Scientists say dolphins should be treated as 'non-human persons'

[kpete]

Source: TIMES UK

From The Sunday Times
January 3, 2010
Scientists say dolphins should be treated as 'non-human persons'

Dolphins have been declared the world’s second most intelligent creatures after humans, with scientists suggesting they are so bright that they should be treated as “non-human persons”.



Studies into dolphin behaviour have highlighted how similar their communications are to those of humans and that they are brighter than chimpanzees. These have been backed up by anatomical research showing that dolphin brains have many key features associated with high intelligence.

The researchers argue that their work shows it is morally unacceptable to keep such intelligent animals in amusement parks or to kill them for food or by accident when fishing. Some 300,000 whales, dolphins and porpoises die in this way each year.

“Many dolphin brains are larger than our own and second in mass only to the human brain when corrected for body size,” said Lori Marino, a zoologist at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, who has used magnetic resonance imaging scans to map the brains of dolphin species and compare them with those of primates.

Read more: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article6973994.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=797084

[StarfarerBill]

1. K&R and in complete agreement.

[StopTheNeoCons]

181. +1

[MindPilot]

2. Should they really be in the same category as republicans? n/t

[onehandle]

3. Republicans are people too!

Sorta.

[hlthe2b]

6. only on the planet of Freeperlandia

[The Doctor.]

50. No... that's "corporate personhood". We should have 'cetacean' personhood.

There'd be a lot better conversation.

[valerief]

96. They have only the human shell. Nothing inside them is remotely human. nt

[ashling]

222. non-human people

that is, displaying no or limited signs of humanity

[marshall]

24. Only if they start paying taxes!

And of course there will be the massive education system.

[DBoon]

42. I can hardly wait until freepers pay their share of taxes

and then become educated. It would be a great day when the finally attend school and learn how to spell and do simple math.

Oh, did you mean the porpoises?

[AllTooEasy]

212. Awesome.

[AngryAmish]

28. shakes fist

you beat me to it

[Lorien]

41. They are far superior to republicans

after all, dolphins don't spend their lives trying to destroy their home and victimize other dolphins so that they can amass many bright shiny objects.

[DissedByBush]

90. Dolphin myths

They are aggressive.

They fight each other over mates, leaving bad scars, sending the loser out of the group sometimes.

Some kill their own offspring, and some kill others for reasons we don't know.

[Enthusiast]

103. In other words,

they are even more human-like in their behavior than we were led to believe.

[BrklynLiberal]

178. Sounds like a perfect description of human beings.

[AlbertCat]

207. Another dolphin myth.

Myth: "Some don't kill their own offspring, and some never kill others for reasons we don't know."

Dolphins do indeed target other dolphins and ram them to death.

They also don't use tools....like say, some octopi.

Dolphins are dolphins....not "persons" or primates. This is comparing apples and oranges.

But I see no need to uselessly kill them. However, anthropomorphizing them is stupid.




Then there's the Daulphin.....

[sulphurdunn]

227. Not primates but still mammals

Whereas primates are the big terrestrial brains, Cetaceans are the worlds top aquatic intellects. Octopi seem to be the bright lights among Cephalopods. The main difference between humans and dolphins is that dolphins have put all their evolutionary eggs into the perfection of their bodies, while we are following the path of technological evolution. Only time will tell which species was smarter and fitter in the game of survival.

[timefortherevolution]

48. AAAAAAAAAAGH!!! You beat me to it! No, they're better than republicans.

They don't steal food out of one another's mouths.

[glinda]

75. I think they are superior to "humans".

[Lost-in-FL]

66. That would be an insult to dolphins. nt

[cartach]

80. No

Dolphins seem to have a set of morals,Republicans do not.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

137. ...and they're much more likeable

When was tht last time you heard somebody talking about wanting to "Swim with the Republicans"

[Cetacea]

141. ROTFL

My, that was too funny.

:rofl:

[RaleighNCDUer]

162. I haven't -

but then, I avoid DLC sites.

[Richard D]

87. Please

Don't insult the poor dolphins.

[RedCloud]

120. Perhaps. They can be waterboarded and denied legal access.

Somewhere methinks the Xindi-Aquatics will get their revenge on us.

[tavalon]

135. Absolutely not!

Dolphins are highly intelligent!

[BrklynLiberal]

177. LOL.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[jillan]

261. No - dolphins are much more intelligent than Republicans.

[varelse]

4. Recommended

The concept of seeing other species as "non-human persons" is a huge step forward for the human race. I hope it catches on.

[glitch]

33. +infinity. nt

[timefortherevolution]

52. Can't wait to see repugs tie this one to an Acorn conspiracy.

Faux News will report it as a way to count aquatic voters.

[hlthe2b]

5. absolutely! K&highly recommend

[Wilms]

7. Nice! Put in a good word for us.

Despite our tiny brains.

[Flying Dream Blues]

11. Love it!

Signed,
Dog Person

[donco6]

62. Tiny brains but BIG HEART!

Awwww!

[tavalon]

136. The breed of dog I have is said to have the intelligence of a toddler

I think that might be shortchanging him. He is scary smart.

[wakemewhenitsover]

8. K&R -- Free the dolphins, but...

...do less intelligent species deserve less humane treatment?

[varelse]

36. Of course not

;)

[DeSwiss]

9. K&R

- Seth Speaks.

[niyad]

10. k and r--it's about time

[20score]

12. Somebody please tell the Japanese government.

Quickly!

[lildreamer316]

160. +1000

what is that bay where they..you know...oh, it's horrible.

[w4rma]

13. I don't have anything against this. (nt)

[Blasphemer]

14. K&R... nt

[bertman]

15. They are very considerate also. On numerous occasions, when I was fishing in the ocean,

I have been catching fish and reeling them in with pods of dolphins all around, yet they wouldn't take my fish. I was always grateful since I'm not the best fisherman in the world. It would have been very easy for them to grab my catch and make off with it because the dolphins would be swimming all around it.

Yes, I know that some spoilsport is going to mention that they knew they might get hooked if they grabbed my fish, but I'll point out that they could have chopped them in half like the barracudas do.

There is a spiritual quality to dolphins that is never more evident than when they are "playing" around a boat in the deep blue sea. They cavort like kids, except that they are so quick and so agile that they can ride the bow wave, dive under the boat and emerge instantly on the other side, and then just glide along effortlessly as if to say, "Hey welcome to our world, human". They are beautiful creatures.

[sce56]

49. Dupe self delete

[Delphinus]

111. I really appreciate

what you describe in your third paragraph. What a treat for you to be in close contact with them (and for me to read of your experience and smile).

[Cetacea]

122. +1

[tavalon]

138. I just realized, in all the years I dove,

plenty of times I would see them playing around the boat as it was going out to the divesite, but never have I seen them when I was diving. I'm really surprised in retrospect. I've had a close encounter with a barracuda (very curious creature) but never dolphins.

[Matariki]

16. Yay.

They might even be considerably brighter than humans, considering they spend their days not going to work at security firms and the like.

[sellitman]

46. Best yet there isn't a single Rethuglican Dolphin alive b

Proof positive of their intelligence.

[Uncle Joe]

17. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.:thumbsup:

[tridim]

18. It's an issue humans should address at some point in animal evolution.

Now seems like as good a time as any.

[Mojorabbit]

98. Yes and I would add

parrots to the list. My african grey uses words in context and makes up compete sentences from the words in his vocabulary.

[KittyWampus]

150. ALEX!

sorry, I remember Alex and read the book that just came out :)

[Gman]

19. I can think of many more reasons to allow dophins to vote than many Republicans

they're that smart.

[veganlush]

20. no shit.....n/t

[Yavin4]

21. If Dolphins Are So Smart, Then...

http://www3.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Miami+Dolphins+v+New+England+Patriots+3S9sVBSILaTl.jpg

Why didn't they make the playoffs?

[BlueJazz]

39. ..because the of-fish-cials ruled against them.

[KamaAina]

172. 'Cause they blew it?

[avaistheone1]

263. Yeah, and is dolphins are so smart....

how come they are not rich?


http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/12/24/SingaporeRich_wideweb__470x314,0.jpg

[spirit of wine]

22. So long,

and thanks for all the fish.

In the latest Richsrd Dawkins book, "The Greatest Show On Earth", he seems to also mention the evolution of a dolphin and a chimpanzee's brain, not to mention some accolades for Douglas Adams.

[dorkulon]

65. What a brilliant guy Douglas Adams was.

It's a tragedy that he's not writing another mind-blowing, sidesplitting book right now.

[bedazzled]

74. isn't it amazing how many great people are dead

and how many crummy ones still walk around

the mind reels

[ixion]

23. second most intelligent? hmmmm

that is very, very debatable. :)

[Control-Z]

108. How so?

Is there another you believe to hold that position? Or, do you believe they may be even more intelligent?

[Cetacea]

110. Correct. Large brains need large bodies.

It's too soon to say if they are smarter than or less smarter than humans. Considering how alien their bodies and environment is to ours, they may be smarter in a non-human way. Still, when placed in a laboratory environment (and marine parks)they seem to thoroughly enjoy being challenged and tested and there is a certain amount of "crossover".
They probably feel a certain kinship with us, especially since they can "see" our brains, whose characteristics are more similar to dolphins than they are to apes.

The researchers make the usual mistake of comparing brain weight to body weight as a measurement when it may not apply to a species living in a near weightless environment. It is also possible that large brains need large bodies to protect the brain from rotary acceleration. (put a dog brain in the body of the agile cat and the brain would suffer major damage)

Large bodies do not need large brains. Large brains absolutely need large bodies. The larger the brain, the larger the body.

They also fail to mention that the dolphin cortex has MORE folds than the human brain does, and that the dolphin has a FOURTH lobe, and if that lobe is dedicated to motor functions and sensory input as suspected, then that leaves a huge amount of brain mass dedicated to higher functioning. It may be that they are actually "more human" than humans.

The article fails to mention the 2007 discovery of the presence of "spindle" cells, previously thought to belong to humans only. It is believed that spindle cells regulate such emotional states as love, fear, empathy,sorrow, etc... (also found in whales, elephants, apes, and certain birds) Dolphins and whales have them in the greatest abundance.

The article fails to mention short term memory tests in which dolphins recalled more numbers at a faster rate of recall and with far less anxiety than human subjects. This of course makes sense as their cerebral cortex is some forty percent larger than ours.

The article fails to mention the discoveries of long-time researcher Louis Herman, who has dolphins doing sign, has demonstrated that they understand and use syntax, and that they create new behavior when asked to do so, and they do it instantly and in tandem...

And there's much more but this rant is too long already. :)

The article's shortcomings aside, it is encouraging to see that more and more people are calling for the recognition of dolphins (and whales) as the other intelligent species of the planet (and one that has been surviving here some thirty to fifty million years longer than we have)

[tavalon]

140. So, it's certainly possible that humans are the second smartest

after dolphins. My husband, who used to work with dolphins, likely would affirm that.

[Cetacea]

147. Yes, though Orcas and sperm whales may be smarter than dolphins.

Again, despite the huge bodies, any body smaller than that would mean certain brain damage. And as is the case with dolphins, all additional brain mass is in the areas dedicated to higher function.
In the Orca, the cerebral cortex is three times larger than mans, and in the sperm whale, six times. All of them have spindle cells, until 2007 thought to be present in the human brain alone.

Spindle neurons:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spindle_neuron

[tavalon]

165. That was a fascinating wiki article

Thank you.

[RedCappedBandit]

216. I thought Orcas were dolphins?

(Just asking, not arguing)

[Cetacea]

225. Correct. Orcas are the largest of the dolphins.

:)

[veganlush]

25. this is the future...

..it's sad that so many are so far behind on this..

[Peace Patriot]

26. I agree! nt

[niyad]

27. would this mean that our damned gov't would have to STOP using them to deploy bombs?

[Book Lover]

32. Nope. DARPA would push interspecies communication all the further

in order to get them to sign consent forms. Hmm, Twilight Zone episode?

[DBoon]

44. If not they should get veteran's benefits

treat them like any human that deploys bombs

[Cetacea]

116. And royalties.

[haele]

157. I know a Navy dolphin handler - they don't use the term trainer anymore

who informs me that since the mid 80's, the majority of the dolphins who work with the Navy have come to them and stay in the pen area voluntarily. The way those pens are constructed, the dolphins can come and go as they please, and have the handler's (the feeding and training) schedules down pat usually by the second or third visit. The handlers don't even tag dolphins in the pens until the dolphin decides to work with the humans, which usually takes a couple weeks. And most times, the dolphin only sticks around for a few years; as the dolphins who hang out around the pens are generally the young or the very old who are hanging out for free food and care. Other than the occasional "deployment" - and they have figured out when a ship-out is going to happen and will disappear if they don't want to go - they've got a pretty cushy life and are generally very willing to do "a job" - and they'll work on their own cognizance once they've gone through dolphin basic. In fact, several times a tagged Navy dolphin has shown up with a "replacement", a younger dolphin, and will only hang around until that dolphin is comfortable and then split. (Probably to find a mate and raise a family)
Recently, the handlers have also found a couple sick, injured or old dolphins escorted the pens for treatment and recuperation. The other dolphin will hang around until the sick dolphin is taken in to be cared for.

I'm not saying it's not exploitive for the Navy to be using marine mammals - it is, just as any military service is in it's nature, exploitive to any intelligent being.
BTW, Day of the Dolphin was a myth. Dolphins don't get bombs strapped to them; if they figure out it's a bomb - which they can; they can tell the difference between a camera and a bomb by "scent" or feel or some other method - and it's been proven that they'll just go back and return the bomb to the people that sent them out with it. They are good for detecting explosives and divers with explosives, though, and that's what many do.
But it's not like training a dog - and the dolphins can't be treated "like animals" or the handler gets seriously hurt. It's like training a person who don't "have" to work if they don't want to. And the dolphins do get vet (veteran and veterinarian) benefits whenever they feel like using them.

Haele

[Cetacea]

257. Thanks for the info. The Navy has always had a good deal of respect

for cetaceans. It's unfortunate that they refuse to stop the high sonar drills, though, especially given the fact that they lifted or improved that technology from dolphins and pilot whales.

[kayla9170]

29. Like "Free Willy" and the song by MJ......

The late great Michael Jackson had the concept way before we as a society, would accept it.

"Hold me, like a river Jordan, And then I will say to thee, you were my friend......" Michael referring to Willy and the boy in the movie.

The rest of the Free Willy Lyrics..........
Hold me, like the river jordan
And I will then say to thee
You re my friend
Carry me, like you are my brother
Love me like a mother
Will you be there�
Weary, tell me will you hold me
When wrong, will you hold me
When lost will you find me?
But they told me a man should be faithful
And walk when not able
And fight till the end but I'm only human (instru.)


Everyone taking control of me
Seems that the world's
Got a role for me I'm so confused
Will you should to me you'll be there for me
And care enough to bear me
(Hold me) (lay your head lowly)
(Softly then boldly) (carry me there)
(Hold me) (love me and feed me)
(Kiss me and free me) (I will feel blessed)
(Carry) (carry me boldly) (life me up slowly)
(Carry me there) (save me) (heal me and bathe me)
(Softly you say to me) (I will be there)
(Life me) (lift me up slowly)
(Carry me blodly) (show me you care)
(Hold me) (lay your head lowly)
(Softly then boldly) (carry me there)
(Need me) (love me and feed me)
(Kiss me and free me) (I will feel blessed)

Spoken : in our darkest hour in my deepest despair
Will you still care? will you be there
In my taials and my tribulations
Through our doubts and frustrations
In my violenceln my turbulence
Through my fear and my cconfessions
In my anguish and my pain
Through my joy and my sorrow
In the promise of another tomorrow
I'l never let you part for you're always in my heart


This is one of my favorite movies and the song is forever in my mind because it is so beautiful....just like the Whales and Dolphins.

[Land Shark]

78. I, Land Shark, came out of the water for this great song. FINS UP!!! k&r n/t

[liberalmuse]

30. I'd say we should do the same for all animals...

and creatures, for that matter, but, at least we're being urged to start somewhere.

[ddeclue]

31. Meh! Dolphins don't have opposable thumbs...

:P

[postulater]

34. At least as human as a corporation!

[jgraz]

38. Much, much more.

[AllyCat]

61. +1

[defendandprotect]

35. All animal life should be respected -- they are our sisters and brothers on the planet . ..

Obviously, Dolphins are often more humane and compassionate than humans!!

Rather than "non-human persons" -- they might be spiritually superior humans!

[Lorien]

43. Amen to that! nt

[winyanstaz]

64. Mitakuye oyasin....means..All my Relations/We are Related

All life is sacred and an attribute of The One.
Namaste/The Spirit/Divine within me recognizes the Spirit/Divine within you.
"As ye do unto the least of these..you do unto me."
What we do to one..we do to The Creator/The One.
The Earth is our Mother, the Sky Father is the Sun/son.
"In the web of life...all is connected."
All statements from different cultures and paths...all saying the same thing.

[BrklynLiberal]

183. thanks for this.

[debbierlus]

71. Don't insult dolphins by paring them with the human race!

Dolphins don't commit acts of war on each other and they don't destroy the ocean.

Love the dolphins.

[Chulanowa]

84. Except when they play porpoise volleyball

or rape other dolphins.

Extremely intelligent creatures - and also the frat boy assholes of the sea.

[chatnoir]

94. + a xillion

[LWolf]

246. +1,000 nt

[Vidar]

37. K&R.

[sharesunited]

40. I will gladly trade places with them at Sea World as long as the water heater is on!

[Leftist Agitator]

45. I know one dolphin that qualifies for personhood.

[roamer65]

47. "Good luck and thanks for all the fish".

That Douglas Adams quote immediately pops to mind.

[lapfog_1]

73. Just before the earth is destroyed...

The Dolphins will try to warn us with an intricate series of back flips and leaps through hoops, all of which will be misinterpreted by humans.

But it will be the white lab mice (who have been performing a subtle set of experiments on humans for years now) that will be the most surprising discovery of intelligence on our planet.

That, and the fact that we are really aliens from another star system, telephone sanitizers and beauticians sent off planet (exiled) "to save the very BEST of humanity, yeah, that's the ticket!" who happened to crash land on earth.

[Grown2Hate]

241. Not to be a jerk, but it's "So Long and Thanks for all the Fish". I'm just a Douglas Adams

perfectionist. ;)

[CLANG]

51. Republicans will be livid when they hear about this!

They're afraid of the competition.:rofl:

[TheDebbieDee]

53. I hear that dolphins are horny little buggers, therefore they must be INTELLIGENT!

Dolphin POWER.

[elocs]

54. I had a Lit teacher in college who believed that dolphins would one day rule the world.

That is if we leave enough of a world in which they can survive.

[Sunnyshine]

55. i come from the water - that weren't no easy thing

k&r- toadies

Non-human persons with high intelligence sounds alien like funny to me, but only because it's a profound thing to say scientifically and could challenge some of the common assumptions made regards to the ethical treatment of non-human animals. As for The Knowing race- us humans- we have a hard time respecting our survival. In this case, humans are less intelligent than dolphins.

[ooglymoogly]

56. I love dolphins and piss on people who eat them

I hate pugs and love those who piss on them. Can someone make that into a hyku.

[Hatalles]

57. Check this out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuVgXJ55G6Y

[Cetacea]

119. Vortex rings.

If you look at the video at 1:17 there is a dolphin making infinity symbols . When he is done he looks at the camera like he's all proud and saying, "pretty cool, eh?" :)

[sce56]

58. Just love the way they play! One day I might try and swim with them too!

Watching them from the bow is such a treat!



Enjoying the Dolphins playing in my bow wave YouTube


Definitely need to protect them and the Whales also! My last charitable contribution last month was to the Sea Shepard Society to save the whales from the Japanese fleet!

[bread_and_roses]

59. K&R for all the cetaceans...and for the rights of all other living creatures

down to the very least intelligent to share this earth...

[dpbrown]

60. Wouldn't it be cool if they had hands?

They might make for some real competition!

[Lorien]

85. They don't need them. They already have everything that they want

except, perhaps, a clean human free ocean to live in.

[hellsbeagle]

63. All Animals Should Be Treated As Non-Human Persons

If we did so, this would be a much better planet to live on.

[JFN1]

67. About fucking time!!

[veganlush]

68. pigs should be treated as " Non-dog dogs"....

either you think needless animal suffering is bad or you don't. Factory farming equals animal torture. If you are part of the demand that makes the supply profitable, you are supporting the torture of animals, their intelligence relative to ours is irrelevant. Needless suffering is what is it. It's time to evolve past this. Eat a plant based diet and live a healthier life, or if you think you have to eat meat, hunt for it and kill it yourself. At least the animal was able to lead a normal life up to that point. Predator vs. prey is natural. Factory farms, which the majority of americans support through their purchases, are reprehensible. the time has come for people to get their heads out of the sand.

If you love your dog and/or cat, stop buying meat from factory farms. Put your morals where your mouth is. Go vegan.

[veganlush]

69. BTW, thanks for posting on this important issue, kpete...n/t

[Orrex]

70. They may be smart, but I could totally kick their ass at thumb-wrestling

Except maybe these ones, of course.

[iris27]

72. "On the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins

because he had achieved so much - the wheel, New York, wars and so on - whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man - for precisely the same reasons.

The last ever dolphin message was misinterpreted as a surprisingly sophisticated attempt to do a double-backwards-somersault through a hoop whilst whistling the 'Star Spangled Banner', but in fact the message was this: So long and thanks for all the fish."

- Douglas Adams, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

[Mind_your_head]

82. Indeed. "So long and thanks for the fish." eom

[Stevenmarc]

76. So dolphins should be treated like corporations

[Land Shark]

79. Corporations are "persons" only for limited purposes (in law) when it suits them. Not jury duty, etc

[onpatrol98]

77. 'non-human persons' - sounds kind of nutty

...I feel like I'm standing in a room full of naked people, with everyone pretending that they're wearing clothes...

In order to be a person...don't you have to be human? Shouldn't we just treat animals better? This seems a bit nutty to me. If we want to protect animals, why should we have to give them a new, "odd" name to do it?

[Lorien]

83. Um, corporations have the legal definition of personhood

the title isn't limited to human beings.

[onpatrol98]

88. that's a bit nutty also

True, but personally, I've always thought that was a bit nutty as well.

[Odin2005]

145. So a sapient AI wouldn't be a person?

Your anthropocentrism is showing. :puke:

[alp227]

81. "Non-human persons"? That label should be more scientific than legal.

I wonder who will oversee the new dolphin governments, schools, communities, and banks. :rofl:

But still, that label is quite interesting.

[surrealAmerican]

231. I'm wondering if that has some sort of ...

... specific legal meaning in the UK.

[flamingdem]

86. go dolphins ! nt

[progressoid]

89. Treat them like humans...and bomb the fuck out of them.

[RedCappedBandit]

218. rofl!

This was actually the first thought that popped into my head when I read the op.

[pissedoff01]

91. NEXT: Scientists say pigs should be treated as 'non-human persons'

(not as ham or bacon)

[pecwae]

113. Fine by me.

[Ignis]

271. They're already smarter than your dog.

Why eat one and not the other?

[Captain Hilts]

92. Absolutely. Pigs and octopi come in second and third. nt

[omega minimo]

93. Anyone see "The Big Blue"?

Recommended

[Cetacea]

124. +1

[omega minimo]

196. ++

:hi: "Cetacea" would know it!

[valerief]

95. I'd love to see personhood given to dolphins and removed from corporations. nt

[varelse]

134. no kidding (nt)

[WheelWalker]

192. Beautiful ! +1

[Hekate]

97. Kick and Rec. Fascinating, and I'm prepared to believe it. nt

[cqo_000]

99. Dolphins save swimmers from shark

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/11/24/dolphin_newzealand041124.html

[BrklynLiberal]

180. and that is not the only time...merely the most accurately documented time.

[Solly Mack]

100. K&R

[pokerfan]

101. I was just watching this video earlier

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwJaUFHs-C4

[BrklynLiberal]

182. Here are a couple more that prove they have a sense of altruism..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBLj1x86V74&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fp_motddvnQ&NR=1&feature=fvwp

[proteus_lives]

102. I'll treat them like humans when they write an essay about being as intelligent as human beings.

Or when they create artwork, poetry, mathematics, buildings, agriculture or when they domesticate guppies as sea-kitties.

Until then, they're animals.

[Cetacea]

106. I guess many native humans weren't human after all.

[proteus_lives]

107. How so?

All humans have the ability to create, use, participate in or appreciate the things I listed.

Dolphins do not.

[Cetacea]

125. And you know this...how?

[Dangerously Amused]

151. My brother is profoundly retarded and physically disabled, and can't create,

use, or participate in any of those things, and his appreciation of any of them is widely open to debate. According to you my brother isn't human and therefore should be considered and treated as an animal. Right?

[eqfan592]

236. You can't possibly know this, proteus.

Our understanding is limited in many ways, and this includes understanding another species ideal for "art work." Perhaps they have a complex form of underwater dancing that they enjoy and that is viewed by them as an art form, with specific masters teaching others. We already know that they are able to pass such knowledge on from one dolphin to another.

Simply because something wouldn't pass our muster for "art" (and honestly, most humans can't agree on what art is, either) does not mean they do not have some form of it.

[pecwae]

114. What about the humans

who do none of what you mentioned? Until they do, what would those folks be in your estimable opinion?

[proteus_lives]

117. All humans create.

It's part of what makes us human. We have foresight, imagination, higher thought processes.

All humans have the capacity to appreciate, create, use or participate in the things I mentioned above.

Dolphins do not.

[Cetacea]

126. "We have foresight, imagination, higher thought processes."

And you are certain that dolphins and whales do not possess these qualities?

[Nihil]

170. "All humans create" ... except for the ones that don't.

> All humans have the capacity to appreciate, create, use or participate
> in the things I mentioned above.

That is not true.

There are many, many "humans" that you appear to be including in your
"all" that simply do not - often cannot - do the above.

I am not just talking about the seriously retarded and/or physically
disabled ones (although these are an obvious starting point) but also
those who are psychologically incapable of performing the actions and
capabilities that you've associated with "normal" humans.

You may not be able to tell the difference between a "normal" human
and a physically sound (yet lacking) "sub-normal" human from a photograph
but that doesn't make the difference go away.

How about the ones who simply do not do so (either from lack of skill
or lack of interest). Are these still human?

Similarly, *you* may not be able to appreciate the beauty, the emotional
capability or the intelligence of other species but, again, that doesn't
make the "unwanted" aspects go away.

Were humans "sub-human" before they learned to write?

Were they "sub-human" before they proved the skill of blowing crushed
coloured earths over their hands to leave images on a cave wall?

Do you know what a pitifully tiny fraction of the history of this
species has been found & preserved? Yet you believe that no such
corresponding evidence exists for any other species (whether older
or younger than our own) and so claim that we are unique?


> We have foresight, imagination, higher thought processes.

All of these are abstracts that are still not fully understood.
How do you expect to recognise these abstracts in another species?

(This is way down the line from asking you to explain their relevance
in the frame of reference of that species - even for land-based ones
with whom we have a lot in common.)

[uberllama42]

127. Humans are also animals.

To say that dolphins are animals does not make a meaningful distinction between them and us.

[LanternWaste]

132. As are we.

"Until then, they're animals."
As are we.

I'll treat people like people on an individual level when they begin acting in a civil and dignified manner, and finally begin to refrain from saying crap simply to say crap. Until then, they're animals.

[AlbertCat]

211. "Until then, they're animals."

Humans have a human DNA code.


Dolphins has a dolphin DNA code.


End of discussion.



It is stupid to anthropomorphize dolphins. You have only a slight clue what and how they perceive the world around them.(which is very very very different from ours since we don't live in the sea)We do human things and dolphins do dolphin things. One may THINK they understand dolphin motivations and intents but one doesn't. Hell, you can hardly discern other humans' motivations, much less a sea creature's from which we are far removed.


Stil....no reason to kill them for sport or food.

[harun]

174. I will agree people should not kill them but I also agree with you, they

are just animals.

People have something animals don't. To avert a flame fest I will leave it at that.

[proteus_lives]

195. That's what I was saying.

I don't think they should be killed either but we have something animals don't. Simple fact.

[eqfan592]

237. Proteus, be careful not to fall into the same trap the anti-2a folks...

..we "debate" with do. Take a look at the evidence yourself. There does appear to be more to dolphins than first meets the eye, and that is truly the simple fact. Being dismissive of this fact is counter productive. If they are intelligent, then it is not crazy for somebody to make the ethical argument that they should be treated as any other intelligent being would be.

[proteus_lives]

250. I'm not dismissing that that they are more intelligent then other animals.

I do agree they are high up there.

But they aren't as smart or evolved as humans and they probably won't be for a long time.

They shouldn't be hunted or exploited. They should be studied all these lines.

I just have a problems equating animals with humans. It's simply a different scale.

[Ignis]

201. Presumably, the word you're looking for is "souls." (nt)

[harun]

209. Actually the word is "choice"

Humans have the choice to affirm or deny God. All the rest of creation affirms God, only we were created with the ability to deny Him.

[Ignis]

213. Either way, it has nothing to do with the OP (intelligence).

But it might make an interesting topic for the Religion forum.

[DRex]

226. That's ridiculous...

don't sully my animal bretheren by putting them in league with the religious. They certainly do not affirm god. They do nothing of the sort.

Except frogs. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TKerWEQono

[Sultana]

104. K&R

[democrank]

105. K & R

Thanks, kpete.

[Control-Z]

109. I just love

this kind of information. It would be so exciting (and for some reason, I imagine, comforting) to touch, talk to, and swim with a dolphin.

Thank you for the post!

[rambler_american]

112. Recommend the documentary

The Cove. Devastating and heartbreaking account of the annual slaughter of dolphins by the Japanese.

http://www.netflix.com/Movie/The_Cove/70112741?trkid=222336

[pecwae]

115. Not enough digits available for Recs.

[BlueIris]

118. Oh, crap. Welcome our new, bottle-nosed overlords.

Have mercy on our humble ape-race, Dolphins.

[madokie]

121. I agree

I seem to want to think I remember reading that the dolphin is the only other creature that has sex seemingly for fun like we humans do, or the lucky ones anyway :-O

[Cetacea]

129. You read correctly.

They also engage in gay sex and have midwives.

[madokie]

142. cool

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

123. Pa love Fa! nt

[mdmc]

128. Veterinarians at Sea World agreed, claiming co-payments would

now be part of the dolphin's medical check ups and treatments. There will no longer be a dolphin dental plan,.

[Cetacea]

130. Thank you for posting this, Kpete.

[yellerpup]

131. We are not far from any creature on this planet

but we have forgotten how to honor and respect other species. K&R!

[LeftHander]

133. American Family Institute already making plans for marriage ban....nt

[theFrankFactor]

139. Surprised? I'm Not.

K&R

[Mari333]

143. non human animals are smarter then human animals

I find it amusing that human animals think they are sooo smart, gods special little monkey.
knr

[Odin2005]

144. I agree. Our fellow apes should, too.

[Deep13]

146. Dolphins evolve opposable thumbs.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28315

[Cetacea]

148. LoL . ""That's it for us monkeys."

Thanks for the link.

[grantcart]

267. lol

"Last Friday, a crude seaweed-and-shell abacus washed up on the beach near Hilo, Hawaii. The next day, a far more sophisticated abacus, fashioned from some unknown material and capable of calculating equations involving numbers of up to 16 digits, washed up on the same beach. The day after that, the beach was littered with thousands of what turned out to be coral-silicate and kelp-based biomicrocircuitry."

[Cetacea]

268. Ha. That was the best part of the story imo.

One of the Onion's better efforts I thought.

[Larkspur]

149. Does this mean that they can also be called "enemy combatants"?

:sarcasm:

I love dolphins and always have. It was the TV show "Flipper" that got me to love dolphins.

[sudopod]

247. He was on a mission.

The boy with a dolphin grew up to be a man with a porpoise.

[sudopod]

248. He was on a mission.

The boy with a dolphin grew up to be a man with a porpoise.

[goodboy]

152. "So long, and thanks for all the fish!" -Douglas Adams (HGTTG) (nt)

[derby378]

153. We used to have a Seven Seas amusement park in the Dallas/Fort Worth area

Its main attraction was an orca named Newtka, back when they were more commonly referred to as "killer whales."

I was just a kid, but I think I remember Newtka tossing a collectible Frisbee to me with his picture on it. I just remember that I enjoyed watching Newtka frolic and perform as he did. What kid wouldn't?

But as I got older and learned more about dolphins in general, I still wanted that contact with dolphins, but now I realize that such contact needs to be on their terms, not ours. Even in the most humane conditions, dolphins that are kept penned up in amusement parks don't fare as well as they do on the high seas. It's where they belong. Just like I wouldn't appreciate it if I was prepetually trapped under a glass dome that had a 1,000-foot diameter at the base. I coud have a comfortable home under the dome, all the food and medical care I needed for a lifetime, and even some neighbors to keep me company, but sooner or later I'm going to want to set foot out of that dome.

[myrna minx]

154. K&R n/t

[AspenRose]

155. Dolphins rock.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

156. Kick for our dolphin buddies!

[Gregorian]

158. My first thought was military sound weapons.

I just remember hearing about extremely loud underwater experiments that the military has been testing. What a lovely world they've made for us, and for living creatures on, above, and under the planet.

Otherwise, I'm not surprised at all. All animals have intelligence. And probably a hell of a lot more than most humans realize.

[Orsino]

159. It would be completely impractical to set up reservations...

...and they might not be susceptible to smallpox.

[Gman2]

161. Dolphins are hypnotizable. I did one. Rubbed it where our ears would be.

[supernova]

163. Dolphins like Umox?

[gorfle]

164. Non-human persons.

One of the arguments often used to justify abortion is that unborn humans are not people. (I myself am pro-choice but do not see the need to try and justify such sanctioned killings).

If a dolphin can be afforded the rights of being a person, what about unborn humans? If we cease to deny the inherent peronsonhood of dolphins, who can deny the inherent personhood of unborn humans?

[tavalon]

166. Non human persons is so person centric, it's embarrassing

Why does it always have to be about us?

[anonymous171]

169. "Person" is a moral/philosophical term, not a biological one. nt

[Goldstein1984]

167. "...the world’s second most intelligent creatures after humans..."

Using human criteria for "intelligent."

I wonder what an objective visitor from another world would conclude, based on the mess that humans have made of their own culture and the ecosystem?

If humans every do become truly civilized, they will look back on killing dolphins and other cetaceans as the equivalent of cannibalism.

[BrklynLiberal]

185. +100

[Mixopterus]

189. Well, if they have achieved FTL travel...

They would have very likely stirred up the ecosystem on their home planet as well, so it wouldn't be a big deal to them.

[Goldstein1984]

269. If they survived long enough to achieve FTL travel...

they didn't do the kind of damage we are.

My gut tells me that the combination of nuclear/biological/chemical weapons, the myth of unlimited growth, and human nature are a lethal combination. That's only my belief, and for the sake of my grandchildren I hope I'm wrong. But only time will tell.

For my own peace of mind, I've abandoned a anthropocentric view of survival. The life evolved and existed on Earth for about three billion years before humans showed up on the scene. Humans are not as isolated from other life of Earth as the traditional monotheistic religions teach. I'm satisfied if life on Earth survives, even if life on Earth ceases to include our species.

[Maru Kitteh]

168. K & R and I couldn't possibly agree more.

[MissDeeds]

171. K&R

Great article. No creature should be used for our amusement.

[patrice]

173. Noting how some of us treat human persons, I'm not so sure how this scientific declaration will bene

fit dolphins, but I do like this "non-human persons" tag!

[Ignis]

175. K&R. Glad you got a better response than I did, Kpete.

(Granted, it's not a 100% match, but you'd think some anthropomorphism would have worked in my favor. ;) )

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6775301

[BrklynLiberal]

184. Too close to "evolution" for some folks, I guess...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

There are those who want to cling to the notion that mankind is truly superior...no matter how much evidence to the contrary.
After all, exactly who is it that is making that evaluation???? Once again, consider the source.

Is there any creature that mankind has encountered that they were willing to admit was their superior?..or even their equal?

[Mixopterus]

190. Seriously

What criteria are we supposed to use? In the most basic, Darwinian sense no species is equal to humanity on our planet as we casually sweep aside other species just to build our homes and we wield an incredible amount of collective power in comparison to all of Earth's life combined.

[BrklynLiberal]

197. I guess when it comes to survival of the "fittest", mankind is in charge.

The irony I guess is that "The fittest" may not actually turn out to be the one that can conquer everything around it, but the one who can learn to survive and still let those around him, and the planet itself survive as well.

When we are the only creature on the planet, and then the planet itself is ultimately destroyed, would that be finally considered as survival?

[Mixopterus]

203. It's certainly part of natural cycles

Organisms will always replicate beyond what the ecosystem can actually sustain, leading to a crash and a new equilibrium. The power of humans is that we have the potential to escape this to a large extent, which ties into the notion of "singularity". It's a rather complicated concept, actually, and part of transhumanist philosophy.

The basic argument is that a species that has reached a high level of technological sophistication becomes increasingly shielded from Darwinian mechanisms as his technology increases, to the point where (eventually) they are no longer responding to Darwinian processes per se and instead responding to the artificial mechanisms they have set. The argument states that it is necessary and perhaps inevitable in this case that the species will make the whole of their being out of the artificial systems they have crafted, eliminating them altogether from evolution in a natural sense.

This can only occur, however, in organisms that are sentient and wield a variety of intelligences. The potential to escape natural cycles and natural evolution itself is incredible, you must admit, and most certainly grants a great degree of power to humanity that other organisms on our planet simply do not possess.

[Ignis]

193. Perhaps you're right.

The very existence of those god-damned apes makes a mockery of our Special Role as Stewards of Creation.

:crazy:

[BrklynLiberal]

176. Actually, it is mankind that should be treated as "non-dolphin persons"

The inference that humans are the superior beings is not to be taken at face value.
Consider the source.

[davidwparker]

179. My favorite animal in the sea ... ever since watching Flipper. n/t

[Faygo Kid]

186. No one you see, is smarter than he. . .

Apparently true.

[femrap]

187. Hell, most all animals are

smarter than most people!!!! I don't see them starting wars and destroying their environment.

[AlbertCat]

228. I don't see them starting wars and destroying their environment.

Uh....


Early bacteria destroyed their environment


Ants and bees regularly launch wars.

[Mixopterus]

188. Good news

Hopefully Orcas and Elephants will also be classified as non-human persons, though I do have to argue that Elephants and Orcas show many more traits of what we would call culture than dolphins; I imagine the scientists focused on dolphins as its a much more popular animal to elevate in terms of sentience.

I feel it is necessary to comment on a few things, however:

"Person" is a philosophical technical term that is roughly synonymous with a state of sentience and associated cognitive abilities. This is most important in ethics, as ethical choices originating from and dealing with things that are not sentient can only be indirectly unethical, i.e Immanual Kant's position on animal cruelty.

Dolphins are not perfect beings devoid of the baser elements that seem to be inherent in mammalian intelligence. They rape and kill for fun, and generally conduct themselves along similar (though more mild) lines as chimps. Orcas and elephants outclass them by far in terms of what humans would consider "good" behavior, especially in terms of group behavior.

The reason why, I think, scientists and philosophers focus on intelligence as a metric to determine the treatment of life primarily deals with the organism's concept of self and the need for a consistent treatment of life forms who share traits that post-Enlightenment Western civilization has deemed the primary criteria for equitable treatment according to the law. Much of the philosophical groundwork of the liberal tradition is based on elements of existence than can only exist if the participants are intelligemt, sentient organisms (like humans). This ties directly into the basis for ethical systems, as participants can only be included in so much as they are capable of choice and reason. In order to stay consistent a just society along these lines cannot cherry pick who gets treated this way, be it a monstrous human or a sentient animal (artificial or biological).

This also tied into the concept of ethical magnitude, which is a basis for rational, consistent decisions. Based on the established criteria of intelligence/sentience, it is unquestionably permitted to destroy microbes and insects at will, while it would be extremely unethical and perhaps the same as murder to kill, say, an elephant at will. Humans, of course, get the highest tier in this hypothetical system due to rules of self-preservation of member species.

[sofa king]

191. Sure they talk... but can they build a fire?

Just a little quip to illustrate how myopic our definition of "intelligence" can be. There are "persons" I personally know whom I would not trust to perform the duties my dog has. So you can bet your last dime that I firmly believe there are dolphins, bonobos, dogs, and maybe even octopuses that deserve treatment at least as good as the idiots who block shopping aisles, run me off the road, litter, and vote for permanent tax cuts for the people who rip us off every day.

[Yavapai]

194. This brings to mind an editorial cartoon,

from back around the time of the Cuban Missile crisis.

The scene was several dolphins in the water, with the New York skyline in the background and huge atom bomb mushroom clouds rising up.

The caption was "...and the meek shall inherit the Earth"


Also, I have to agree about the intelligence of African Grey parrots. We have a flock of five. One, whose name is Cheeky, will, whenever she thinks she has been wronged, will exact revenge days after-wards, when you least expect it. The rest of the time she is very sweet. Each has their own distinct personality and one I think, may be a republican. Does anyone have any good recipes???:mad:

[BrklynLiberal]

198. lololololol

and one I think, may be a republican. Does anyone have any good recipes??? :mad:



They are magnificent birds....with true emotions.

[Laura902]

199. It is unethical to kill porpoises anyway

not just because certain kinds are more intelligent than others

[Dorian Gray]

200. I love dolphins

this article is fascinating. Thanks for sharing.

[TPaine7]

202. I have long believed and maintained that rights are a function of sentience.

Sentient rights, not human rights.

As we would want entities superior to us in intellect and technology to respect our rights, so should we respect the rights of our "lessors."

[Deep13]

206. Does that mean some humans are so stupid as to be disqualified?

People who still have a favorable view of Darth Cheney, for example? :evilgrin:

[TPaine7]

220. Excellent point,

rights are also a function of morality (I would argue that a person too stupid to see Darth Cheney for what he is due to brain injury--as opposed to stubborn stupidity--would retain their rights). For sufficiently aware entities, sufficient immorality multiplies any rights by zero.

IOW, humans who are sufficiently immoral forfeit even the right to life. (Whether it is good policy to execute them is another matter.)

Short answer?

"Pretty much."

[Meldread]

204. "Non-human persons"? That's silly.

First and foremost dolphins are animals. They shouldn't be treated like humans, they should be treated like dolphins. Second, humans are also animals. They shouldn't be treated like dolphins, they should be treated like humans. The phrase "non-human persons" makes the assumption that dolphins want to be treated like humans, but that conclusion is silly to draw because we don't necessarily know how a dolphin wants to be treated. It also makes the assumption that humans themselves are not animals; we're no better nor worse than any other living creature on the planet.

Humans make the same mistake with dogs. We try and "treat" them like humans, but dogs do not think like humans and this causes psychological issues for them. Just to give an example, many people with dogs make the assumption that when they return home and their dog acts very excited at their return that it means their dog is happy to see them. This is not the case at all. The dog was under immense distress while the human was gone. This distress is often taken out on apartments and homes (dogs going threw the garbage, ripping up clothing, etc.) Dogs are pack animals, and in a dogs pack only the leader of the pack is allowed to leave, not those who follow the leader. When a dog acts excited upon a humans return, it is because the dog sees himself as the leader (not the human) and was under immense psychological distress because the human abandoned the dog. The key to solving this and helping the dog become psychologically balanced is to get the dog to view the human as the leader, not the other way around.

Yet, we view dogs through a human lens. We do not view dogs as dogs, who think radically different than humans. Thus, we punish dogs who destroy stuff in our homes or make a mess, causing them further confusion and distress. (When in reality it's the humans fault the dog is acting in such a manner - not the dogs. It should be the human who is punished, because he's the one who abandoned the pack.)

The same is true for dolphins. We should not view or think of dolphins as we think or view humans. Their thought processes are no doubt radically different, and when we think of them as people and try and treat them as such, it will only cause confusion and distress for them.

Instead, it makes much more sense to advocate for things that we KNOW is good for dolphins. For example, protecting their habitats. Attempting to end the murder of dolphins. That is a good start, and from there we can study them, and as we learn more we can decide how a dolphin should be treated.

[Deep13]

205. I think the concept is that human is the species...

...while "person" is a self-aware, intelligent animal capable of abstract thought. The conceptual difference may come from science fiction where the universe is filled with alien (and therefore non-human) people. Under that definition the highly intelligent, social and communicative marine mammal may qualify as a person, but of a non-human species. If so, they would be the first "alien" people discovered.

[Meldread]

215. I understand that, but...

...it's of great concern to me that humans have a tendency to place human attributes to animals that they think are "like them." Make no mistake, I don't believe this is maliciously intended. Humans are by their very nature a nurturing and caring species, and when we find another animal (such as dogs or dolphins) that we think are "like us" we want to treat them "like us." So we ask ourselves, "How would we want to be treated if we were a dolphin?"

That's entirely the wrong question and thought process to use. Therein is my objection. I do not object to the intent, as I think it's both good to evaluate how we treat other animals. However, we should ask ourselves this question instead, "How does a dolphin want to be treated?"

That question leads us to better understanding the dolphin, understanding what is natural for them, their species, their societies, and their way of life. From there we can better understand OUR role in it and adjust our actions accordingly and with respect.

The other question leads us toward treating dolphins more how we'd like to be treated in their situation. This is bad because it may lead to them having issues psychologically because we don't understand what is natural for them - the same way we bring harm to our pets as we try and treat them like humans.

------

Also, as a side note, I think this is wrong to look at a "person" as a "self-aware, intelligent animal capable of abstract thought." That entire assumption is built around what we think we know and understand of other species on our planet (or beyond it). We only know how to think as a human. To take an example, does the rat's pain hurt any less because we believe it lacks the capability of abstract thought? To our knowledge all living creatures feel pain, and likely many feel some baser emotions as well (such as fear).

I think it's a mistake to measure the worth of another animal by their thought process.

On that same token, it seems pretty certain that even plants feel pain. Do they feel pain similar to animals? It is difficult to say, but it is pretty clear that when a plant is harmed it responds in various ways depending on the plant.

What we as humans need to come to terms with, overall, is that the planet and the universe as a whole is a violent and amoral place. It is in no way ethical, and could care less about what lives or dies. Animals as a whole reflect that nature – including humans. It is perhaps one of the things that sets us apart from other known species. We attempt to create a morality of right and wrong, even though it frequently goes against our baser animal instincts.... which is why we have wars and environmental degradation. The only reason we have compassion for each other, on any level, is because evolution determined that such an emotion was beneficial to our survival as a species.

But that's another subject all together.

[Deep13]

251. I generally agree with resisting the impulse to personify other critters.

Scientists seem to have arrived at this conclusion after decades of research. This is an idea they have not extended to apes, dogs or other intelligent animals.

It's clear that any critter with a central nervous system and sufficient "marbles" can feel pain. I think there is a qualitative difference between a jelly fish or a bug that reacts to stimuli and a critter like a dog that has sufficient self awareness to perceive it as pain and suffer from it. Lacking any nervous system at all--they can't move anyway even if threatened--it is pretty safe to conclude that plants do not experience pain. They have no nervous tissue, let alone the brain power for any subjective experience.

The criteria the scientists are using is not simply based on capacity for pain or base emotion. Dolphins, who in absolute terms have more brain power than we do, have the capacity to conceptualize abstract concepts. The only reason there are no dolphin cities is because they have no hands and because fire will not burn underwater. Maybe that's the ultimate difference. Humanity evolved with our technology. There is no such thing as a truly wild human because we evolved in dependence on our society and our inventions. We can't even eat much without fire and at least some tools. Humans seem to be alone in needing at least some artificiality to live.

[TZ]

210. Shocker: a poorly written article about science

I think a better terminology is to treat dolphins as sentient, self aware creatures, which so far only humans are really classified as.

[Meldread]

221. That terminology is also mistaken.

It implies that the treatment of dolphins should be based entirely upon their higher mental capabilities. Does the pain of another animal (even a severely mentally retarded human) somehow matter less because they lack higher brain functionality?

I think the appropriate term is "ethical." We should advocate ethical treatment of dolphins, humans, and all species in relation to biological human nature. For example: It is entirely ethical and natural for a human to eat pork, despite pigs having fairly high intelligence. What is the -ethical- way of dealing with this, however? That is the question that should be debated. We do not try and turn lions into vegetarians, for example, and we don't morn that which they kill for food. No greater or lesser standard should be applied to humanity. The same questions apply to dolphins and how humans should interact with them.

To give an example: It is ethical for humans to keep dogs as pets. Over many generations dogs have evolved (in large part due to human selective breeding) to better understand and interact with humans. Yet, dogs still think and view the world completely different from the human. The ethical way to treat the dog then, is to understand how the dog views the world, and adjust our actions to make the relationship between the dog and human more harmonious.

[TPaine7]

232. That seems circular

The ethical way to treat the dog then, is to understand how the dog views the world, and adjust our actions to make the relationship between the dog and human more harmonious.

We should live harmoniously with dogs, but not with pigs because we have chosen to live harmoniously with dogs and to eat pigs? That seems to reduce ethics to doing what we have chosen to do--which would make (almost) everything we do ethical.

[Meldread]

238. You're partly misunderstanding me.

What is ethical from my viewpoint is made up of three things. First, it is what is natural for humans as animals. If we strip away our civilization, and placed humans back on the plains of Africa what would be -natural- for them? Essentially, imagine going back in time and studying humans as we'd study chimpanzees. That is what is natural for humans. Second, we need to determine what is natural for the animals in question. Third, we need to determine what is moral from a human vantage point in how we interact with the other species.

For example, it is natural for a human to eat a pig. Ignoring domestication, the pig would be prey for other predators of the wild and thus it is natural for the pig to be eaten. This means we must determine whether or not it is moral to eat a pig.

To give another example, it is natural for humans to eat plants. Yet, going out to try and eat an oak tree is not natural for either the oak tree or the human. Therefore, a human should not eat an oak tree. Morality does not come into play in this situation because it is irrelevant.

However, in the situations where morality does come into play it is the source of debate. Is it moral to eat a pig, a dog, or a dolphin? It could be argued that it is natural for a human to eat each of them, and it is natural for them to be prey for predators and therefore to be eaten. It therefore comes down to morality and how a culture might shape it.

I'm not in favor of emotion guiding morality. Emotion is not an objective way of looking at it, and it is easily manipulated. An animal a human views as cute is much more likely to receive sympathy (and thus less likely to be eaten (an evolutionary advantage regarding humans as predators?)). An animal humans regard as ugly is less likely to receive such sympathy.

Thus, my personal view is that if animals are natural for humans to eat then humans should be allowed to eat them with the exception of those which are endangered. However, in the interest of being moral we should not cause the animals that we eat unnecessary suffering in the process. This means I oppose the way many animals are treated at industrial farms. It is unnatural for them to be cooped up, restrained, it is also unnatural to have them pumped full of hormones to grow faster so they can be eaten. It is therefore necessary for us to allow these animals to live as naturally as possible until we decide to kill them for food.

That view is not necessarily popular around here - which is why in my previous post I brought up the point: why do we not feel sorry or condemn the lion when he kills his prey? It is natural for the lion to do so, and we recognize and accept this fact. Yet, we place ourselves on a higher standard when it comes to interacting with nature. I think that's both a good and bad thing. It's good because it shows that we're a compassionate species that has the ability to care for OTHER animals outside of our own kind. A lion most likely does not have this ability. I doubt it contemplates or cares about its dinner. Yet, at the same time I don't think it's wise to feel guilt over something that is natural for humans to do - we must kill, eat, and consume in order to survive. Nature built us that way. To do otherwise is to go against our own nature.

[TPaine7]

239. I see we agree on the core of correct behavior--

cause no "unnecessary suffering."

That is also the core of my thinking.

I disagree, however, that consuming animal is necessary for many of us.

[Meldread]

244. I never said it was necessary.

I said it was natural. What is natural and what is necessary are two different things. :)

I'm only opposed to people feeling guilt over being an animal. A wolf, lion, or any other predator does not seem to feel guilt over killing it's prey. It is necessary for their survival. It's how they evolved.

It is no longer necessary for our survival to kill animals... and that is why we've seen the animal rights movement come into being. The more and more civilized we become - we become further removed from nature. This allows us time to reflect on the morality of our actions, something that is less important when you're faced with: "Eat this pig or starve to death." In such a situation, virtually every dedicated vegan would do what is necessary to survive. Including eat the pig. That, in my view, is not a bad thing - it is the position every other predator on the planet faces daily.

We are in a unique position because we do have a choice. Whether one choice or another is morally wrong is up to each individual, culture, and society to decide.

[TPaine7]

223. Person |= human being

Philosophy. a self-conscious or rational being.

Source: dictionary.com

Obviously "person" can mean "human being" in some contexts. Equally obviously, this is not one of those cases.

[Cetacea]

245. Extraordinary findings call for extraordinary measures.

[Meldread]

249. That doesn't make any sense.

Are you saying dolphin's think exactly like humans psychologically, share the same desires, and feel and interpret the world through a similar lens?

If so, I'd say you know very little about other animals, and that such a view is not only demeaning to them but also harmful.

[Cetacea]

254. Hmm. I thought that was an old , tried and true adage.

I never stated that dolphins are exactly the same as humans, nor do I wish they were.


You can't surmise what I do and do not know about animals based upon that adage. However, I can surmise that what you accuse me of is a projection as you failed to realize that one of the animals you heralded as more worthy of elevated status is in fact a larger dolphin. (Orca)

What I do know is that we needn't wait to find out how dolphins feel about drowning in the blood of their own in Japan and Denmark in order to stop this atrocity right now.

[Meldread]

264. I didn't meant to imply that is what you stated or meant.

You left a six word response to my post that could have meant anything, which is why I said "That doesn't make any sense."

I then attempted to make a guess at what you were trying to say.

With that being said this response you made helps clarify what you meant.

-----

"You can't surmise what I do and do not know about animals based upon that adage. However, I can surmise that what you accuse me of is a projection as you failed to realize that one of the animals you heralded as more worthy of elevated status is in fact a larger dolphin. (Orca)"

I didn't herald any animal for an "elevated status/" I don't believe in "elevated status" - that would imply that humans are somehow elevated above the rest of the animals on the planet. From a non-speciesist stand point, in the eyes of the Universe / Nature there is nothing important or special about the human species relative to any other living organism - be it plant, insect, bacteria, or other non-human mammal. Mother Nature is an equal opportunity killer, and it will eventually kill all of us; so we're all in the same sinking ship.

The main difference between humans and the other species is that we have advanced tool use, which has led to technology, which could mean that some day we could be the first species (on Earth at least) that finds a way to beat Mother Nature before she files our species away along side all the other extinct species she's killed.

"What I do know is that we needn't wait to find out how dolphins feel about drowning in the blood of their own in Japan and Denmark in order to stop this atrocity right now."

My argument has nothing to do with working toward stopping humans from inflicting unnecessary pain on animals - dolphins or otherwise. My argument is that we should not attempt to humanize dolphins or other animals, which most certainly have entirely different psychologies than humans. We don't have to go further than examining how humans have failed in relation to dogs as pets. Hundreds of thousands of dogs each year are abandoned and put to sleep because humans want to humanize them and fundamentally don't understand how their dogs think. When their dogs act a certain way it is 99.9% of the time the fault of their human owners not understanding dog psychology.

Things that humans encourage with dogs would never be allowed if they actually knew what they meant. For example, if a small cute little dog jumped into your lap, a lot of people go, "Oh he likes me and wants me to love on him!" The dog may very well want your attention, but in his mind he's staked a claim on you. He's disrespected you and has said, "I'm claiming you. You belong to me. I'm the dominant dog." Giving the dog affection would only reinforce this point of view. Then later when you try and discipline the dog for doing something you don't approve of it creates confusion and distress in the dogs mind. Dogs are pack animals and understand dominance - their packs have leaders. If they don't see a leader in their pack, they will attempt to establish themselves as leader to make themselves feel more secure. Because humans don't understand this they constantly send mixed signals to the dogs, which lead to so many of the problems they face.

Another example of something misinterpreted by humans is how a dog should approach a human. A dog should always approach a human in a calm manner, with their heads and tails lowered. They should not make physical contact unless the human first gives the dog the signal that it is okay. Most humans who see that assume the dog is upset, frightened, or depressed. That is not the case at all. The dog is showing a sign of respect to the human, and accepting his dominance in his pack. In the dog world making eye contact, as an example, is a display of dominance - it is a challenge.

It's things like this that I want to save dolphins and other animals from... so many dogs are abandoned or are psychologically scarred because humans fundamentally don't understand them and cannot communicate with them in ways that they understand. That is why I oppose the humanization of dolphins and other animals. Dolphins are not humans, they are dolphins. To think of them otherwise is to denigrate their species, and will ultimately lead to causing them a great deal of harm.

I'm all for preventing the unnecessary harm inflicted upon them. However, beyond that I believe we as a species need to show them respect, and try to understand them in deep and meaningful ways. It's unlikely dolphins would ever become "pets" for most humans, but understanding them is important as we do have interactions with them - from amusement parks to navel applications - just read up thread. Understanding how they think and interact with the world then helps us communicate with them in a way that they can sufficiently understand - the same is true for all animals.

[Cetacea]

265. Thanks for the clarification.

I think we are mostly in agreement with one another. I especially do not enjoy seeing dolphins and whales as circus animals, however I believe the Oceanariums are helping to educate the public. It wasn't that long ago when whales were perceived as dangerous Moby Dicks, and the Oceanariums were largely responsible for dispelling such harmful myths.

However, due to the size and complexity of their brains, their long history of friendliness to man, and their 30-50 million year survival history I feel they need to be treated with the same respect I imagine we'd show any alien intelligence.

[Meldread]

270. I think that is a good way of looking at things.

Just imagine if humanity discovered another earth like planet with life. How would we approach it? We'd approach with caution, and attempt not to cause harm to it until we better understood it. We'd also do our best not to overtly intervene. Why would a different standard be applied to non-Human life on Earth? It's true that we have a much greater impact on it whether we like it or not - we're part of the ecosystem as much as any other animal.

However, if we tried to imagine other species as "alien life" I think that's a good way to approach it. It causes us to examine our actions, and be mindful of how it impacts the other species around us. Our advanced intelligence is in my view an unintended gift from nature through evolution. It allows us to accomplish so many things other species literally can't even contemplate. Yet, it comes with the responsibility to temper our actions with wisdom. Great intelligence means nothing if you do not possess the wisdom required to make good use of it.

In the end, there is only one main rule that should exist when dealing with other species on Earth or elsewhere: First, do no harm.

[Cetacea]

276. However, I do not consider dolphins "animals" and agree with the scientists.

Their status needs to be regulated along with their larger cousins.

[uberllama42]

273. Why is the dog's understanding of the situation superior to the human's?

If anything, the dog understands the human even less than the human understands the dog.

When in reality it's the humans fault the dog is acting in such a manner - not the dogs. It should be the human who is punished, because he's the one who abandoned the pack.

How is the dog more justified in viewing the human as a subordinate pack member than the human is in viewing the dog as a pet that should respect his other property? The human treats the dog like a human, and the dog treats the human like a dog. Whence do you derive the moral superiority of the dog's point of view?

[Meldread]

274. Because the dog is placed to live in a human world.

Since the dog cannot understand humans (as you point out) it is necessary for the human to better understand the dog, and get the dog to recognize him as the leader of the pack. The human can then help the dog understand what is proper behavior in a human world. If the dog does not recognize the human as its leader, it at best becomes confused when the human sends mixed messages, and at worst it acts in a way that is detrimental to humans or human property. That is when humans typically abandon the dog.

The dog is completely dependent upon the human for survival. It is not about being morally superior, but about being morally responsible. If someone takes a dog as a pet, they are morally responsible for that dog and must help that dog adjust to living in their world.

[hyphenate]

208. This is nothing really new

In fact, some time ago, they postulated that dolphins and whales were likely more smart than humans, as Earth is essentially a water planet, and the most highly intelligent species would logically be a marine animal.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

214. Dolphins should be treated like uppity fish, scientists say.

[aikoaiko]

217. Never going to happen.

[Cetacea]

229. That's what many said about the US Marine Mammal Protection Act.

[aikoaiko]

233. I was 4 when that came around so I have no recollection of what people said.

;)

I have no problem with protecting and conserving species when populations get low, but personhood is a totally different issue.

[Cetacea]

259. I hope that didn't come across as snarky.

:hi:

[TPaine7]

234. Part of me would enjoy seeing the human race

encounter a truly advanced alien race and get to see the rights issue from the other side.

The question would not concern human rights but whether humans deserved {name for other species or grouping of species} rights.

It would be poetic if the truly sentient ones opted to treat us in accordance with our treatment of our "inferiors" (with exceptions for the doe-eyed dreamers who took pains to minimize animal suffering).

[aikoaiko]

243. Sounds like a twilight zone episode.

[RedCappedBandit]

219. We don't even treat people as people

How can we expect to afford dolphins the same rights we "normal people" take for granted in the US?

[flvegan]

224. Which makes what the Japanese do each year in Taiji even worse.

[tigereye]

230. there is a wonderful sci-fi novel with the premise that dolphins and other

animals have been "lifted and enhanced" onto a similar communication and status level with humans. It's quite interesting - but the name of it is escaping me.



This study raises interesting question - does a certain level of intelligence/communication skill constitute "personhood?" :D

[JackInGreen]

242. I know it

And love it
The Uplift War Series.

[tigereye]

275. right, and welcome to DU!

it's a very clever concept and fascinating books.

[Smashcut]

235. I hope everyone here has seen THE COVE.

http://www.thecovemovie.com/

These beautiful, kind, highly intelligent beings are being murdered in a gruesome fashion with the approval, even advocacy, of the Japanese government. Furthermore, the trade in animals for captivity (i.e., show dolphins) is immoral and should also be stopped.

This movie is at times almost impossible to watch but it should be seen by everyone. I, for one, was unaware of these atrocities and the decades-long guerrilla movement to stop them.

[Ignis]

272. +1

Horrible, but worth watching.

[ThatsMyBarack]

240. In October 2002, I swam with the dolphins here:

http://dolphinsplus.com/

The dolphins there are some of the nicest creatures on earth, and are treated VERY well by the staff!

:hi:

[Moochy]

252. Dolphins can process syntax

I witnessed this first-hand when I worked on a student documentary about a group of research dolphins in Florida in the early 90s.

They are the only non-human mammals who can apply meaning to word order:

Flipper Take Ball (to) Trainer. dolphin nudges ball over to the trainer
vs
Flipper Take Trainer (to) Ball. dolphin nudes trainer over to the ball.

[Cetacea]

255. DRC?

You might like some of the work Lou Herman is doing if not already familiar with it.

"In a show of dolphins' inventiveness, trainers may gesture "create tandem," and a pair of dolphins will perform a series of moves in synchrony. "They may swim in a circle, leap out of the water in a spinning motion and spit water out of their mouths together," says Louis Herman, PhD, director of the Dolphin Institute. "We never know what they'll do. And to this day, researchers are uncertain how the dolphins tell each other what moves they'll display."

[Moochy]

256. Yes Lou Herman was the researcher's former PhD advisor

The writer/director of the documentary had visited the DRC and was inspired. He made contact with some former students of Herman's in Florida that had received grants for a dolphin communication research. I did the sound mix on the 3 day shoot, and did so very poorly I must say.

I am pretty sure that what I saw demonstrated was first done at the DRC in Hawaii by Herman.

Pretty amazing animals... Their active sonar allows them to sense densities and essentially image inside hidden objects. In other words, you can't play a shell game with a dolphin that gets a good look at the outside of the cup.

[Cetacea]

258. Cool.

It's a great place. Any links to the documentary you worked on?

[Moochy]

260. no

I have not found any, it was a documentary made as a film & communications master thesis back before the youtubes in 1992. I think we had to sign a bunch of NDA's that basically kept the video from ever surfacing except at my friend's thesis review. :-)

[Mind_your_head]

253. Why not?!

One more :kick:

for these beautiful, intelligent creatures!

(Humans can be beautiful and intelligent too.) Apparently, we don't care to evidence those characteristics very much though.... :-(

Dolphins are waaaaay more than cool. Humans, "not so much".

Peace,
M_Y_H

[amborin]

262. K & R great post!

[shanti]

266. and 1

i love dolphins and whales...watching "the cove" just about killed me.