9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Yes, I still have a little food for thought, which ame to my mind

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
with this topic, and I viewed some youtube

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
videos and one of these videos I have seen

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
was the philosopher Daniel Danett, who told

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
that neurobilogists expressed the theory that

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
there is no free will in humans. So it happened

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
that we made progress in brain research and

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
I do not want to enter the details now.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Anyway, by new techniques of neuro-imaging

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
many things today can be seen.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
How new connections in the brain are built

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
and so on, and from all these new findings they

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
they tried to find

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
the free will and did not

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
find it, and by this they concluded:

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Free will does not exist, it is

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
an illusion. Then the philosopher claimed

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
thet from his point of view this is false.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
I myself see it the same way,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
there is something like free will and

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
if we can not prove it with our means of investigation

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
this does not mean that it does not exist.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
This only means that our means of investigation are

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
not sufficient to find it,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
but the conclusion I consider to be false

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
What do I want to say? The question is:

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
you can define by the free will whether

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
humans really have character,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
that they are persons and so on and

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
similar I want to do this for animals.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
The question, whether an animal is a person

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
or has a character. I do not want to

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
lump this together. With this you can also

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
answer, whether an animal has a free

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
will or not.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Following new results of the neurobiologists,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
neither animal nor man has

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
a free will and this classification is

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
futile following

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
these findings.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Somewhen I chatted with a pal

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
abot the topic: Which person is most close

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
to you?

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
And I said: My rat.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Then he said: I would not see

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
the rat as a person.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Then I began to think whether

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
some humans see animals as

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
persons and some don't.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
What is the reason for this difference?

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Do we need this distinction, and why?

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Last christmas, this is now

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
about a month ago, I came a little closer to

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
the solution. My grandma told that she

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
has problems with mice in the

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
barn , because they built a net

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
somewhere during the winter, so she

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
put toxic bait there to master this

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
problem.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
And for me, who is living

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
with rats this sonded like:

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
You could say, in the barn a homeless

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
has moved in

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
to shelter from the cold,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
and of course

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
I had to poison him.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
When I tell this I see someone

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
is already laughing.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Told this way it

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
sounds very cruel. Without further thinking

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
making cold who is only looking

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
for a little warmth.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
On the other hand: If it is about

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
an animal, it is somehow normal.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Especially an animal you are

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
used to poison like mice.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
That's the way it is.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
The I realized:

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
If I have two behaviours

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
which are identical, where only the

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
victim is different, suddenly one behaviour is

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
cruel, and the other behaviour is more

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
or less normal.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
There is a contradiction in this.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
My grandma is a lovely person

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
and I would not say she defines herself

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
by the cruelness she

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
causes these animals.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
For her this is simply

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
something that has to be done.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Apart of this, she is one

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
of the nicest persons ever.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Then it came to my mind:

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Could it be that we have to

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
make the distinction that animals are

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
something different than we are,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
or no persons, or of less value, so that

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
we can mask our own cruelness?

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
If we say we are cruel to some

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
and very kind to others, this does not

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
sound consistent.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
But when we say one is of another

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
category than the other, and are

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
applying double standards, then we

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
can integrate

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
our behaviours.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
It might be that someone does

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
something cruel on the one hand and

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
is a nice person

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
on the other hand.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
The more I thought about it,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
the more I ralized

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
that this scheme is to

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
be found

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
all over the world.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
For example in economy.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
We live in an economical

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
very good land, but on

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
the costs of countries in the third world.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
But we do not realize

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
this, we fade out that we

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
inflict atrocities

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
for our

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
good life.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
We have the mechanism of suppression

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
which enables

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
for us a good life.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
The mechanism makes us

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
miss the

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
consquences of our actions.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Then the question came to me:

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Might it be that we classify

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
many animals as of low value

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
to appease our consciousnesses,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
not to be force to live with the

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
cruelness we

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
do to the world.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
With this thought

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
I want to close

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Thank you

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Dr. Buschmann out of the off: This is

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
called cognitive dissonance, a

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
known phenomenon in man.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
For example there are simultaneoulsy

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
animals as source of food in factory

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
farms and on the

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
other hand a

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
pet dog, which is no

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
match. A divergence of

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
reasonings which

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
are not comaptible, simply

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
to appease the consciousness to be able

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
to better live with this.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
The same scheme you can find in speciism,

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
racism, group building, in economical

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
and cultural differences. This is very widespread.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Thank you for the expert's addition.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
For me it was the moment

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
I realized this contrast.

9:59:59.000,9:59:59.000
Thank you