Should they have it? If so, which species should it include?
Parrots deserve it more than apes.
>>2145250
If you talk about improving animal rights, I'm cool with that.
Personhood, no. Great ape can't abide by the law. But maybe my understanding of the term is not very accurate. I can't even find what it translates to in my language. I obviously think of it like a legal person.
>>2145268
I think this works.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_personhood
The gibbons probably aren't included because they're considered "lesser apes."
>>2145276
>On June 25, 2008 a parliamentary committee set forth resolutions urging Spain to grant the primates the rights to life and liberty. If approved "it will ban harmful experiments on apes and make keeping them for circuses, television commercials, or filming illegal under Spain's penal code."
That's great. Let them be, and possibly make the areas they live on nature reserves.
I don't think we understand the self-awareness thing well enough yet to make any good policies related to it.
>>2145255
Corvids deserve it more than parrots
I don't consider Australopicines humans, so I sure as heck am not going to consider any other modern great apes humans. You could argue that MAYBE H. erectus were the first humans but that's pushing it.
It will never happen. If it does, the people that voted for it to happen are complete idiots. You are going to open pandoras box. It will not end until every "pet" species has the same rights because the general public are all god damn idiots and everyone knows it. Giving everyone a right to vote was the first error.
It will end with shit like cats having a complex set of rights and expectations of care and strict punishments for the slightest mishandlings. Dominos fall. Neutering becomes mutilation and punishable by stiff fines. Abandoning cats will carry prison sentences. The overpopulation problem that many countries face will be illegal to fix. And that's just cats. Humans will want all their furbabies to have extended rights and protections.
We really, really do not want to take the first step on this. It would be only a matter of time before politicians began using cat's rights as vote-bait and then this shit gets written into law because some dumbfuck just wanted to further their political career and preyed on the emotions of idiot voters.
>>2145268
>Great ape can't abide by the law
neither can most babies/children, but they're legally people for some reason
>>2145385
The greatest mystery: Why children get so much protecion and shit when they have animal level intellect.
>>2145354
It's less of a "treat animals as people" law. It's more of a "don't use endangered creatures for experimentations/ treat them like shit." I doubt cats and dogs will ever get rights just because there are so many of them.
If it doesn't have sapience, then it cannot be called a person.
>>2146865
great apes are mostly sapient by the common sci-fi definition of the word.
>>2146868
No they are not. You are confusing sapience and sentience. In sci-fi, they say sentience when they really mean sapience. Don't ask me why; they just do.
>>2145343
Eskimos deserve it more than Corvids
>>2147138
The already have it
>>2147134
>Don't ask me why; they just do.
well they're writers, so they get paid to know what words mean.
If hundreds of professional writers use the word differently than you do, perhaps you're mistaken? Just a thought.
>>2147245
>mistaking sci fi writers for actual scientists
>their books sell well, so they must be right
>>2147250
>thinks you need to be a scientist to know what words mean
>thinks a mistake by writers would make it past several editors and the public in general
>thinks millions of other people are wrong but somehow he's the only smart one that knows it
>can't even consider the possibility that he's mistaken
>literally cannot fathom the idea of his perfect self making a mistake
Look buddy, I know better.
I've known since the first time I saw you incorrectly using the word here years ago.
I just don't care if you look like an idiot. I actually think it's a bit funny. Like walking around with a hole in the ass of your jeans and every time someone tries to tell you about it you tell them they're wrong and stupid. That's some funny stuff.
>>2147233
then the domino line has already started
>>2147261
Do you seriously think writters don't misuse words? They do it all the time, specially in fiction.
In what world do you live in?
>>2147245
Writers literally misuse the word sentience. Look up sentience on wikipedia.
>>2145250
We already consider niggers people, so why not
>>2145250
I don't know how anyone can look into the eyes of a great ape and not sense the depth of their gaze and the intelligence behind it, the sense of personhood, the emotional clarity of an ape with it's offspring.
>>2147245
SF writers do actually misuse sentience/sapience. If we were talking about a novel about space-apes, it would be cool, but when we're talking about actual animals, we use animal science terms.
>>2145385
Only to a certain extent though. A child does not have the same rights that an adult does, really they have hardly any rights at all at least with regards to their own self-determination. Their "rights" mostly just pertain to standards of care that are required to be upheld by their caretaker so that they are treated without cruelty or neglect.
>>2145268
>If you talk about improving animal rights, I'm cool with that.
Why?
I swear to god, the empathy module in our brain has been an evolutionary misfire in the sense that we are not supposed to feel empathy for other fucking species. Empathy is great for direct offspring and for the tribe in a "it takes a village to raise a child" sense. But people shouldn't fucking care about apes or dolphins, no matter how intelligent they are, let alone cows or pigs.
>>2151340
>we are not supposed to feel empathy for other fucking species
Then why do we?
>>2151340
I don't think one can have one or another, seeing how intelligent we are (we're always thinking "if x, then y").
Even tribal communities have respect for animals (take what you need but no more than is necessary), so I see it very much built into us. It's a huge generalization of large amount of cultures but still.
Of course you could write essays about how slavery fits into is, or globalization and how it tends to overwhelm us so that we stop caring at all, or modern factory farming and the selective treatment pets...
Personally I think it is part of our growing up as a species. But I'm a bit of a romantic.
>>2151340
"The Homo Sapiens' Burden" in stores now.
>>2151350
Evolutionary misfiring. Empathy is good for preserving your tribe. Being part of a strong tribe means more chance of long term survival and thus more chance to pass your genes. Our empathy has grown out of its evolutionary useful bounds though.
Just like how having the instinct to follow traditions and learn from your superiors is a great way to develop culture in primates (and dolphins), but how also leads to evolutionary misfiring like superstition.
Both of them are logical consequences of a trait that has an important evolutionary purpose at it's core, but that doesn't mean that every single consequence of these traits is beneficial to survival.
>>2151352
We are pretty much the same as people in tribal communities. That distinction is irrelevant to the discussion.
I know I'm going to get a lot of hate for this, but I also don't believe slavery was bad or that Western people should care about Africans dying. I don't mean that in a "we are superior /po/tard" sense either. I mean that if a certain (sub)species/race cannot survive on their own, they shouldn't be kept alive by superior (in a purely Darwinian sense) species. Just like we shouldn't keep Panda's alive, we shouldn't keep millions of Africans alive who keep making children who they cannot support on their own.
I don't say that last part out of hatred for Africans, or out of love for my any other race. I say it out of love for human kind. I want human kind to evolve further to be fit for their changing environment and letting people who aren't fit for that environment to die from natural causes is absolutely essential in this. Stop all this "life is precious" nonsense. Just let nature run it's course like it always has.
>>2151365
>We are pretty much the same as people in tribal communities. That distinction is irrelevant to the discussion.
To clarify, what I meant by this is that I believe these people have the same problem with empathy I described for non-tribal people. I don't mean to say that these two populations don't have important genetical distinctions. Just that in that specific sense, they don't differ that greatly.
>>2151365
I understand some of what you're saying, and even agree with parts of it. I can't understand you saying slavery might be acceptable. But I understand that there should not be money put into prolonging conflicts and shitty practices (clothes given for free are then sold in the black market, too much corruption in general). Aid needs to be rethought, and many Africans agree on that.
>>2151340
>people shouldn't fucking care about apes or dolphins, no matter how intelligent they are
Why not?
Because you want to eat them, kill them or abuse their habitat?
There's nothing wrong with caring about animals, like it's nothing wrong with loving ugly girls.
Animals feel empathy too, and they pay for it even worse than we do.
Animals deserve their rights, at least the right to not be experimented on for dumb reasons, or beign driven to extinction, we fucked the natural process a long time ago we are living in a human wold now as yu bastards always say, so we play with human rules now if the mayority want animal laws so their furbabies can be protected.
Good luck doing a public campaign against that.
And for the record smart animals are sapient and sentient in every definition of the word.
Wankers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJ0_-BQK5qs
Ur mum lol
>>2145255
>>2145343
cetaceans deserve it more than both of you
>>2152807
They get props for using their genitals as prehensile arms.
>>2151340
I would argue that it is to our benefit to care at least a little bit. If we legit just didn't give a fuck about any animals then we would probably be hurting ourselves in the long run as we would have little motivation to try to preserve their habitats or keep them around.
