Should Apes be given "Human" Rights?

[Sand]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6505691.stm

 

An interesting article if I do say so myself. Given that the miniscule genetic differences (just 1%) between us Humans and the chimpanzee should these primates be given the same rights as any of us?

[Pop]

Not for that reason. If we gave the same rights to things on the basis of their genetic similarity to humans we'd have to give rights to cancer and embryos if we were to be consistent. You need a different standard.

[Sand]

True enough. How about cognitive ability? A fully mature adult chimpanzee has the same intellectual level of a 5 to 6 year old human. Many have been taught how to communicate (via sign language). Also they do have a capacity to learn and cause mischief, much like human children. There was an article about the local ape trust a couple of months back on how a chimp learned to cause a ruckus by setting off a false fire alarm in the building. It was reported that the chimpanzee "laughed" seeing the humans running around. She did it 3 times before finally getting caught in the act.

[metadigital]

This isn't the first time this has been published. (I believe the last time was due to Spain's communist party floating it.)

 

There is less than 0.1% difference between humans of all types. But humans have about 97% junk DNA (almost half of the human genome) that "exists for the pure and simple reason that they are good at getting themselves duplicated".*

 

If fact, over 60% of the genes are fundamentally those found in fruit flies. At least 90% correlate at some level to those found in mice. (We even have the same genes for making a tail, if we switch it on.)**

 

We have 46 chromosomes. Some ferns have more than 600.**

 

Actually, the real reason that humans are unique in this world is not because they are conscious; many (maybe even most) animals are conscious. Humans are the only beings that use symbolic representation, which allows us to conceptualize beyond the immediate, present tense of the world. There are three different levels of cognition, according to Terrence Deacon in his seminal work The Symbolic Brain: iconic, indexical and symbolic.

Icons are mediated by a similarity between sign and object, indices are mediated by some physical or temporal connection between sign and object, and symbols are mediated by some formal or merely agreed-upon link irrespective of any physcial characteristics of either sign or object. These three forms of reference reflect a classic philosophical trichotomy of possible modes of associative relationship: (a) Similiarity, (b) contiguity or correlation, and © law, causality, or convention.

...

When we say something is "iconic" of something else we usually mean there is a resemblance that we notice. Landscapes, portraits and pictures of all kinds are iconic in what they depict. When we say something is an "index" we mean that it is somehow causally linked to something else, or associated with it in space or time. A thermometer indicates the temperature of water, a weathervane indicates the direction of the wind, and a disagreeable odor might indicate the presence of a skunk. Most forms of animal communication have this quality, from pheremonal odors (that indicate an animal's physiological state or proximity) to alarm calls (that indicate the presence of a dangerous predator). Finally, when we say something is a "symbol," we mean there is some social convention, tacit agreement, or explicit code which establishes the relationship that links one thing to another. A wedding ring symbolizes a marital agreement; the typographical letter "e" symbolizes a particular sound used in words (or sometimes, as in English, what should be done to other sounds); and taken together, the words of this sentence symbolize a particular idea or set of ideas.

 

No particular objects are intrinsically icons, indices, or symbols. They are interpreted to be so, depending on waht is produced in response. In simple terms, the differences between iconic, indexical, and symbolic relationships derive from regarding things either with respect to their form, their correlations with other things, or their involvement in systems of conventional relationships.

 

Chimpanzees, and all the great apes, do not have symbolic brains.

 

* Woolfson, Adrian Life Without Genes

** Bryson, Bill A Short History of Nearly Everything

[LadyCrimson]

From the article:

"Rights and responsibilities go together and I've yet to see a chimp imprisoned for stealing a banana because they don't have a moral sense of what's right and wrong. To give them rights is to give them something without asking for anything in return."

 

That's my stance on it.

I'm all for protecting species and animal protections against cruelty, but that's not quite the same thing as "human rights."

[Dark_Raven]

Should Apes be given "Human" Rights?

No.

[metadigital]

It would be nice if we managed to give humans human rights.

[Pop]

It would be nice if we managed to give humans human rights.

Let's tackle that one first then.

[Pidesco]

I think giving apes, "ape rights" would make a lot more sense.

 

I also think this topic rivals with the worst Eddo threads.

[Tale]

I believe sentient AI, capable of posting on forums and playing computer games, should be given human rights.

 

and then some

Edited March 30, 2007 by Tale

[Dark_Raven]

I think giving apes, "ape rights" would make a lot more sense.

Logically speaking yes, that does make more sense.

 

I also think this topic rivals with the worst Eddo threads.

Sandy's alt is EDDO?

[Krookie]

Sandy's alt is Hades. And Hades as like 10 alts.

[Laozi]

Yes Hades, I think you deserve the same rights as everyone else no matter how hairy your feet get or how much poop you sling.

[Cantousent]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6505691.stm

 

An interesting article if I do say so myself. Given that the miniscule genetic differences (just 1%) between us Humans and the chimpanzee should these primates be given the same rights as any of us?

 

Eldar

[Fenghuang]

Wait, so Sand's alt is not only Hades, but also Eldar and you?

 

I'm so disturbed right now.

[Sand]

MYSTARY!

[taks]

damn. not only is sand irrational, but he has a split personality with someone that is rational no less.

 

my head hurts now.

 

taks

[Dark Moth]

I heartily concur.

 

 

Sand is definitely giving Eddo some competition here.

[Sand]

That is what happens when I am bored.

 

At least I didn't ask if chimps have souls and make this into a freally funky discussion.

 

Still, the studying the intelligence of Chimpanzees and how well they adapt to new environments, learning language, and making the use of various tools is very fascinating. At least to me.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

why would we give apes human rights? Then they couldn't stay in the zoos, wander off into the jungle and eventually die from pochers.

[metadigital]

Bushmeat FTW

[Dark_Raven]

Chilled monkey brains.

[Gromnir]

am all in favor o' giving the other great apes Human rights, but we want 'em subject to human law too. if in california, chimp A steals a woobie from chimp B, then charge chimp A with petty theft... 'less the woobie is worth more than $400, or is an avacado. gorillas shoulds be made to wear appropriate clothing lest they find selves violating those pesky indecent exposure laws... please, think of the children. if Gromnir visits a zoo in sacramento, and a baboon throws poop at Gromnir, we want the baboon (the baboon not named Gromnir) charged with crime(s.)

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Dark_Raven]

We can give Grommie Ape Rights.

[Blank]

Animal welfare is a good thing, but let's not forget the millions of humans who are suffering under sub-human conditions. If we can't take care of our own species, how realistic can we be of taking care of other species?

Meta touched on that too. But I saw this under the comments for the article. This fact puts to shame any people who promote ape rights.

 

Some dude from Nigeria says the same thing:

In places where human rights are guaranteed, you can talk of apes' rights. In those places of the world where humans survive on less than 1 dollar a day, would they ever think of human rights for apes? Why are we more concerned about what's happening to apes than what's happening to humans.

 

I think this next guy is funny:

That chimps share 99% of our genes is an oft-quoted statistic, but we also share 33% of our genes with Daffodils. Should we amend the Geneva Convention to indict over-zealous gardeners? The percentage of genes that we share with another species is not relevant to the fight for animal rights (a fight I support). There are many very, very good reasons to protect animal welfare, but genetics isn't one of them.

Edited March 31, 2007 by Blank