Display:
The methodological insistence on avoiding antropomorphism leads to denying, by fiat, that animals can do the things that are culturally perceived as quintessentially human. And that which cannot be is not seen or is explained away as antropomorphism.

Or at least so argue modern ethologists, such as Frans de Waal.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Sep 8th, 2010 at 11:19:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Another error stemming from egotism, I'd say.  

"Quintessentially Human" stuff is dwindling all the time.  Tools, for example, are used/done by spiders, sea otters, chimpanzees, octopi, and other species with varying degrees of cognitive ability, adaption of the tool, adaption to the tool, etc. etc.  The one thing Humans can do that other animals don't, to the same degree, is our complex social groupings used to allow us to exist in a diverse range of ecological niches.

by ATinNM on Wed Sep 8th, 2010 at 12:45:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The methodological insistence on avoiding anything perceived as anthropomorphism has led them into an intellectual cul de sac. There is a similar problem with "conspiracy theories", even if deriving from different motivations.

As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Wed Sep 8th, 2010 at 02:38:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series