Re:Young Gorillas Observed Dismantling Poacher Snares
by jmmcd on Tuesday July 24, 2012 @05:55AM
(#4285000)
more progressive scientists
I don't really like to hear scientists described as progressive or non-progressive. I would prefer to hear that they are more or less sceptical.
Re:Young Gorillas Observed Dismantling Poacher Snares
by jbattle on Tuesday July 24, 2012 @09:16AM
(#4285509)
I read "progressive" as an ethical statement. Unless you can demonstrate a "scientific default" ethical system that all scientists should adhere to, this seems like valid distinction
Re:Young Gorillas Observed Dismantling Poacher Snares
by jmmcd on Wednesday July 25, 2012 @05:06AM
(#4290057)
Progressive means the scientists advocate reform or "new, liberal ideas". All of which is fine in their private capacity, but if these scientists are influenced in their scientific output by being progressive then they're not doing their job.
As for emotions, that's a harder thing to prove. Dolphins are intelligent enough they should be classified as sentient non-human persons according to more progressive scientists. They have the richest range of emotions we've seen outside of chimpanzees, and to be honest, chimpanzees are so very nearly human it's quite amazing. They don't seem to lack any faculties that humans have, but some of their emotions are just less pronounced or developed.
Sometimes it seems the only reason that chimpanzees aren't affected more emotionally is that they don't understand the implications of what's happening. It's just ignorance more than a lack of emotion.
What might exist in the way of emotions humans don't have is things that are bio-chemical. Nature has a way of "rewarding" behaviors that are productive with a positive feeling. Do cuttlefish feel something other than love when doing their dances? What does an octopus, which has a nervous system entirely unlike a mammal or fish, feel when going about their day?