If you are a dog-lover then insert "cats" in the title. If you are a lover of both dogs and cats insert "ferrets." If you love ferrets, sorry. Deal with it.
There is a prominent and prevailing worldview, a mindset of our culture which believes and asserts that we, i.e. human beings, are not any different than the animal kingdom. It would assert that we are merely the most highly evolved--that is the only difference. It is the belief that the material world is all that exists. Only that which can be scientifically quantified--seen, heard, touched, tasted, or smelled-- is real.
Something within me rebels at the thought that I am not categorically different than the lowly ferret or even the highly esteemed dog or cat, or even the chimpanzee who, at times, evidences more intelligence than my Uncle Fred.
I believe there is something inherent/innate within us as human beings that knows we are different from the animal. Nineteen years ago when my dad died at 66 years of age,why did I weep? Why were there days when I sobbed because I missed him so much? When the pallbearers solemnly carried the casket I knew the casket didn't simply contain a 150 lb carcass of a formerly upright bi-ped. This was not merely the body of my flesh and blood, but a kindred "spirit." A spirit unmeasurable by empirical research methods, but, nonetheless, so real, so actual that 19 years later I can see him just as clearly as if he were sitting here beside me as I type this.
I believe one difference between "us" and "them" is that we have a conscience. It would appear that animals have a conscience (e.g. when they flash you that "paws in the cookie jar" glance), but I would contend it is not conscience, but a conditioned response. It's called operant conditioning. B. F. Skinner was one of the most influential of American psychologists. A radical behaviorist, he developed the theory of operant conditioning -- the idea that behavior is determined by its consequences, be they reinforcements or punishments, which make it more or less likely that the behavior will occur again. Clarence the canine or Freakshow the ferret doesn't experience a guilty conscience when he chews up his owner's $150 Nike running shoes; he has been conditioned by now to know that punishment ensues when he chews on something other than his designated doggie-bone or ferret flavo-ring. It's conditioning. You and I, on the other paw, assuming we are relatively healthy moral beings, do not vandalize each others possessions. We refrain from doing so not because we fear we will be caught, not because of fear of present or future punishment, but because we know it is wrong. To do so is a violation of the other person.
I just don't think people with this prevailing worldview can live consistently with their beliefs. Here's what I mean. I can't imagine the secular humanist, upon the delivery of his long-anticipated child, exclaiming to his wife, " What an intricate formation of respiratory, neurological, and vascular systems in our newly birthed fetus! Note the weight and length of this epidermically-housed ectoplasm." NO!!! He says, "What a beautiful son/daughter!!" He says something equivalent to that because, in truth, he cannot live consistently with his worldview. It's mere fetal ectoplasm--until it's his own. Now it is "my son," my "daughter." That's because there is something--someone--beyond mere "material" that has been born. There is a person--spirit housed in flesh--that his worldview cannot account for, but which he himself, in his very words, cannot deny.
Can you imagine a couple who deeply loves each other, and after an evening of celebrating an anniversary and reminiscing about their years together, they culminate this endearing time together by making love. Does he then turn to her and say,"Now THAT was certainly an acceleration of the central nervous system. I noted a rapidly increased heart rate, blood pressure significantly beyond normal ranges, reserves of adrenalin activated, and a jelling of body fluids." NO!! He says, "I love you." Because there is more going on than mere physiological response. Something you can't measure or quantify is taking place at the deep level of the soul. (He also says, "I love you," because his wife would kill him if he were to utter the other response.)
From a faith-based perspective, a person is unique from an animal in that in the Genesis account of creation, only man and woman are described as being created "in the image of God."
The entire remaining created order is described as "good"--no doubt about it. But you alone, my friend, are an image-bearer of God. the creator of the cosmos. I encourage you to celebrate your dignity and to view and treat others as being created in God's image.
We are more than we appear to be.
There is a prominent and prevailing worldview, a mindset of our culture which believes and asserts that we, i.e. human beings, are not any different than the animal kingdom. It would assert that we are merely the most highly evolved--that is the only difference. It is the belief that the material world is all that exists. Only that which can be scientifically quantified--seen, heard, touched, tasted, or smelled-- is real.
Something within me rebels at the thought that I am not categorically different than the lowly ferret or even the highly esteemed dog or cat, or even the chimpanzee who, at times, evidences more intelligence than my Uncle Fred.
I believe there is something inherent/innate within us as human beings that knows we are different from the animal. Nineteen years ago when my dad died at 66 years of age,why did I weep? Why were there days when I sobbed because I missed him so much? When the pallbearers solemnly carried the casket I knew the casket didn't simply contain a 150 lb carcass of a formerly upright bi-ped. This was not merely the body of my flesh and blood, but a kindred "spirit." A spirit unmeasurable by empirical research methods, but, nonetheless, so real, so actual that 19 years later I can see him just as clearly as if he were sitting here beside me as I type this.
I believe one difference between "us" and "them" is that we have a conscience. It would appear that animals have a conscience (e.g. when they flash you that "paws in the cookie jar" glance), but I would contend it is not conscience, but a conditioned response. It's called operant conditioning. B. F. Skinner was one of the most influential of American psychologists. A radical behaviorist, he developed the theory of operant conditioning -- the idea that behavior is determined by its consequences, be they reinforcements or punishments, which make it more or less likely that the behavior will occur again. Clarence the canine or Freakshow the ferret doesn't experience a guilty conscience when he chews up his owner's $150 Nike running shoes; he has been conditioned by now to know that punishment ensues when he chews on something other than his designated doggie-bone or ferret flavo-ring. It's conditioning. You and I, on the other paw, assuming we are relatively healthy moral beings, do not vandalize each others possessions. We refrain from doing so not because we fear we will be caught, not because of fear of present or future punishment, but because we know it is wrong. To do so is a violation of the other person.
I just don't think people with this prevailing worldview can live consistently with their beliefs. Here's what I mean. I can't imagine the secular humanist, upon the delivery of his long-anticipated child, exclaiming to his wife, " What an intricate formation of respiratory, neurological, and vascular systems in our newly birthed fetus! Note the weight and length of this epidermically-housed ectoplasm." NO!!! He says, "What a beautiful son/daughter!!" He says something equivalent to that because, in truth, he cannot live consistently with his worldview. It's mere fetal ectoplasm--until it's his own. Now it is "my son," my "daughter." That's because there is something--someone--beyond mere "material" that has been born. There is a person--spirit housed in flesh--that his worldview cannot account for, but which he himself, in his very words, cannot deny.
Can you imagine a couple who deeply loves each other, and after an evening of celebrating an anniversary and reminiscing about their years together, they culminate this endearing time together by making love. Does he then turn to her and say,"Now THAT was certainly an acceleration of the central nervous system. I noted a rapidly increased heart rate, blood pressure significantly beyond normal ranges, reserves of adrenalin activated, and a jelling of body fluids." NO!! He says, "I love you." Because there is more going on than mere physiological response. Something you can't measure or quantify is taking place at the deep level of the soul. (He also says, "I love you," because his wife would kill him if he were to utter the other response.)
From a faith-based perspective, a person is unique from an animal in that in the Genesis account of creation, only man and woman are described as being created "in the image of God."
The entire remaining created order is described as "good"--no doubt about it. But you alone, my friend, are an image-bearer of God. the creator of the cosmos. I encourage you to celebrate your dignity and to view and treat others as being created in God's image.
We are more than we appear to be.
