The book “Animal” describes differences and simulates between animal and human behavior. The book consists of an introduction, and three chapters devoted to different problems and issues, and a conclusion. The first chapter, “Visible and Invisible”: Questions of Recognition” describes stories of animal heroism, place in domestic life, love, and behavior patterns. In the second chapter, “Real and Symbolic, Questions of Difference” the author arguers that there is no universally recognized criterion for the distinction between homo sapiens and the other species of animal kingdom, due to the fact that many evolutionary theorists feel bounded by the dogmas of conventional morality, when it comes to defining such difference. However, given the fact that there is a plenty of physiological evidence, which points out at primates as human’s closest biological relatives, we can define humans as animals endowed with intellect. Unlike animals, which only posses “intuitive intelligence”, humans are capable of operating with highly abstract categories (this refers only to sub-specie of homo sapiens that continues to evolve evolutionary, namely representatives of White race), which in its turn, allowed them to become an undisputed masters in animal kingdom. The chapter discusses such problems as relations and interection between children and animals, filming of animals, use of animals in drug testing, etc. The third chapter, “Intelligence and Instinct: Questions of Power” describes language, interaction and testing problems. In other words, humans do not only have a situative but also “universal” consciousness – that is, they are capable of relying on their rationale, within a context of making decisions, because their ability of viewing their own “ego” as three dimensional category, allows them to indulge in abstract philosophizing, which creates objective preconditions for the emergence of empirical sciences. The conclusion sums up the main ideas and facts of the research.
The author creates an interesting narration about interaction and communication between animals and human. The author states that bbiologists thought of the fact that primates and humans posses a very large brain as such that does not quite fit into evolutionary theory, because such brain requires body’s energy simply to be sustained, whereas evolutionary theory implies that only living organisms capable of relying on external sources of energy for as little as possible, are more likely to survive. Fudge creates an interesting interpretation of animal kingdom and relations between men and animals.
The important aspects of the reading are that both humans and animals belong to one kingdom. We, as humans, should treat other species fairly and with dignity. Therefore, it is whether people make a new “evolutionary jump”, which will elevate them above the bulk of humanity, in the way humans are elevated above the apes, or they stop evolutionizing and begin “celebrating diversity”, until the time when they run out of food. However, only an utterly naive person can suggest that weeds are more valuable then the wheat, as plants. Once we stop tenting the wheat crop, the Darwinian laws will reduce this plant to its “natural” status, in the world of fauna. The same applies to human societies – what we refer to as culture is nothing but a result of people’s existential vitality being transformed into the tool of eventual “evolutionary jump”, with people being actually in control of the process. Only individual’s high IQ rate qualifies him to become a part of particular culture, by adopting a “cultural” mode of existence with the mean of subjecting its animalistic instincts to its sense of rationale. Therefore, the adaptive essence of culture can hardly be referred to as such that fits into the theory of survival of the fittest, yet – cultural individuals are more likely to exercise control over the objective reality, simply because they are able to anticipate of what would correspond to their biological competitiveness in the future.
What is Missing”
I suppose that the author misses theoretical materials and background paying more attention to personal interpretations and reflections of the topic. It would be useful to use Darwin’s theory of evolution and biological facts to explain language and behaviour patterns. Culture has always been the qualitative factor, within a context of human evolution, which serves as best indication of its adaptive properties. Culture means quality; however, within a context of Darwinian laws – quality does not necessarily correspond to the particular organism’s rate of survivability (Ehrlich and Ehrlich 2008). If farmer had stopped tending a crop, it would be the matter of time, before various weeds begin to grow in that field. While studying a social behaviour of groups of chimpanzees, which tended to be affected by “mental exhaustion”, after having been presented with tasks that required an excessive utilization of their brain power, primatologists were able to explain the behavioural phenomenon of “laziness”. However, on the tactical level of biological competition, humans will always loose, while confronted with instinctively defined behaviour, on the part of animals or sub-humans. The fact that Western countries are now being flooded by hordes of non- immigrants, with authorities proving themselves incapable of effectively addressing the issue, confirms the validity of earlier statement. Apparently, human and primate’s brain, which weights from 550 grams to 1320 kilograms, is an apparatus that consumes excessive amounts of energy, which is why it simply cannot be “turned on” at all times (Ehrlich and Ehrlich 2008). The sheer power of people’s intellect gave them a strategic advantage, while competing with other species, by enabling evolutionary evolved individuals to actually write their own “behavioural programs”. Science might not have answers to all questions, but the answers it has are absolutely veritable.