|
I've seen quite a few responses here that define humanity based on some sort of intangible feature - a soul, a spirit, religion, whatever. I'd like to offer an alternative viewpoint.
Let's start by looking at the simplest creatures. They have a simple brain (let's assume they have some sort of central processing unit) and they have an equally simple stimulus -> response system to react to their environment. In other words, something happens (it touches something pointy), and it reacts (moves away). Add a little bit of ingrained programming, a little bit of memory, and we have an amoeba.
The next level - insects and such. Now we have to factor in a couple more senses. The brains now have to handle several inputs, from eyes for example. Now the processing becomes more complicated, but it's still a stimulus -> response environment. The insect receives inputs from its senses, processes them, and sends out signals based on a combination of instinct and past experiences.
Next level - cats, dogs, horses, etc. Now we have the whole slew of senses available as inputs. This gives a wide range of possible responses, including some that appear to us as intelligence. Have they moved beyond a stimulus -> response model? I don't think so. They certainly have more cognitive power than insects. They can recognize patterns, and apply their past experiences to similar situations in the future. They also have a wide array of instincts to draw on. Are they human? Not even close.
Next and final level - humans. What makes us so special? Well, we've managed to develop to the point that we not only use the inputs from our bodies to determine the outputs of our brains, but we allow the outputs to be fed back in as inputs again. This is what forms the basis of a consciousness - the ability to analyze our own reactions to situations. (And analyze the analysis, and so on... the basis of obsessions). Only a human could ask themselves why they do what they do. Only a human could take in a situation, come up with a reaction, and then analyze that reaction before acting on it. Everything else can only analyze (if they analyze at all) the incoming stimulus that results from their reaction, whether good or bad.
Of course, this is all just speculation. I just thought this discussion could use a little bit more from a purely mechanical viewpoint.
|