Y'know, I think it's just the semantics of how the word "spirit" is used, that is making this seem like a discussion from two different sides. Whether "spirit" is quantifiable, objective, or extant in whatever mode, shouldn't be the source of a disagreement. The effects of "spirit," what we see as manifested in a person that can be attributed to "spirit," or how a person relates to the world around them (motivated by what one might call spirit), is the same for both "sides" of this discussion.

Hey, I wrote this (above) after TFF's 11:56 AM response. It still seems like a good point. My issue now, is with the semantics of the word "animal," as Revl uses it. There seems to be a big difference between the spiritual human and the domesticated animal.

I think that there is a big difference in their (our) respective levels of complexity, but not so much of a difference in the respective content of "spirit." I could even argue that other animals have more spirit than humans (of course, depending on how you define spirit).

I find myself seeing both points of view as valid and equatable; but needing a bit of interpretation, or translation, based on the semantics of the word, "spirit," or the word "animal." It's mostly in the objective/subjective point-of-view area that I see the difference of opinion. Ultimately, I think there is very close agreement here (except for the semantics).

We're all just trying to understand and classify the world as best we can. If that is evolution's goal, then we should cetainly appreciate the differences in points-of-view that contribute to the evolution of understanding.

Originally Posted By: Revlgking
BTW, who here is willing to actually say: "I am not a spiritual and human being. I am not a soul, a free and unique individual--one who has some self-awareness that I am me and not someone else. I am simply a clever, domesticated animal.

Any time someone more clever than I chooses, they are free to own and use me. I hope to be lucky enough to be someone's pet. I hope I will at least get a rich owner who is willing to feed me well and take me for my daily walk." smile laugh -Revl.
Hey Revl, I remember as a kid, going to school in the mornings, being very jealous of our dog laying in the sunlit patch on the rug.

I might be willing to raise my hand here, but I'd like to qualify the perspective from which I am agreeing to be called a domesticated animal. From the perspective of both BNW and 1984, aren't we all already kind of at that point?

But now I'll go back to deluding myself into thinking I'm unique, etc., and be happy again. wink

Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.