Man is not an animal

[Viker]

Every species has it's unique traits and abilities. None of what is mentioned separates us from animals.

 

[Wildswanderer]

How do you know they don't? Be specific if you can. Also, I don't see anything in that definition from the dictionary about "spirit world". What is that? I'd like to hear your explanation of spirituality, as clearly it is going beyond what the dictionary said.

One other point, clearly you believe that spirituality is a matter of "thinking", or reasoning. Correct? You said animals aren't capable of "thinking outside that box", so therefore spirituality is cognitive in nature, according to you?

Not necessarily... We don't know where the soul is located, so making it in the mind is just a guess. Animals act on instinct and some use some elementary reasoning... they aren't capable, IMO of things like praying and worship. Of course my understanding comes from biblical sources.
We are like God in that we are spiritual beings. Animals do not have a soul or a spirit, as far as we are told.
The Bible describes the soul of humans as eternal.
There is no evidence in the Bible that animals have a spiritual nature or that they possess a soul. We aren't told explicitly that they don't but that's certainly the implication.

 

[Mark Charles Compton]

As soon as I posted, I thought, "Some clever clogs will tell me it is nothing to do with brain size" which I knew

When the phrase 'larger brain' is used, I assume most people are implying a higher level of neural activity.

I presume in a generalization the capability of the neural network is more oft than not correlated to the size of the entity's entire anatomy and nervous network (for sending and receiving signals, distance is time) and the relative spatial limits of brain's casing (more tissue allows more connections?). I could be way off, I stated it was presumption.

Conjecture: I could imagine orientation of the neural networks central location within the system could also have the potential to affect its efficiency. Consider the need for brain location in a creature of massive proportion, I would think a design similar to cephalopods would be preferred, to bypass the limitations of communication speeds across the larger distances, that or having more than one brain could solve the problem.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Windwalker]

Not necessarily... We don't know where the soul is located, so making it in the mind is just a guess. Animals act on instinct and some use some elementary reasoning... they aren't capable, IMO of things like praying and worship. Of course my understanding comes from biblical sources.

I've heard people claim this, but the Bible doesn't really say they don't. In fact, it pretty much says they do, the same as Adam. They worship God. They are part of the coming kingdom, etc. I just a moment ago found this good blog where the author goes into some detail about this using scripture: Do Animals Have Souls? What the Bible Says

I like this quote which comes later in the blog:

“But ask the beasts, and they will teach you; the birds of the air, and they will tell you; or the plants of the earth, and they will teach you; and the fish of the sea will declare to you. Who among all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this? In his hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind.”

Job 12:7-10​

We are like God in that we are spiritual beings. Animals do not have a soul or a spirit, as far as we are told.
The Bible describes the soul of humans as eternal.

All of creation is spiritual, in that Spirit created it. Remember that it was "the fall" that introduced sin? But by virtue of creation, all life is "God breathed", and therefore spiritual. Even the rocks shall sing out, right?

As far as the souls of humans being eternal, I'm not so sure about that. God's Spirit is eternal, but aren't human souls themselves created?

There is no evidence in the Bible that animals have a spiritual nature or that they possess a soul. We aren't told explicitly that they don't but that's certainly the implication.

I would disagree with that, and I think that blog does a better job than me taking the time finding all the passages which say otherwise. But aside from the Bible itself, just look at nature itself. Love is not found only in humans, but in all of creation, in all its creatures. Love is spiritual, as "God is love".

 

[KWED]

So you just keep pushing it back? Lol? How does that prove your idea?
No I do think any animal is capable of being spiritual, that's a big difference between us and them.

In our past, when we had no proper explanations for anything, we made up explanations. These involved supernatural beings. This developed into the idea that we had a connection with these supernatural beings. Thus religions were born and the indoctrination of children. There is no evidence or rational argument to suggest that our consciousness, soul, whatever, is independent of our physical brain, and some evidence that it is dependent on the physical brain.

 

[KWED]

Being spiritual is attempting to connect with the spirit world.

Why do you believe there is a "spirit world", and what is it?

 

[Kfox]

Animals do not have articulate speech and poets. Man is not an animal.

Yes, the animals can communicate. But they have no articulate speech. .

It sounds like you are confusing "animal" with "beast".

 

[KWED]

We don't know where the soul is located,

What is "the soul"? Is it our consciousness? If it is, we know that it is located in the brain.

so making it in the mind is just a guess.

Are you claiming that "the soul" is separate from the mind? How do you know? How do you know there even is "a soul"?

Animals act on instinct and some use some elementary reasoning

Like humans then.

they aren't capable, IMO of things like praying and worship.

Neither am I. So it would appear that both animals and atheists have higher cognitive functions than religionists.

Of course my understanding comes from biblical sources.

Hmm...

We are like God in that we are spiritual beings. Animals do not have a soul or a spirit, as far as we are told.
The Bible describes the soul of humans as eternal.
There is no evidence in the Bible that animals have a spiritual nature or that they possess a soul. We aren't told explicitly that they don't but that's certainly the implication.

So basically, your argument is based on religious dogma rather than reason and evidence.
Fair enough.

 

[Polymath257]

Not necessarily... We don't know where the soul is located, so making it in the mind is just a guess. Animals act on instinct and some use some elementary reasoning... they aren't capable, IMO of things like praying and worship. Of course my understanding comes from biblical sources.
We are like God in that we are spiritual beings. Animals do not have a soul or a spirit, as far as we are told.
The Bible describes the soul of humans as eternal.
There is no evidence in the Bible that animals have a spiritual nature or that they possess a soul. We aren't told explicitly that they don't but that's certainly the implication.

Can you show any evidence that humans have a soul? What, precisely, do you mean by a 'soul'?

it seems to me that praying and worship is a much more animal way of approaching things than, say, using reasoning and logic, which even many humans have difficulty with.

As you pointed out, much of this is 'what we are told', but how credible are the sources? Do they actually have a means of determining the answer they give? or is their view simply made up?

More specifically, since I reject the Bible, why would I suspect that humans have a soul and animals do not?

 

[Polymath257]

They react to stimulu. They can reason on a very elementary level. They can't count to ten for example but they can learn doing this equals that.

And they can work together in groups, communicating between each other to accomplish a goal. They have empathy for others and can respond to another being's emotional state. In many ways, most humans could learn a lot from dogs.

Let's also face it, most humans can't reason above a very elementary level. Just look at how many people have difficulty with basic logic or algebra.

 

[Wildswanderer]

But ask the beasts, and they will teach you; the birds of the air, and they will tell you; or the plants of the earth, and they will teach you; and the fish of the sea will declare to you. Who among all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this? In his hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind.”

This is merely saying that animal life shows God's glory, IMO. And remember Job was wrong about a lot of stuff.

 

[Wildswanderer]

As far as the souls of humans being eternal, I'm not so sure about that. God's Spirit is eternal, but aren't human souls themselves created

Created to be forever.

 

[Valjean]

"Animal" is a biological category. It has nothing to do with religion, cognition, behavior or technology.
How did this thread stray so far afield?

 

[Wildswanderer]

would disagree with that, and I think that blog does a better job than me taking the time finding all the passages which say otherwise. But aside from the Bible itself, just look at nature itself. Love is not found only in humans, but in all of creation, in all its creatures. Love is spiritual, as "God is love".

Really? Well I suppose a lion does love a good meal of gazelle, and a Coyote does love eating a rabbit... But I suspect that's not the kind of love you're talking about. I'm not at all certain that animals are capable of the kind of love humans are. Agape love requires a spiritual soul.

 

[Wildswanderer]

In our past, when we had no proper explanations for anything, we made up explanations. These involved supernatural beings. This developed into the idea that we had a connection with these supernatural beings. Thus religions were born and the indoctrination of children. There is no evidence or rational argument to suggest that our consciousness, soul, whatever, is independent of our physical brain, and some evidence that it is dependent on the physical brain.

Oh, so we are all rational now so we have all knowledge? I suspect that early man was just as intelligent and sophisticated as we are. You sell our ancestors short. They were not stupid.
Today people are so "educated" they lose their common sense, and their knowledge of the spiritual.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Neither am I. So it would appear that both animals and atheists have higher cognitive functions than religionists.

I think you have that backwards.

 

[Wildswanderer]

More specifically, since I reject the Bible, why would I suspect that humans have a soul and animals do not?

Because for most people some sense of the spiritual is intuitive.

 

[Kfox]

Because for most people some sense of the spiritual is intuitive.

Popularity is NOT an indicator of truth.

 

[Polymath257]

Because for most people some sense of the spiritual is intuitive.

And why is that intuition reliable at all?

Sure, the hairs on your neck can tingle, but that doesn't show the existence of a 'spiritual realm'. it just means that people can freak themselves out.

 

[Polymath257]

Oh, so we are all rational now so we have all knowledge? I suspect that early man was just as intelligent and sophisticated as we are. You sell our ancestors short. They were not stupid.
Today people are so "educated" they lose their common sense, and their knowledge of the spiritual.

My interpretation is that ancient people had just as much raw ability as we do now, but substantially less information. Their sophistication was directed in different ways: towards hunting, gathering, making tools, using resources in their environment, etc. So, intelligent, yes. Sophisticated, no. Definitely not stupid, but also definitely uninformed.

The 'knowledge' of the spiritual is their *guess* about how the universe works. It is the stories they told themselves to explain what they observed. That guess has since been shown to be wrong in almost every particular. But the cultural tradition gets passed on and people still train themselves in that belief.

That doesn't mean it is correct.

Most 'common sense' is nonsense.