|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 3:34 am Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
[quote="Antrugha"]
| Quote: |
| As for the DNA argument, you may be surprised to know that we, in fact, have a relatively high percentage of similar DNA with almost every species of life on the planet. |
indeed, you have 75% in common with a flatworm.
| Quote: |
| This is the main argument for evolutionary genetics because of the redundancy inherent in DNA. |
Sure we have far more in reserve than we actually use, but is this less than we used to have, or more?
| Quote: |
| What you really have to look at is the gene pool of the monkeys vs. that of the humans. |
this does not mean both had a common ancestor. in the bible..god made life from other life. ie the woman was made from a mans rib etc. This is a feature of the cration argument: God made species by starting with DNA that he'd used to make something else.
Of course this seems wacky to you, but be aware of it if you are going to argue against creationism. having a % of the same DNA does not mean a common ancestor...
| Quote: |
| in conclusion, it's inherently flawed to look at the similarity of DNA between us and the monkey because that 0.3% is mostly made up of the difference in genes |
What 0.3%? the latest test shows chimps have 95% similar DNA- a fair bit less than thought previously.
| Quote: |
| This is called junk DNA and is the archaic DNA from billions of years of evolution. |
Surely though DNA replication has a tendency over time to lose variety rather than gain extra? The argumant that mutation adds DNA variety seems unnaceptable. Firstly...
Mutation is usually quickly bred out and dissapears within healthy populations. it only accumulates in isolated inbred populations- eg small islands such as the galapagos. However in the course of inbreeding, much DNA is necesarily lost because of a limited gene pool constantly subdividing against itself. No new outside material is being added, allowing mutations to increase.
| Quote: |
| DNA during mitosis isn't absolutely perfect and will make a mistake every few thousand or so base pairs. When a mistake is made within a coding region of DNA, you get a difference in genetic product. Possibly resulting in hair colour change, or, perhaps in a genetic disease. |
every 10.000 or so. So far all mutations in people are accompanied by disease or deformity. they are not advantageous. hence the idea that genetic drift accounting for the diversity of species is contentious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
madowlspeaks
Joined: 07 Dec 2006 Location: Somewhere in time and space
|
Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 7:05 pm Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
| aldershot wrote: |
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| aldershot wrote: |
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Chimpanzees have DNA that is 99.7% comparable to a humans DNA. Because of this FACT, some people argue that humans too can be classified as animals. Those who say that humans are not, in fact, animals and who choose to eat meat, would then have to philosophically support the moral cause of eating a chimpanzee. |
...phew... this is entirely fallacious. nearly embarrassing to read it. |
Apparently you failed your philosophy 101 class back in high school. That's more embarrassing than this post could ever hope to be. |
come now, i'm not mocking you. just stating your argument has more holes than a hooker who uses heroin. listen to your statment (above, in bold):
all humans who declare to be above animals and who are carnivorous MUST therefore MORALLY SUPPORT eating chimpanzee.
you can't possibly think this is logical. you are making a universal statement without syllogism or proof. for fun, let's existentially deduce your statement:
a) some humans declare to be above animals.
b) some humans eat meat.
c) some humans support eating chimps.
if a), then c)? nope. if b) then c)? nope. if a) then b)? nope. if c) then b)? OK. if b)then a)? nope. sorry dude. your argument can't logically hold sway. |
Just where do you draw the line between humans and animals? This is my point. Conceptually, the argument holds sway perfectly well.
Besides, the paraphrases A, B, and C you present are erroneous on your behalf. In addition, the argument is linear, so deduction is the wrong conceptual tool. In the physical world, it's like using a hammer where you need a skill saw.
See properties...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilinear |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aldershot

Joined: 17 Jul 2006
|
Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:32 pm Post subject: Re: Would you eat a chimpanzee? |
|
|
| madowlspeaks wrote: |
| Just where do you draw the line between humans and animals? This is my point. |
thank you. concise. no sweeping statements.
there is a veiled line between humans and animals. both are intricate organisms. i don't think humans are more important than animals. but there is something that sets us apart from the animal kingdom. that said, i think humans are more remarkable than most animals.
humans see the macro world. we witness the micro world. we've been to the moon. we've discovered more pharmacology than any other animal... there are so many more feats ranging from the mundane to the extraordinary. this is what makes us more remarkable than the rest of the animal kingdom. not more important, rather, more remarkable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jaderedux

Joined: 10 Jan 2003 Location: Lurking outside Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If I was starving I would eat a chimpanzee. However, chimps are strong and more than likely they would kill and eat me.
So it goes.......
Jade |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|