machine into the future...
phpBB: created June 2000
Jurassic Park: released June 1993
Apply to become a Jr. Extension Validator
My extensions | In need of phpBB services? | Was I helpful today?
No unsolicited PMs unless you're planning on asking for paid help.

SamG
Former Team Member
Posts: 3221
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 6:35 pm
Location: Beautiful Northwest Lower Michigan
Name: Sam Graf

Re: Jurassic Park, is it possible?

Post by SamG » Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:14 am

Let's see ... not April 1. So I'm just a sucker without excuse. :oops:
We should talk less, and say more.

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”