WEBVTT

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Yes, I still have a little food for thought, which ame to my mind

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
with this topic, and I viewed some youtube

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
videos and one of these videos I have seen

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
was the philosopher Daniel Danett, who told

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that neurobilogists expressed the theory that

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
there is no free will in humans. So it happened

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that we made progress in brain research and

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I do not want to enter the details now.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Anyway, by new techniques of neuro-imaging

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
many things today can be seen.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
How new connections in the brain are built

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and so on, and from all these new findings they

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
they tried to find

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
the free will and did not

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
find it, and by this they concluded:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Free will does not exist, it is

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
an illusion. Then the philosopher claimed

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
thet from his point of view this is false.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I myself see it the same way,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
there is something like free will and

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
if we can not prove it with our means of investigation

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
this does not mean that it does not exist.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
This only means that our means of investigation are

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
not sufficient to find it,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
but the conclusion I consider to be false

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
What do I want to say? The question is:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
you can define by the free will whether

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
humans really have character,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that they are persons and so on and

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
similar I want to do this for animals.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The question, whether an animal is a person

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
or has a character. I do not want to

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
lump this together. With this you can also

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
answer, whether an animal has a free

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
will or not.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Following new results of the neurobiologists,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
neither animal nor man has

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
a free will and this classification is

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
futile following

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
these findings.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Somewhen I chatted with a pal

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
abot the topic: Which person is most close

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
to you?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And I said: My rat.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Then he said: I would not see

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
the rat as a person.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Then I began to think whether

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
some humans see animals as

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
persons and some don't.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
What is the reason for this difference?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Do we need this distinction, and why?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Last christmas, this is now

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
about a month ago, I came a little closer to

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
the solution. My grandma told that she

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
has problems with mice in the

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
barn , because they built a net

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
somewhere during the winter, so she

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
put toxic bait there to master this

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
problem.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
And for me, who is living

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
with rats this sonded like:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
You could say, in the barn a homeless

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
has moved in

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
to shelter from the cold,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and of course

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I had to poison him.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
When I tell this I see someone

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
is already laughing.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Told this way it

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
sounds very cruel. Without further thinking

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
making cold who is only looking

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
for a little warmth.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
On the other hand: If it is about

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
an animal, it is somehow normal.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Especially an animal you are

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
used to poison like mice.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
That's the way it is.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The I realized:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If I have two behaviours

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
which are identical, where only the

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
victim is different, suddenly one behaviour is

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
cruel, and the other behaviour is more

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
or less normal.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
There is a contradiction in this.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
My grandma is a lovely person

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and I would not say she defines herself

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
by the cruelness she

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
causes these animals.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
For her this is simply

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
something that has to be done.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Apart of this, she is one

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
of the nicest persons ever.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Then it came to my mind:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Could it be that we have to

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
make the distinction that animals are

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
something different than we are,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
or no persons, or of less value, so that

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
we can mask our own cruelness?

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
If we say we are cruel to some

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and very kind to others, this does not

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
sound consistent.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
But when we say one is of another

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
category than the other, and are

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
applying double standards, then we

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
can integrate

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
our behaviours.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
It might be that someone does

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
something cruel on the one hand and

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
is a nice person

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
on the other hand.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The more I thought about it,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
the more I ralized

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
that this scheme is to

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
be found

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
all over the world.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
For example in economy.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
We live in an economical

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
very good land, but on

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
the costs of countries in the third world.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
But we do not realize

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
this, we fade out that we

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
inflict atrocities

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
for our

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
good life.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
We have the mechanism of suppression

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
which enables

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
for us a good life.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The mechanism makes us

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
miss the

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
consquences of our actions.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Then the question came to me:

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Might it be that we classify

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
many animals as of low value

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
to appease our consciousnesses,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
not to be force to live with the

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
cruelness we

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
do to the world.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
With this thought

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I want to close

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Thank you

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Dr. Buschmann out of the off: This is

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
called cognitive dissonance, a

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
known phenomenon in man.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
For example there are simultaneoulsy

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
animals as source of food in factory

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
farms and on the

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
other hand a

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
pet dog, which is no

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
match. A divergence of

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
reasonings which

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
are not comaptible, simply

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
to appease the consciousness to be able

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
to better live with this.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
The same scheme you can find in speciism,

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
racism, group building, in economical

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
and cultural differences. This is very widespread.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Thank you for the expert's addition.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
For me it was the moment

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
I realized this contrast.

99:59:59.999 --> 99:59:59.999
Thank you