|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> Defining "species" based on the decisions made by groups of living beings
> (even if those decisions are instinctive) is just silly.
Here's my problem with that:
By this very statement, the fruitflies are different species. It's simply
the decisions made by a group of *humans* that determines whether the fruit
flies reproduce. They're not going to do it on their own. The only way it
would happen is if humans decided to pick up teeny tiny scalpels and make it
happen.
And isn't instinct driven by genetics? How can you say genetically-dictated
behavior doesn't contribute to two creatures being different species, but
then say a species in theory can be determined simply by looking at the
genetics?
Imagine if a whale and a dolphin were genetically compatible. I'd still call
them separate species, because it would be impossible to bring a cross of
those two to term without the genetics of human beings. Namely, the genetics
of human beings that gave us hands and brains big enough to invent
artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization and artificial wombs. I'd
argue that if trying to bring a child to term kills the mother and the child
before the child is born, the two creatures are a different species.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Serving Suggestion:
"Don't serve this any more. It's awful."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |