Re: Playing on the words `human' and `animal' 2/2 (was The

Glenn R. Morton (grmorton@waymark.net)
Fri, 04 Sep 1998 20:56:49 -0500

At 10:38 AM 9/4/98 +0800, Stephen Jones wrote:
>Furthermore the above is "reason for scalping" among "the Marquesans" a
>South Pacific Island population of *Homo sapiens*. The relevance of why
>0.2 kya Homo sapiens in the South Pacific scalped their enemies to why a
>4,000 kya Homo heidelbergensis in Africa did it, is hard to see (to put it
>mildly).
>

How does anyone know someone is human? Because they behave in a human
fashion.

>Even here it is not necessarily religious. Gaining "the benefit of that
man's
>powers and potentialities" is not necessarily religious. They might see it
as
>*socially* benificial as us getting a university degree or investing in
>property. Daniel Dennett points out that primitive people doing something
>that looks religious to us moderns, is not necessarily religious to them:

The idea of powers is a religious idea. Animals don't think about 'powers'.

>
glenn

Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm