Comparing Costs of Human vs. Pet Health Care by Dr.
There is a great disparity among scientists and the general populace concerning non-human intelligence. There are those who want to find and communicate with another intelligent species, almost to the point of over-interpreting data in favor of this hypothesis.
There are also those who would only consider another intelligent species to be a technologically competent, tool-using, perhaps even humanoid race. In their extreme, they often put forth criterion of intelligence that would only include humans, often by definition.
They tend to explain away most data that points towards other intelligences with complex theories that rely on Occam's Razor 2. The two most common traits that most skeptical scientists rely on are language and technology Asimov These two are seen as the paramount of what sets us apart from other animals.
However, by using exactly what sets us apart from other animals as our criterion for intelligence is defining intelligence as human intelligence. Within this framework it is near impossible to find any other species that fulfills our criterion.
These two factors are definitely indicators of intelligence, but are not the defining characteristics. Expressing intelligence through technology and language are as much factors of general vocal and manipulative abilities as they are intelligence. This view is fine if we wish to keep humans at the evolutionary pinnacle.
On the practical side, we would be missing the possibility of a vast source of knowledge in other intelligent species. Also, if we ever did make contact with an extraterrestrial intelligence, it would most likely come to us and would therefore be far superior, at least technologically, to us.
If just such a species were to have this attitude and consider themselves superior to all other life and that lesser species were exploitable, it would not be a pleasant day for the human race.
Overall, it ends up being a stalemate between the two positions. Their theoretical frameworks are based on such different assumptions that one can hardly please the other. Those believing in non-human intelligence can be less zealous in data interpretation, and those who are skeptical can be more open-minded.
However, for our purposes it will suffice that there is at least the possibility of non-human intelligence. We are only concerned with how this intelligence may be instantiated. Most people take it for granted that intelligence is intelligence.
It is some sort of base thing that is either there or not, with very little variation. This is far from the truth. Mental abilities vary greatly even among people. This does not necessarily refer to just someone being able to do differential calculus and another compose concertos, some differences are more fundamental than that.
There are cultural differences in actual brain regional functions. A prime example of this is with Japanese minds and the interpretation of sounds Tsunoda Language is primarily a function of the left temporal lobe more on that later. For Westerners, sounds which are considered meaningless basically any non-language is analyzed on the right side of the brain.
With the Japanese, some sound, most notable natural noises and sounds of traditional Japanese musical instruments, are analyzed in the left temporal lobe. Furthermore, this difference does not arise until after about the age of 9. Apparently, due to their culture Japanese people attach some sort of linguistic meaning to these sounds.
This is a notable difference in the functioning of these two sets of brains.“Human beings are a part of the animal kingdom, not apart from it. The separation of “us” and “them” creates a false picture and is responsible for much suffering. It is part of the in-group/out-group mentality that leads to human oppression of the weak by the strong as .
Some animals seem to have similar abilities, but they cannot be compared with human emotions. The Bible: The Bible clearly distinguishes between man and beast: On the sixth day, Adam was created “ in the image of God ” and quite apart from the land animals through a clearly distinguished separate act .
Identification of Human and Animal Hair. Introduction. There are two main types of forensic hair examinations: hair identification and hair comparison. Hair identification involves classifying a hair as being a member of a specific group, e.g.
human pubic hair. In hair comparison, on the other hand, a determination is made as to whether or not. Gene cloning is the most common type of cloning done by researchers at the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI).
NHGRI researchers have not cloned any mammals and NHGRI does not clone humans. Animal models allow closer approximation to a human response. They are not perfect, of course; animals host different diseases and different responses.
While the fundamentals of life are the same – there is a 67 percent similarity between the DNA of humans and earthworms – there are differences in species and even in individual animals.
Comparisons and correlations of human and animal bioavailability have previously been reported in the literature, and although these seem to indicate that animal values are not predictive of human bioavailability, they have mainly been limited to small sets of .