Animals Are As With-it as Humans (Animals Are Conscious)

reply to post by milkyway12



Michio Kaku says the fifth dimension is light.

So here's the deal -- quantum physicist Louis de Broglie was studying Einstein's relativity and de Broglie discovered a paradox:

When energy increases in frequency then under relativity time as wavelength expands since time slows down -- this violates the Law of Pythagoras stating that wavelength is inverse to frequency.

So then de Broglie figured out the only way relativity is true in the realms of quantum physics since energy is based on frequency -- is to have what he calls the "double solution" so that when the frequency is zero then time as phase is infinite. This is before it turns into classical time as amplitude based on squaring or logarithms. So how that works is that de Broglie stated there is a "pilot wave" that is faster than the speed of light and it secretly then guides the energy -- and this happened by going backwards in time from the future.

So that is how light is the fifth dimension because it works through quantum entanglement which is nonlocal -- instantaneous communication. This is actually witnessed in quantum biology but it can be reproduced in technology because technology always requires the "collapse" or decoherence of the infinite phase as the pilot wave -- consciousness -- back into a logarithmic classical or material measurement. So for example bird migration relies on the quantum zeno effect so that the retina of the bird takes observations so fast -- detects the photons so fast -- that it prevents the collapse or "measurement" of the photon back into a classical wavelength. So then the difference in spin between the electrons can triangulate differences in the Earth's magnetic field compared to the bird brain's memory of location. Fish use this with what's called "quasi telepathy" and plants use it for photosynthesis. So humans also use it - -only it's been repressed in the West every since Archytas created logarithmic-based geometry - -or what the Greeks called "alogon" but actually the irrational number continuum.

So quantum physics as the new foundation of science actually takes science back to before Plato and Archytas to what Pythagoras was originally teaching -- although his school required nine years of silence to learn the real quantum biology skills of entanglement, time travel, telekinesis, bilocation, etc. Fortunately there are still some energy masters of this from the East and even from the South - a few San Bushmen masters as they are the oriignal humans doing this.

Chimp 'Secret Handshakes' May Be Cultural

Well traditional the Chinese don't shake hands as it's unhygienic.

There's also an energy transfer from hand shakes.

Chimp males rape the females and Chimp males practice warfare.

In contrast bonobo males don't rape and don't practice warfare and also rarely ejaculate yet have sex all the time.

So bonobos are the secret to hominid primates having happy relations with ecology -- the females are in charge because Nature is female. Handshaking is a chimp male thing.

reply to post by fulllotusqigong

I guess you haven't heard that Qigong is a bunch of shi$ made up in your mind.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by dontreally

Why not just admit that it was most likely jealousy you were seeing, and not a sense of justice?

Erm, because she was obviously really bothered by the discrepancy???? If she had no sense of justice, why would she make such a big production about the fact that she got the smaller one?

I have a dog too. My dog, my cousins dog, my dog I had as a kid, and all the other dogs I know and interact with, are in no ways fundamentally different from each other, as you seem to be avowing in the case of your own dogs.

Then you haven't been around enough dogs. I have....counting....hang on......eight......eight dogs I've loved and lived with...spanning 42+ years.....and every one of them had/has a different personality! (My dogs have all been "mutts", though...maybe yours and your cousins were purebred dips.)

We can love dogs in their own ways. There's no need to make yourself look stupid by saying self observation, self consciousness, the power to reflect and evaluate, abilities which produce sapience in humans, exists in dogs.

Look stupid? Are you seriou...yes. you are!! ...serious!! Dude, dogs get it. But, hey, don't believe it if you don't want to...just sayin'

Funny story..

Where I used to live, I had a full length mirror. One of my dogs (the female, of course ) would spend literally hours staring at herself in the mirror. She would primp and prune herself. If she saw an out of place piece of hair, or debris in her fur in the mirror, she would then clean it off or straighten it out. She loved to look at herself from different angles, and would give different "looks" in the mirror. She also taught herself how to smile in this way.

She would lick herself in different areas to get different effects on the hair (like different hair styles, I suppose), and then look in the mirror from all angles to see how she looked.

Not really sure what conclusions to make from this, other than she is one hell of a strange dog. Honestly, Im a bit glad I dont have a full length mirror in my new house

I for one believe dogs to be capable of jealousy - especially when a dog that thinks he's the pack leader is slighted. I know of a dog that whines terribly if you pet his pal dog in front of him. I don't believe him to be concerned about justice.

Justice.... I guess it depends upon what you are thinking that means.

Humans sublimate it to a concept that can be disengaged from the material world, in our usage of language,
but there may be a more down to earth interpretation, which animals DO share.

Like in social animals like dogs, there is a hierarchy.... there is an order in which each member has the right to eat, and who has the right to how much (the higher up the ladder gets to eat first to their hearts content, the lowest must content themselves to whatever is leftover).

It is instinctual- they do not "think" about this- they simply "live" it. The place in the hierarchy is determined through specific language of the body and behaviorism in interaction, and expect to be respected by all members then.

Your two dogs, if up to that moment, they have been treated as if they were equals, then suddenly one gets more than the other, there could be a reaction of confusion.... not thought out, more like when we just "feel" something is out of wack... something is wrong with this picture, with this moment... it has something to do with that thing or that individual....but it is not right.

That feeling would be even stronger if the dog who recieved more was normally in the lower position, the sense that somethign was off would be bigger and the reaction stronger.

But I personally think that there is a big difference between the human type of thinking about justice, and the instinctual reaction based upon feeling that animals have.

I will go as far as to share my more controversial opinion that the reason our behaviors are so similar to other animals in appearence is because our behaviors ALSO stem from such base instincts... our sublimation of concepts is secondary and illusional.

This is not anthropomophism exactly, more like Behaviorism.

reply to post by wildtimes

Erm, because she was obviously really bothered by the discrepancy???? If she had no sense of justice, why would she make such a big production about the fact that she got the smaller one?

Dogs are scavengers. You seem to be really not caring at all about this fact, and yet it is this fact which obliterates your claim that what you saw "must have been conscience" because you - interpolating, might I add - her facial expression, decided that it was not jealousy - because that would be "unbecoming" to your human like dogs - rather than simple canine jealousy, a trait which is highly developed in animals that scavenge.

Then you haven't been around enough dogs. I have....counting....hang on......eight......eight dogs

It has nothing to do with dogs, but the people analyzing the dogs. You clearly aren't educated enough to judge what you're seeing.

We should not be so arrogant as to judge other animals by Human standards.
Reminds me how Victorians loved to depict animals with Human Characteristics.

Each animal has it's own unique way of communication

Yet some things are Universal as regards sentient life.

reply to post by wildtimes


I agree - Animals have feelings and if scavenger can be applied to Dogs then also it can apply to Humans.
Like you say you have to live with animals to appreciate their quality's

reply to post by Bluesma

Humans sublimate it to a concept that can be disengaged from the material world, in our usage of language, but there may be a more down to earth interpretation, which animals DO share.

That may be because justice is an ABSTRACT concept. In order to be just, one needs to have the ability to disengage from the material world and abstract from any specific situation in order to come to a moral judgement.

Outside this, were not talking about justice anymore.

Like in social animals like dogs, there is a hierarchy.... there is an order in which each member has the right to eat, and who has the right to how much (the higher up the ladder gets to eat first to their hearts content, the lowest must content themselves to whatever is leftover).

Yes, there is great wisdom in nature. But animals do not sit and "think this up". It is God, or Nature, which determines this order.

If were going to credit an ability to animals, firstly, it has to be present individually; secondly, it has to be something that is perceived, and then understood - which means, a specific situation that is reflected upon. In other words, justice presupposes the presence of self consciousness - self observation. One has to see oneself as an acting person in order to judge the nature of a specific action; and further, one has to recognize the need to adhere to that action.

Clearly then, no animal in nature is moral or just. What we may see at times is an unconscious judgement - and therefore a reaction - of animals to acts that are inherently unjust. For instance, one person mentioned a Chimpanzee that became despondent after his friend was killed. This reaction implied an understanding of the evil done. But it is not a conscious understanding - but an unconscious reaction to an evil; his friend, his companion, was dead. The bare sight of his dead friend elicited an outrage in the monkey. Again, this only shows that morality is indeed a natural demand of nature: it is not so much the individual monkey expressing condemnation in his actions, but natures creator.

Another example is how dogs react to violence or yelling. If your dog is trained well, they react very negatively towards it. They cower their head, pull in their tails and go away as far as possible, or sometimes even closer to intervene, when some 'evil spirit' has come between people they know.

This is why there is an ancient belief that animals are intermediaries between the 'gods' and man. Because animals act mostly unconsciously - in that they are directed by instinct and emotion, and not a self conscious mind that pauses, reflects before acting, it was thought that whatever they did was dictated by some higher force - the daimons; dogs especially were ascribed powers of prescience. An inner intuition of nebulous characters, sensing danger etc. They were given such powers because of the obvious absence of reason - self consciousness - which is what makes human beings fundamentally different from animals.

It is instinctual- they do not "think" about this- they simply "live" it.

Completely agree. We too experience this 'just living' mode once in awhile. When someone responds without thinking - this is the same thing. This is acting without the will passing through the self conscious mind before acting. This is the essence of the animal experience.

not thought out, more like when we just "feel" something is out of wack... something is wrong with this picture, with this moment... it has something to do with that thing or that individual....but it is not right.

I think it's important to keep in mind how dogs hunt - how nature has equipped them. Scavengers fight over food, and they fight for simple reasons of jealousy. Dogs obviously have the intelligence to observe and note differences in portion - since this relates to how full, or satiated they will feel. If she gave her dog less than her other dog, I imagine the chief motivation of her confusion was that she didn't have the same: it wasn't an inkling of a moral sense, that it wasn't right because portions should be equal, but rather, a jealous motivation that wanted her need and desire for a larger portion to be met.

This is the difference between understanding principles - that equality exists, and that in certain situations an equal distribution of goods should be spread - and individual selfishness, which doesn't care for principles (or even recognize them, as in animals) but acts out of sheer self interest.

our sublimation of concepts is secondary and illusional.

I think it's dangerous, and highly misinformed to relay our abilities and experiences - which is higher in the chain of being - with that of lower worlds. A humans conscious perception of love, of justice, of kindness, humor, indignation, awe, etc - these experiences are something completely unknown to nature. In fact, nature in it's complete unconscious condition, relative to us, is as if non-existing - not existing because it is not conscious of it's existence. This very fact alone, to me at least, forces nature - and it's own peculiar laws, i.e. survival of the fittest, natural selection, - to be subsumed by human categories of existence: metaphysics. This means that natural law exists only for some teleological purpose from which man can derive some spiritual lesson from; that natural selection is the mode of behavior of lower beings - that brute necessity drives them to act, and by acting, they follow their own 'law'. We, being beings possessed with the power of self consciousness, and reason, understand that by these gifts are designed to adhere to a 'higher' law: the law of living righteously, of doing justice.

I disagree that Humans are "Higher then animals"

Animals do not feel the need to question their existence
Our questioning shows a lack of knowing

reply to post by artistpoet


animals do not feel the need because they don't have the ability to reflect and notice a need.

The fact that humans CAN do that, shows that we are above them.

Weird how such an amazing gift - self conscious - can be so deprecated and shat upon by people to be seen as a reason for our being less than animals.

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by artistpoet

 

animals do not feel the need because they don't have the ability to reflect and notice a need.

The fact that humans CAN do that, shows that we are above them.

Weird how such an amazing gift - self conscious - can be so deprecated and shat upon by people to be seen as a reason for our being less than animals.

Reflect upon what? Give an example
How does reflecting upon something show that Humans are more conscious than animals

We are animals no more no less

Perhaps our fellow beings (animals) do not require reflection or naval gazing - Perhaps they accept their place on Earth more readily than Humans.
And furthermore perhaps they are more in touch with their Higher Self than we.
Yet Humans relegate animals as beneath them - This simply is not so and it pains any to truly accept this.

reply to post by artistpoet

Reflect upon what? Give an example How does reflecting upon something show that Humans are more conscious than animals

Self consciousness. We know we exist. We know we act. We know we feel. We know we think. We know we love. We know that nature begs the question: who created this?

Perhaps our fellow beings (animals) do not require reflection or naval gazing - Perhaps they accept their place on Earth more readily than Humans.

They don't have a choice - they haven't the ability to reflect and wonder! When you live unconsciously - a thing you clearly admire - these questions don't pop up. You're unconscious of them.

Animals don't recognize principles. They don't see into the higher world of abstract things. Abstraction is a purely human ability.

And furthermore perhaps they are more in touch with their Higher Self than we.

Higher self? Animals do not have a higher self. The proposition of a higher self implies a lower self - i.e. an ego, i.e a self conscious individuality.

Animals, at most, are little refracted pieces of a higher group consciousness. Whereas humans might possess a higher self - an essential self relative to the ego - animals are unconscious units of a general unconsciousness.

Yet Humans relegate animals as beneath them - This simply is not so and it pains any to truly accept this.

I don't take it you read very much. Not a single philosopher of ancient Greece thought as you do. And they were fairly 'spiritual' themselves; unconsciousness - emotion/pathos - was seen to be the root of suffering. Thus, the stoics sought to rid themselves of pathos - emotion, making apathy their ideal condition.

Now, what you seem to be glorifying is the pre-socratic days of primitive mythology where gods were adored i.e. where being nothing more than unconscious vehicles for the movements of the gods, was seen as being preferable to exercising self consciousness.


Whatever. It is obvious to me that humans live in a more refined state of being than animals. Of course, in ultimate terms - the ultimate being the Absolute, or Godhead - all are equally nothing before the essence; but in the world of existence, of action, there are different levels of perception, of being. Being human is infinitely better than being an animal: Hinduism - the vedas - teaches this, as does Buddhism; and of course Judaism considers man as the sine qua non of existence.

Vegetarian disinfo.

Are plants conscious?

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by artistpoet

 

Self consciousness. We know we exist. We know we act. We know we feel. We know we think. We know we love. We know that nature begs the question: who created this?


They don't have a choice - they haven't the ability to reflect and wonder! When you live unconsciously - a thing you clearly admire - these questions don't pop up. You're unconscious of them.

Animals don't recognize principles. They don't see into the higher world of abstract things. Abstraction is a purely human ability.

Higher self? Animals do not have a higher self. The proposition of a higher self implies a lower self - i.e. an ego, i.e a self conscious individuality.

Animals, at most, are little refracted pieces of a higher group consciousness. Whereas humans might possess a higher self - an essential self relative to the ego - animals are unconscious units of a general unconsciousness.

I don't take it you read very much. Not a single philosopher of ancient Greece thought as you do. And they were fairly 'spiritual' themselves; unconsciousness - emotion/pathos - was seen to be the root of suffering. Thus, the stoics sought to rid themselves of pathos - emotion, making apathy their ideal condition.

Now, what you seem to be glorifying is the pre-socratic days of primitive mythology where gods were adored i.e. where being nothing more than unconscious vehicles for the movements of the gods, was seen as being preferable to exercising self consciousness.


Whatever. It is obvious to me that humans live in a more refined state of being than animals. Of course, in ultimate terms - the ultimate being the Absolute, or Godhead - all are equally nothing before the essence; but in the world of existence, of action, there are different levels of perception, of being. Being human is infinitely better than being an animal: Hinduism - the vedas - teaches this, as does Buddhism; and of course Judaism considers man as the sine qua non of existence.

edit on 3-9-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)

Animals know they exist also as well as feel and love - can you read their minds?
Does nature really beg the question who Created it or is it not Humans feel the need to ask such questions.
Because thay fail to be in harmony with the nature of Creation - Animals do not need to create Philosophies or Religions in a quest to ultimately understand themselves.

If a being on a higher wave length accepts and uses pure thought as it comes knowing the course of action required without having to ask an imaginary God or Guru for guidance or self doubt and so reflect on the nature of reality then is that unconscious - You presume so much

Rather snide of one who takes a so called enlightened stance to presume I am not well read - But no matter - Books do not enlighten nor gurus - Intelligence comes from within ask an animal

The "Ultimate Being" "Godhead" you say - Ancient Greek Philosophy -
All seeking to be in balance and harmony yet animals are already there
Sorry on their behalf they do not question their existence but accept and use theit thoughts as they come in a purer form than Humans
Sorry they do not trash the planet as Humans do - or some to be fair

Seems you walk in dead mens shoes and look to Archaic ways to justify that You are higher or more godlike than say a Horse -

reply to post by artistpoet

Animals know they exist also as well as feel and love - can you read their minds?

So you don't even know how to reason properly.

Ok. All we can know about animals - and about all things - is from what they reveal to us externally: in animals, its through their behavior that we come to know something about their consciousness.

Rather snide of one who takes a so called enlightened stance to presume I am not well read - But no matter - Books do not enlighten nor gurus - Intelligence comes from within ask an animal

Your reasoning is deranged. You jump to foregone conclusions without realizing how arbitrary - i.e. emotional, they are.

To just assume that animals have abilities without proof - or admitting 'psychic' factors above evidence elicited through analysis of behavior patterns - is illogical.

The best we can do is first analyze what animals show us through their outward behavior, with each other, with man, and with their environments.

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by artistpoet

 

So you don't even know how to reason properly.

Ok. All we can know about animals - and about all things - is from what they reveal to us externally: in animals, its through their behavior that we come to know something about their consciousness.

Your reasoning is deranged. You jump to foregone conclusions without realizing how arbitrary - i.e. emotional, they are.

To just assume that animals have abilities without proof - or admitting 'psychic' factors above evidence elicited through analysis of behavior patterns - is illogical.

The best we can do is first analyze what animals show us through their outward behavior, with each other, with man, and with their environments.

You say all we can know of animals is external behavior - Then you say my thinking is deranged because I asked can you read their minds - Also you yet again apply Human thinking and concepts such as Psyche to your fellow beings and accuse me of being Illogical.

Psyche in Greek Mythology refers to the soul - As in the Myth of Eros and Psyche IE Love and the Soul of which have just recently finished a large canvas painting - after much study.by me whom you more or less accused of being ill read - so it goes.
We can discuss this till "Till the Cows come home" or Humans for that matter.

Have you really spent a lot of time with animals I wonder?

You see even within Human Animals there is the elitism to their fellows which is transposed onto the environment and other creatures.

Animals have much to teach us by example if we care to look - yet we relegate them as somehow dumb
It is so far from the truth but I am sure you will disagree - No matter

A dog raised in a good loving family is more human that some 'scumbag' who raped woman or kiled humans often.

I had a dog which as most dogs most important thing for them is food.. but still.. If she knew she was not allowed to take it even when she had easy acces, she wouldn't touch it!! even when she was all alone for a day.

And imagine an alien race more 'advanced' / more powerfull, and they would treat us like we human treat animals (general speaking).. better be really scared then for your life/well being.

But the thing is, we got the power.. we can do good things with that or bad things, 10000 way more bad things then some animal killing another animal, which is his nature. We on the other hand most likely only realise when the damage is really done and too late probaly.

But we are sucked up in this money world.. which is just like the meat in the animal kingdom (for the predators).