/lit/ - Literature

>you think you're any different
>list two differences
Now, whether they're significant is another question entirely, but clearly they are differences. Sure, we're also animals, but those qualities are fairly unique among animals.

>another faggot trying to polarize some shit.
>implying humans can't have unique aspects even if we have similarities

>>2660314
>>2660317
>only considering the qualitative aspect of the listed differences ignoring the point of the thread.

check your categories before using them.

>>2660327

This is gibberish.

>>2660327
you're an idiot. try not to make threads on this forum anymore. thanks in advance.

>>2660334
>forum

im not sure who need to go 1st.

>>2660336

>sure

cthulhu fhtagn ia ph'nglui mglw'nafh

>>2660333
>cant counter-argument
>therefore original argument is gibberish

>>2660336

>>2660343

>fhtagn

im not sure who need to go 1st.

Where are all the animal-built hospitals?

Power plants that supply millions?

Churches?

Moon landings?

>>2660356

Those are all subjective items. An animal moon-landing will be far different to a human moon-landing.

How do you know your dog isn't actually a dogtor in the animal world?

Kant.
OP, are you serious?
Like really, you cant possibly be serious?
Youre not serious, OP.

>>2660345
language and symbolic representation ARE two major distinctions that mark humans out from the rest of the animal kingdom. other animals have distinctive features as well.

>>2660394

>>2660394

I am not him, but that has to be one of the most retarded arguments I have ever read on this board...

>>2660394
mind=blown
My cat would make the worst cat-rat ambassador ever.

>>2660411
I think you mean OP -Kant- possibly be serious.

>>2660394
very different yet still experiential unless you're talking about some ethereal ghost dog kingdom.

>>2660418
That's hard to do.

>>2660418

get a load of this autismal guy!

>>2660413
see >>2660327

Kantianism? Like really?
i never thought there were people under the age of sixty who still take it serious. in academics, that is. you people are probably highschool kids who were told by their teacher what a great thinker kant was.

>>2660394
>Those are all subjective items. An animal moon-landing will be far different to a human moon-landing.
>How do you know your dog isn't actually a dogtor in the animal world?

new level of idiocy on /lit/.

>>2660514

You're right, you've single handedly reached that new level of idiocy by believing that post to be sincere.

Idiot.

>>2660394
What does that even mean?

Does anyone with a Retard to English dictionary want to translate for me?

>>2660518
the point is made absurdly but it is relevant.

>>2660418
>>2660514
>>2660519

the autism... it burns!

>>2660528
Define autism.

Hey, now I'm a peace-loving guy and I don't look for confrontation, but you are giving us non-animals a really bad name. Just cool it down, ok?

>>2660534

One characteristic of autism is the inability to distinguish between sarcasm and sincerity i.e. taking everything at face value or as a statement of truth rather than considering the possibility that it is in fact fatuous.

>>2660547
That's what your mother said

>>2660534

Taking a post with the word 'dogtor' in it as being totally serious.

>>2660518
wow i forget trolling happens on the internet. thanks for the reminder, smart anon.

>>2660547
I forgot vocal inflection can be transmitted through pure text.

>>2660518
how do you know the post you were referring to was sincere? another idiot detected.

>>2660557

>'animal moon-landing'
>'how do you know your dog isn't a dogtor in the animal world?'

I NEED TO HEAR THE VOCAL INFLECTION IN ORDER TO TELL WHETHER THIS POST IS SERIOUS OR NOT.

>>2660572

>mfw no one was able to, not even touch, but perceive the original argument.

come at me.

>>2660712
you can't even express it cogently and that's OUR fault?

>>2660712
>people think i'm an idiot so they must not understand my deep thoughts.

*rolls eyes