Stosh

I think theyd be considerable as mankind, at least as far back as heidelbergensis, which , was the nearest ancestor of all humans and all its dna lineages , including neanderthal denisova sapiens etc. Though Im not actually sure about the humanity of all humans living now, its a fair assumption to assume some degree of commonality mentally behaviorally etc as indicated by physical similarity. Back beyond then , Youd have to decide what your favorite human traits are. Upright walking and hands and probably several other traits are considered to have preceded our enlarged brains. The bigger brains are secondary developments, and may just indicate expanded capabilities, whereas the human spark or soul or condition could reasonably have begun long before. Theres probably only one trait that humans have thats basically unique IMO , imagination.. and even that is speculative to say or just not true outright. Theres no accurate fact or even reason to consider humans to be ultimate evolutionary specimens in any way. We simply are what it is we are individually,,, if we exist that way at all.'...... Enlarged breasts for show ,when not in breeding mode , is unique to humans .

More specifically then, Whats reasoning ? The rest needs to wait till the bottom of this, please dont give me an example , to be self explanatory ,, What is reasoning composed of and unique about. All the way down, simplest components.....

Sorry, I dont know what the question is asking.

Conception? Whats that mean here?

Youd have to agree with it, to have reason to agree with it.

Ah yes, there are parasites, and the backer may or may not be one, but the person most at risk, is the one inventing the net on the island, he has- either or -type consequences , he may still eat or just die. The financier, plays a spread, and directs capital which statistically pays off , or maybe not, But thats not a life or death risk. He risks imaginary numbers , which he likely borrowed and can file bankrupcy and hire lawyers to defend him, if he screws up. Like a Trump. Faced with the iron hand of nature , the burning sun and the non negotiable tropical storm , hes a big pussy. No rich guy takes the risks of the poor if he can help it. Maybe that fastfood worker can feed their kid tonight, maybe they get fired for some trumped up bullshit. The poor learn courage and caution, live with the dire immediate consequences of the dinkiest of issues. The rich think they risk much because the paper zeros are many. I dont blame the well off , I just dont think they are any better,and may be just as bad, or easily .... worse.

Ah , I wouldnt consider something that has no consciousness to have goals,, they would incur consequences. But ok. Perceptual pleasure, umm can one have pleasure that was not perceived? I agree though that a coral reacts to things, but so do plants, and chemicals. Its self fulfilling that procreating systems can persist by procreation, but I , Personally dont consider that to be goals without having awareness intent and understanding. Ill try to remember what youre meaning ,going forward.

please explain that last part Dawei.

Lets say, Karl has a wonderful novel idea never before been thought. Society at large has to buy in. Theres no reason why ummm Ralis might not have the same idea.. after Karl, but knows a guy who can build it, and does so before Karl. Either way, the conceptry required to have the idea was generally available already. ... provided by,,, you guessed it! The giants on whoms backs we all stand. But the financial backer may be a total dipstick.

I dont know yet if I agree or dont ,to that. I hitch up at the word purpose. Which to me is different than having intent. Do animals know the purpose of sex? as you are using the word purpose? Or are you thinking that there is a purpose held by something else ? that say, a coral, is knowingly trying to fulfill...or even that the thing has goals,,,or that pleasure is required to make them spray into the water.

So ,, it was a trick question , and you already realize suffering and compassion are a bogus dualistic paradigm to be chopped up with the burning sword of truth? Very good.

Men ride the wave of circumstance, inventions usually get 'invented' by several people roundabouts the same time, an obvious example would be electricity- Edison Tesla etc ... So no , individuals might not actually responsible for what they might take credit for.

Ya gotta accept them for what they are, they just arent humans , and I find em terriffic anyway. ( cats) Sophie does have to look after her own welfare, and their bonds do get severed easily ,, but that can be said for people as well, just as much ,, but at least she's an honest little 'ho'. with realistic needs and desires. That wasnt my point though , what I was getting at , is that she makes a distinction between playing around , and being serious. The only difference in THAT is intent. Therefore , she has intents -unlike umm bugs and plants-. Which is really a pretty abstract thing IMO. PS, I dont think we have any actual instincts -hardly at all.

I'm not sure us humans act out of abstractions as much as we like to think. But I do think my cat understands that her claws can hurt, and can have expectations that I may react poorly , I can fake her out ,and I could make my dog feel guilty. I don't mess with the cats mind much , she's too honest, but the dog was fair game.

Yeah , its an interesting story , a bit confusing to me though , is just what would piss off a Buddha? But actually suffering and compassion , cannot outweigh each other. Mañjuśrī is depicted as a male bodhisattva wielding a flaming sword in his right hand, representing the realization of transcendent wisdom which cuts down ignorance and duality.

Of Course advanced animals think and have emotions ! Simple Proof of thinking, a horse lifts its legs to a height above an object its jumping. It has to have an idea of itself , and the object , and the relative sizes of things , and where its going to be when it comes down, , and that it will be up. Otherwise it would spring like a flea , with no idea where , or how high or what will happen. Ping! Proof That it has emotions ,is ,, some days it may not feel like jumping , or it can be scared to jump , or it may jump around just having a good time. The drivers, for at least mammals, differ from those of humans , in scope , and level of abstraction, but even ducks have an idea of how many chicks they have , lizards can return to a hole from a route other than the one they set off in , parrots can mourn, and play,, and even turtles can solve some puzzles. No they probably cant solve complicated algebra ,, but neither did a lot of kids I knew in school.

West , treat symptoms ,and feed off the public like cash cows. East , pretend to effect cures or use western treatments.

No, thats the only important ones. To try to make it complicated would be like quoting Kasich.

From what Ive read , many scenarios are posited ,,, Homo erectus spread out of africa to europe , heidelbergensis emigrated to europe , and displaced him , becoming neanderthal , a second wave of heidelbergensis descendants , this time called sapiens, came out of africa hooking back up with neanderthal and most stayed there until just a few generations ago when my grandparents moved to the US. The end.

I got one of those.

Thanks , Nungali , this is helping to clarify , but I want to check my reading ,, if its not too tedious ,,,, Bunjalung or Bundjalung is the tribal affilliation and language group to which Lewis walker belongs ,and it or they center roundabout New south wales, because earlier traditional habitations are underwater , in the Gulf of Carpentaria where a large shallow lake was? The Name Lewis walker is taken from an ancestor hero of the man in the clip? and you know him personally,but didnt learn the whole story about the Mani, you live near," Old man dreaming." though this is a place you are associated with, somehow, but do not own or live at. ( I thought Nungali was a placename near you, or you were associated with, that had something to do with kangaroos. ) Salt water people and freshwater people , refers to , groups living on the coast vs inland? not being some sort of totem affiliation. Howd you come by the clip?

Well since I wish you long life and prosperity, this puts me in a tough spot. It's completely against my principles and that would be immoral. Exactly ! this is what Ive been harping on ! That's why I don't like 'morality' , it makes people extremist rather than compromise-rs. (But humaneness is great !) Compromise is in everyone's interest long term because it makes for moderation. Its what our constitution is supposed to foster, and how successful business prospers. When groups cannot come to compromise , thats when the shit hits the fan.

That's chock full of opinion. Besides I don't support the slippery slope argument , its bogus , BECAUSE , it means that even in the face of reasonable compromise , and reasonable action , one is not going to be reasonable. Its trying to excuse , or be a license to -be wrong extremist and irrational. And at the end of that post , to support your argument , and make it sound level headed , you had to exaggerate that rule of law was equivalent to having tyrants. If I wanted to , I could have just quoted the opening paragraph of the above source,,, hiding the rest , would be presenting an argument to suit my beliefs , not to represent the truth of what that source said. I know these tactics are popular, to misquote sources refuse negotiation, exaggerate self servingly , but you know better. Tsk Tsk.

Choosing to have collectively fewer kids isnt choosing to perish .. Google search World Population: 8.5 Billion by 2030, a 50 Percent Increase. Global population will increase during the next 35 years to around 8.5 billion people, with almost 90 percent of the increase occurring in developing countries, according to newly released World Bank projections. However ! there is some stuff supporting you which I found independently, heading toward 2030 Karl. The question remains though, whether all these changes will be feasible , if there is to be anything wild left , or whether these changes will result in conflicts preventing the scenario working out pleasantly. I think they present a VERY optimistic view -to the border of ridiculousness ... but here that source is anyway. http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4252e/y4252e06a.htm

That life as it is on earth fits the conditions that have existed on earth, isnt so surprising . Considering life elsewhere, that gets tricky. I dont think we can draw any curve of expectation Whatsoever! based on our own ,single data point. A second point, on Mars or Elsewhere, would help, so long as the biochemical pattern does NOT fit with earths. If its like ours ,then one would speculate common origin, not ubiquitousness of principle.