Did Homo habilis or erectus have human rights? How about Australopithecus? Would it have been ethical for colonizing aliens from another star to disrupt our evolutionary path at any point? And for any of the carnivorous you may know: At what point on man's evolutionary path would it have been ethical to hunt him for food?



Homo habilis



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2008 07:11PM by brome.

No, it was apparently widely practiced even for anatomically correct modern humans.
[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Also there is a commentary here, can't find details though:
Cannibalism rife throughout human evolution
Keri Page
The Lancet Neurology - Vol. 2, Issue 6, June 2003, Page 329

I think the practice is not more widespread now due to social constraints and better availability of food (reliable agriculture) rather than anatomy/evolution.

Also see this:
[www.sciamdigital.com]

Basically we don't eat each other as long as there is other stuff to eat.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2008 11:42PM by arugula.

Not hunting each other, I meant for another species, perhaps colonizing aliens from a different star system, to hunt man for food as they would any other animal. At what point did man acquire human rights changing him from an animal to a human. At what point would it have been unethical for beings of another species to derail human evolution. Any species from another star that colonized planets would simply crowd out any life forms developing on the colonized planet. And if man had rights as an animal then it would follow that all animals have similar rights.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2008 08:09AM by brome.

Well homo sapiens was able to mate with H. neanderthalensis, which was about 250000 years ago. I would peg that as being "similar enough" to now to be considered human.

But some people might put it much further back, maybe 2000000 years ago (elaborate stone tools, fire, much bigger brain, etc.).

Here is a pic:

brome

could u re- word, clarify your question?

r u just wanting agreement that it is "wrong" to hunt animals?

since humans have "rights"?

well, humans attain rights when they give it to themselves, mostly
but it can be a fight

so i don't understand your question

a woman who is in an abusive relationship with her husband attains the right to "speak her mind" when she goes ahead and "speaks her mind"

i'm not sure what u mean by " human rights"

do u mean "Civil Rights"

voting rights?

rights to life or dignity?

what exactly is your question?

is this just a roundabout way to say " It is a bad thing to kill animals?"

i don't eat meat

i have disliked it since i was 4 years old

not sure why people like to eat carcass ( why don't they just munch on roadkill?_

but u need to also ask the animals themselves to grant each other "animal rights"

cuz they are hunting and eating each other constantly

just an observation

they get more out of it though cuz it ain't cooked

okay brome

u said "other" species

so scratch out the thing i wrote about animals eating each other

since u mentioned specifically that u were talking about other species

so it had the "colonizing" vibe to it

which i understand

good parallels

btw

i understood your question

i just felt like yapping anyways

You're right la_veronique it is an argument that once you declare we have human rights that logically our evolutionary ancestors should certainly have rights too. And since they were animals then all animals should similarly have the same rights.