What, specifically, differentiates humans from, a) animals, and b) machines?

Question

The issue of the soul will always be a consideration, I know; with that, the problem is definitional--there is no "proof," authentication, scientifically-supplied evidence to sanction its existence. With machines, I'm thinking in terms of separating man from his tools in very literal ways (think Stephen Hawking and Christopher Reeve, ATMS, credit cards, Internet, communications, medicine, and so on).

Conscience, consciousness, soul, even "alive" are contentious words. The word "alive" in the context of a machine-human interface would bring in people such as Stephen Hawking. He cannot live without technology to assist him--so is he alive? Is he a human or is he a machine? How do you know?

Answer 1

I would think that it is self-actualization that makes the difference. Whereas an animals motivation to do something would be either instinctive or because of a physical motivation ie. hunger, pain etc. and a machine needs an outside influence in order to complete its purpose, a human has that characteristic that enables him to create, to perform an act out of emotion, or to exhibit compassion, all for no particular reason other than desire to do so.

Answer 2

Machines don't think for themselves. Machinesare not alive. With enought money you can fix any machine and make it work. Not so with humans and animals. You can always get hurt to the point where there is no repair. MAchines are made out of non organic materials. That is metals plastics. They are not living tings a much as ocks arenot living thigs.

The diffrence between a human and an animal is the conciosness level. We are a bitmore concious about our actions that animals are. For example, both human and animal can get angry at another being or object and hurt them. The difference is that animals usually do it at that particualr moment in time. I mean, an animal fels pain an anger as much as we humans do and can bottle up recentment but an animal does not plan ahead. We humans have this malice. We can plan for days and years on how to hurt someone else. An animal just does it. So, I guess the main difference between an animal and a human is being concious enought to have an intent.

Now intent may not be a bad thing. An animal may use a tool to get at food because is hungry. A human may not only use a tool to get food, but, it can also improve of those tools and make them more efficient. The intent being that we humans plan for the future (ok not everyone) with an intention of being better off later than just 5 minutes from now.

Othe than this humans and animals are not different. Both need to eat, sleep and procreate.

Answer 3

Well, the difference between animals and humans is intelligence. Humans have the frontal area of brain that allows them to do creative thinking. If you were an animal, for example, you couldn't ask this question. And animals can't recognize themselves. For example, if you have a pet, when you put them in front of a mirror, they think it is another animal. We know it is a reflection of ourselves when we look. The only other animal to see themselves is the dolphin. This part of the brain is what makes the large part of that 2% difference between humans and chimpanzees. And don't think the reason people are not animals is because animals are peaceful, because chimpanzees are horribly violent, cannibalistic and territorial.

The difference between humans and machines is of course, the obvious ones. Humans are alive. In the sense you mean, there are fewer. Machines are created by humans, so a computer is filled with only knowledge you can figure out in your head. The computer can not think on it's own, but has to use already existing knowledge from humans. In that sense, our brain is just the ultimate computer, because it can think of the same things a computer can. The computer really can not think outside of the human brain, and already existing knowledge.

Answer 4

Animals and computers do too have souls. If we can have them so can they.

I wasn't clear on your rationale in your questions. Many animals species use tools and even other animals as tools. What is a virus without a human? A dead virus. What is a bacteria without a human to grow on?

It is also interesting to note how we in this culture differentiate tools. Someone could easily break a branch and use it as a tool of death in the same way that one could manufacture a gun from raw materials.

Ultimately, the question reduces to the need of humans to be different than all other things in the environment. We do have big egos.

Cats and dogs eat grass to cleanse their stomach. A medicine if you will. A raw material that is used to benefit the end user. We might use syrup of ipecac. Same idea.

Answer 5

i've got heard it suggested guy is the only animal that kills for relaxing. yet cats additionally do this. i've got heard it suggested we are the only animal that has intercourse for excitement, yet dolphins additionally do this. i've got heard it suggested we've the main complicated language for speaking. even with the undeniable fact that it seems whales easily win that call. i've got heard it suggested we are the only ones with a soul. however the existence of the soul has on no account been shown, so figuring out who has one and who would not sounds like a faux technology, and not an sufficient or impartial answer. i think the thought that we are in a position to make ethical judgements could desire to be a controversy. i do no longer understand of the different omnivore species that chooses to consume only vegetables consistent with a ethical or ethical end. yet few human beings have made such sacrifices, so we are in a position to chop back who qualifies in that experience. shall we boost this to assert that it may desire to be generalized, and what makes us diverse is that we come to ethical conclusions on a brilliant form of themes, yet i'm uncertain different clever species do no longer do an identical. we've written language. this is probable unique. even however, the actuality seeker Peter Singer might argue there is not any distinction super sufficient to make us extra desirable, and do declare so is to prepare some thing stated as "speciesism", which has similarities to racism or sexism. i easily experience no longer all people embody humanity, and countless animals look to demonstrate humanity, so this is rather an considerable question.

Answer 6

Appearance and the way they were created. Animals (including humans) were created biologically, machines consciously by humans. They're all deterministic, so a sophisticated enough machine could be considered having a soul.

Answer 7

There is no soul

To differentiate humans from "animals" is difficult since we are animals. All we can do is point to appearance and higher cognitive functions.

As for machines, there are many different definitions of life. None of which is perfect. One easy definition that applies to modern machines is that they have no metabolism. Eventually they may, but not yet.

Answer 8

Technically, we are animals, the only thing that makes us 'different' is that we think of ourselves as seperate. But, of course, if prairie dogs gained sentience today, I'm sure they'd think of themselves as separate and some of them would ask, "Hey, what makes us prairie dogs so special?"

As for machines, the big difference is that we're self-propagating biological organisms. As biotech advances, though, that definition's going to have to change.

Answer 9

The ability to ask this question specifically differentiates humans form A & B above.

Answer 10

i don't no Steven hawking,but i no man do not need technology to survive,we are the greater thinker on the earth above the animal.we have made technology for are selves from imitating the thing of nature that already exist.that males us greater than animal.