XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.animals.dog, rec.pets.dogs.behavior   
   From: someguy@ph.con   
      
   moonstruck lunatic lied:   
      
   > Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >   
   >>moonstruck lunatic lied:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>>Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>>moonstruck lunatic lied:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>moonstruck lunatic lied:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>moonspeak@hotmail.com lied:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Give up, moonie.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>If no one attempted to see if something exists, it means that *that*   
   >>>>>>>something doesn't exists?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>NO, moonie, you goddamned idiot.  And it's not what I   
   >>>>>>said, either.  You really are clueless.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>You said dog do not have self-awareness because there is no scientific   
   >>>>>evidence that they do,   
   >>>>   
   >>>>No, you fucking liar, I did NOT say that.  I didn't say   
   >>>>anything even close to that, you clueless fuck.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>Rudy: "But the mirror test *IS* a widely acknowledged test of   
   >>>self-awareness   
   >>>among researchers into animal intelligence, and dogs fail it."   
   >>>   
   >>>Rudy: "True, but when they fail *any* test of self awareness, then the   
   >>>smart   
   >>>bet is that they don't have it."   
   >>>   
   >>>Rudy: "Dogs do not have self awareness.  They don't not have   
   >>>it *because* they fail the test, but they do fail the   
   >>>test, and that leads one to think that they lack self   
   >>>awareness."   
   >>>   
   >>>Sorry for forgetting to add the word *tentatively* to my sentence   
   >>>above.   
   >>   
   >>ASSHOLE, you got the logic entirely wrong.  Look above   
   >>at your bullshit that you attribute to me:  "You said   
   >>dog do not have self-awareness because there is no   
   >>scientific evidence that they do".  Look at your   
   >>fucking "because".  That's completely wrong, and a   
   >>violation of logic that I would never make.  I didn't   
   >>say what you said I said, you fucking liar.   
   >   
   >   
   > Well, considering that you said   
      
   No.  We will ONLY consider that you utterly   
   misrepresented what I said, leading me to believe you   
   didn't really understand it at all.   
      
      
   >>>>>yet you do not even know if any experiments were   
   >>>>>performed to test it. Do you conclude that humans do not have   
   >>>>>self-awarenss because there is no scientific evidence that they do?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>Fuckwit - and you, given your   
   >>>>>>>>>>leanings - are the ones with the burden of proof.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>You are still running away with your imagination, I see.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Nope.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>You have no proof.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>Of what, you fucking moron?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Of my leanings.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>I do have.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>You certainly do have a vivid imagination.   
   >>   
   >>No.   
   >   
   >   
   > Of course you wouldn't realize that.   
      
   Of course I would, and you're wrong.   
      
      
      
   >>>>>>>>>>SHOW that dogs, or any other animals, possess self   
   >>>>>>>>>>awareness, or shut your fucking yap.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>Why would I do that?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>You wouldn't; you're a shirker.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Wrong,   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>No, RIGHT.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>... says the believer of his own imagination.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>Just shut your fucking yap, moonie - you can't possibly   
   >>>>>>>>>>show *evidence* of self awareness in any animals except   
   >>>>>>>>>>humans.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>What is the scientific evidence that humans have self-awareness?   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>You're one of these insistent, low-time-value fucks who   
   >>>>>>>>>>insists on having the last word, aren't you, moonie?   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>No,   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Yes.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>Are you aware of any scientific evidence that humans have   
   >>>>>>>self-awareness?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>Are you?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>No, that is why I'm asking you. You appear to believe that humans have   
   >>>>>self-awareness without scientific evidence.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>No, I don't believe it in the absence of scientific   
   >>>>evidence.  We have self awareness because we define it.   
   >>>> Self awareness in humans is not provable by   
   >>>>scientific evidence, you fucking dope.  It's something   
   >>>>that is DEFINED by human nature.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>So people can just change the definition of "self-awareness" to suit   
   >>>their needs?   
   >>   
   >>No.  There's debate around the margins over what it is   
   >>in humans.  Broadly, there's agreement.  You don't   
   >>seriously question that, either.   
   >   
   >   
   > This doesn't mean that philosophers don't believe dogs might have   
   > self-awareness.   
      
   Most don't.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)