Neanderthal DNA

Originally posted by ivanhoe
Vistesd: " ...... and by 50,000 years ago, Neanderthals disappeared from Europe"

Sometimes I wonder though ........ 😵

LOL, Ivanhoe! Hope you have been, and are, well! 🙂

Originally posted by Nemesio
KellyJay? FreakKBH? Whodey? Ivanhoe?

Were Neanderthals created for humankind's pleasure and thus
have no rights as we feel we have? Do they have souls? Are they
afforded any moral consideration? Some (like, say as
much as a dog)? As much as humans?

Telerion? AThousandYoung? Amannion?

Same question (minus the created/souls part).

Nemesio

What I read in the Old testament is that the way it views all non-israelites.

Originally posted by vistesd
LOL, Ivanhoe! Hope you have been, and are, well! 🙂

"He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. This, my joy, therefore is made full.
He must increase, but I must decrease"

Welcome back from the mountain; argue away.

Originally posted by vistesd
LOL, Ivanhoe! Hope you have been, and are, well! 🙂

I'm doing all right. It would be nice though if the temperature would go down a bit if you ask me ...... the heatwave continues here in Europe.

They keep promising lower temperatures in the wheather reports, but it still hasn't happened though ...... well, I'll survive somehow ... 😀

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
"He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. This, my joy, therefore is made full.
He must increase, but I must decrease"

Welcome back from the mountain; argue away.

Thank you, Freaky: that is much appreciated...

Hope you are well. You and I have seldom agreed on issues (though sometimes we have), but have had some good times working through them and expanding on them (and I learned a lot in the process)...

I don’t have so many arguments to make these days. Palynka was right, though—and I missed the community here a bit...

Originally posted by ivanhoe
They have souls if they are human.

By implication then, if they are judged to be non-human, what rights would we grant them? The entire point of the thread is a "if they were brought back / were alive today", I think. The same question is true, I suppose, of aliens. If aliens came down tomorrow, would we treat them as inferior, equals, or superiors?

Originally posted by Nemesio
I see that this thread has deviated somewhat from my original question
(not that some of the deviations haven't been interesting or even
tangentally relevant).

I wish to return to my essential question which is:

If humankind was created in God's image, are Neanderthals just
animals and, therefore, not subject to the considerations of humans?

Tha ...[text shortened]... piritual/moral penalty for murdering a
Neanderthal? If so, why? If not, why not?

Nemesio

I'd say it depends if they have any notion of morality and if they are able to communicate it to us.

If not, they should have animal status and be treated like endangered species, possibly finding reserves for them to live separated from humans. It might sound controverse but if we are unable to communicate on any moral base, I fail to see how we could live among them as equals.

It's late and I'm not confortable with these ideas, perhaps I'll rethink about them in the morning.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
By implication then, if they are judged to be non-human, what rights would we grant them? The entire point of the thread is a "if they were brought back / were alive today", I think. The same question is true, I suppose, of aliens. If aliens came down tomorrow, would we treat them as inferior, equals, or superiors?

I think the best thing to do, in case they were not looked upon by scientists as humans, is to treat them as if they were.

I would love to teach them the noble game of chess and teaching them how to post in the RHP forums ....... 😀

Originally posted by ivanhoe
I think the best thing to do, in case they were not looked upon by scientists as humans, is to treat them as if they were.

I would love to teach them the noble game of chess and teaching them how to post in the RHP forums ....... 😀

It seems to me you're all assuming they'd agree with things like the Human Rights, for example. What if they don't? Isn't that where the controversy starts?

Is our self-given-status (granted by the Human Rights) defined by our intelligence alone or our morality?

Originally posted by Palynka
It seems to me you're all assuming they'd agree with things like the Human Rights, for example. What if they don't? Isn't that where the controversy starts?

Is our self-given-status (granted by the Human Rights) defined by our intelligence alone or our morality?

You mean whether the Neanderthals would agree with our Human Rights ?

No, they would not agree, I'm sure. The notion of Human Rights as we now know it has developed in Europe over time. Its origens are to be traced way back to the Jewish-Christian tradition, claiming that in the eyes of God, meaning the claim is universal and unchangeable by men, the life of a certain human is as valuable as any other human's life.

The Neanderthals did not go through this development, so they would not agree with the notion of Human Rights ..... I gather.

Originally posted by Palynka
It seems to me you're all assuming they'd agree with things like the Human Rights, for example. What if they don't? Isn't that where the controversy starts?

Is our self-given-status (granted by the Human Rights) defined by our intelligence alone or our morality?

Palynka: "Is our self-given-status (granted by the Human Rights) defined by our intelligence alone or our morality?"

The development on which end stands the notion of Human Rights is the result of both using our intelligence, our ability to reason, our "Reason" ( "Ratio" ), and our ability to investigate, to research, both our inner and outside reality. From this sprouts (our) morality.

It remains to be seen however whether our status is, in the end, self-given .....

Originally posted by ivanhoe
It remains to be seen however whether our status is, in the end, self-given .....

So much for free will if it isn't.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
The development on which end stands the notion of Human Rights is the result of both using our intelligence, our ability to reason, our "Reason" ( "Ratio" ), and our ability to investigate, to research, both our inner and outside reality. From this sprouts (our) morality.

It remains to be seen however whether our status is, in the end, self-given .....

Note that you define all reasons as "our" something. Is that not self-given?

It seems to me that even if you consider a divine influence, it has shaped us into something capable of self-giving ourselves that same status.

And after all, I don't see anyone claiming that the Human Rights were divinely inspired. In the same way some claim holy texts were, at least.

Originally posted by ivanhoe
You mean whether the Neanderthals would agree with our Human Rights ?

No, they would not agree, I'm sure. The notion of Human Rights as we now know it has developed in Europe over time. Its origens are to be traced way back to the Jewish-Christian tradition, claiming that in the eyes of God, meaning the claim is universal and unchangeable by men, the lif ...[text shortened]... ough this development, so they would not agree with the notion of Human Rights ..... I gather.

You have no factual basis on whether to found that claim. (Ok, I noticed the "I gather" at the end of your post.

The fact is, many Far Eastern cultures have embraced them and had no need for that same Jewish-Christian centuries of tradition that you speak of.

But let's assume they don't accept them. Would they be then capable to live among us? If not, what should be done with them?

Originally posted by Palynka
You have no factual basis on whether to found that claim. (Ok, I noticed the "I gather" at the end of your post.

The fact is, many Far Eastern cultures have embraced them and had no need for that same Jewish-Christian centuries of tradition that you speak of.

But let's assume they don't accept them. Would they be then capable to live among us? If not, what should be done with them?

Palynka: "The fact is, many Far Eastern cultures have embraced them ... "

Can you give the names of those "many Far Eastern cultures" ? .... or a link which supports your claim ?

By the way, the Jewish Christian tradition also is an Eastern tradition. It originated in the Middle East, namely in what is now called Israel/Palestine.

Palynka: "But let's assume they don't accept them. Would they be then capable to live among us? If not, what should be done with them?"

Sure they would be capable to live amongst us. We would be having interesting discussions about whether for instance abortions are morally acceptable.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/25.htm


... or euthanasia ....