Are killer whales persons? • Hacker News Board

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#11

Post by itistoday2 » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 4:55 AM UTC

crazy1van wrote: post #5

"Can an animal be a person?" According to the definition, a "person" refers to a human [0][1]. Perhaps the better question is should we treat the whales better or differently based on what we learned rather than shoe-horn them into a word that literally means human. [0] Oxford English: "A human being regarded as an individual" [1] Merriam-Webster: "a human being"

Under United States law companies are persons as well, so these definitions are a bit out of date.

It's perfectly reasonable to expand the term "person" to apply to non humans, companies and orcas alike.

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#12

Post by xCathedra » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 4:55 AM UTC

personjerry wrote: post #7

That clickbait title though. Of course an orca is not a person; an orca is not human, which is most peoples' understanding of "person". I understand if articles might have clickbait titles, but can we give a more reasonable title on HN? Even the second part of the article title, "The more we learn about orcas, the more our assumption of innate superiority looks like a presumption" would've been more effective.

The term person has established precedent, both for humans and non-humans. For humans, the legality of abortion is often thought of in terms of the humanity of the embyro. However, the actual legal issue is whether the law extends to the embyro the right of personhood.

Peter Singer has advocated both for the personhood of certain animals and the non-personhood of certain humans (including live infants below certain cognitive thresholds) for some time.

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#13

Post by itistoday2 » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 4:56 AM UTC

Nice exception to Betteridge's law of headlines, IMO.

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#14

Post by schoen » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 4:58 AM UTC

personjerry wrote: post #7

That clickbait title though. Of course an orca is not a person; an orca is not human, which is most peoples' understanding of "person". I understand if articles might have clickbait titles, but can we give a more reasonable title on HN? Even the second part of the article title, "The more we learn about orcas, the more our assumption of innate superiority looks like a presumption" would've been more effective.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#15

Post by xCathedra » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 5:02 AM UTC

I think the real caution behind giving the status of person to a non-human has nothing to do with animals, but with removing the status of person from certain classes of humans. The atrocities of the last century should probably suffice to establish a measure of caution when redefining personhood.

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#16

Post by yk » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 5:02 AM UTC

personjerry wrote: post #7

That clickbait title though. Of course an orca is not a person; an orca is not human, which is most peoples' understanding of "person". I understand if articles might have clickbait titles, but can we give a more reasonable title on HN? Even the second part of the article title, "The more we learn about orcas, the more our assumption of innate superiority looks like a presumption" would've been more effective.

That is the question basically, is being human a necessary precondition to being a person? And assuming that it is, which humans are not persons ( otherwise human and person would just be synonymous).

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#17

Post by PhasmaFelis » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 5:07 AM UTC

personjerry wrote: post #7

That clickbait title though. Of course an orca is not a person; an orca is not human, which is most peoples' understanding of "person". I understand if articles might have clickbait titles, but can we give a more reasonable title on HN? Even the second part of the article title, "The more we learn about orcas, the more our assumption of innate superiority looks like a presumption" would've been more effective.

Did you actually read the article? The question "Are killer whales persons" is in fact the central issue that it examines, and the use of "persons" instead of "people" ought to make it clear that they're using "person" in the legal sense.

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#18

Post by kendallpark » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 5:30 AM UTC

I have wondered about this often with cetaceans. I feel like personhood is such a human concept and completely depends on who is defining it. It calls into question, "What is personhood to begin with?"

There have many documented cases of dolphins rescuing drowning human swimmers or protecting surfers from sharks. I feel like it takes a good amount of intelligence and empathy-like qualities for dolphins to be able to recognize the peril of a human creature--foreign to their natural environment--and decide to treat him as one of their own where there is no obvious benefit for the dolphin.

My opinion is that we should give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to personhood.

EDIT: This video of killer whales is also perplexing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWsN63PRCW8

A group of killer whales beach themselves to grab some sea lion pups for lunch, then proceed to toss them around and eat them. There was one seal they decided not to eat so one of the killer whales beached himself again in order to release it safely on land. It really does feel like there's complex mind behind this behavior.

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#19

Post by pcthrowaway » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 5:39 AM UTC

kendallpark wrote: post #18

I have wondered about this often with cetaceans. I feel like personhood is such a human concept and completely depends on who is defining it. It calls into question, "What is personhood to begin with?" There have many documented cases of dolphins rescuing drowning human swimmers or protecting surfers from sharks. I feel like it takes a good amount of intelligence and empathy-like qualities for dolphins to be able to…

Is it possible the whales realized that by returning the pup to shore when they weren't hungry, they were ensuring a larger crop next year?

Re: Are killer whales persons?

#20

Post by rokhayakebe » Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 5:59 AM UTC

Here are a few things that would help humans begin to consider animals as their equals:

Seeing animals behaving as traders as in "this is mine, this is yours, I'll trade you mine for yours."

Seeing an animal contemplate art.

Seeing animals having a conversation.

Perhaps all of these have been observed, but if so we need to be more aware of them.

Edit

One more:

Saving and passing on records of previous events