Sentient is having a nervous system, which is not the definition of the term before the attempt at redefinition by the AR movement. It is a perception of stimuli, but NOT a sentient perception. Sentient beings act on a higher level of perception than just stimuli and instinct. It is possible to have a brain dead person react to stimuli.
Please, tell me what's this higher level of perception that doesn't involve the nervous system.
A brain dead person react to stimuli because some parts of the brain are still alive. Otherwise the body could not works and the person would be died.
The brain is composed by differend parts ruling different functions.There is no science basis for rights so the AR movement would die off without the philosophical support.
So what are they doing if not showing that animal rights are a scientific evidence?
http://www.equivita.it/index.php/en/
http://www.rspca.org.uk/sciencegroup/re ... ndtheworld
http://www.freewebs.com/scientific_anti_vivisectionism/
http://animalresearch.thehastingscenter.org/
http://animalrights.about.com/od/vivise ... ingach.htm
http://www.afma-curedisease.org/
http://antidote-europe.org/en/
http://www.mrmcmed.org/Critical_Look.pdf
http://www.safermedicines.org/faqs/faq15.shtml
They show how the disrespectful human behaviour with animals always damages humans too.
There are health topics and Ecological topics.
To show you that AR moviments works very good also without philosophical support from now I will avoid all philosophical topics, and I will speak only about science, ecology, biology, physiology, economy, politics, etc.There is (scientific controversy concerning sentience) when you use a real definitinion of sentience rather than whether it has a nervous system or not.
Again, please tell me your mysterious definition of sentience that is other than use the nervous system.So how can you provide evidence they "speak" of such abstract concepts without resorting to basic make believe and assumptions? Unless the communication can be translated you have no idea of what is or is not being communicated.
The translation of the hieroglyphics was very hard to discover but it was already known that they means something and they weren't only nice drawings.
Lots of scientist discovered the language of animals. In the BBC links I posted before there are the explanations about complex animal languages.
Anyway if you take an handbook about the rearing of cats or dogs there are the explanations of their behaviour and their communication with humans and with other animals.
That's obvious.
You can learn to be empathic with their needs, and understand what they say to you. You can learn this also without a book. Simply having a cat and looking at him. By the experience you will learn their language.
If you will not learn their language by reading a book that some expert wrote, neither by experience, that means that you are not for this subject, like you could not be able to learn a human language.
That doesn't make the language useless or ugly or stupid etc.
And, what's more important, that doesn't make the language a conjecture created by other than the speakers.It is not an abstract? Can you tell me where I can go to hold a right in my hand? Where is there a picture or a recording of a physical right? Not only are you confused on sentience and rights, but also reality it seems.
I don't know why I am not able to post pictures in this forum. You can show the rights showing what happens when they are not respected and when they are. But a brain and spinal column by themselves do not create sentience, which is what you are saying at this point.
No, there are also the nerves and all the components of the neurological system, including the ears, language, nose, eyes, touch.
If you have not all the senses: ears, language, nose, eyes, touch, you will probably die if someone doesn't take care of you.
If you have some damages in the brain you can loose the use of some senses or the use of a part of the body.
http://english.pravda.ru/science/myster ... o_brain-0/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -life.html
What do you think creates sentience more than that?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact is women, children, and the elderly all assisted in various war efforts in all countries.
Kill civilians is always wrong because there are unconscious children or people disapproving the war. And not only for this. The will of the people during the wars is always manipulated by the state. There is the propaganda. They never know what really happens.
And their brain is always washed and filled, like it happened in particular with Nazi and Italians.
Lots of the soldiers were sadistics. But their behaviour was built at table. They were educate and grow up in such way. Their way of thinking was automatic. There was a low level of conscience in some of the people doing the atrocities.
Sure they should be punished. But the punishment should be re-educate them.
Not kill them.
Maybe they were crazy, with mental disease or with a past of abuse.There was no invasion as the Japanese had surrendered. The Japanese connection to rape and sex slavery was well documented in the areas of occupation. Korea would give a good idea of the impact if you want.
No, Japan was invaded after he surrended. The occupation was from 1945 to 1948. And there happened everything including rape and sex slavery. There are documents about that.No, only a small portion of the Marshall Plan involved loans. The majority of the plan was in the form of grants, whcih did not have to be repaid.
That's right, but there was a clear interests in the grants.
An economic interest: with the aid European could rebuilt and became a good market for USA product.
A political interest: because Europe had became part of the American sphere of influence against the growing power of URSS.And.... that was supposed to tell us what about the US not being the primary force against the Japanese?
That’s the reason why USA thrown the bombs: revenge and desire of power.