The statement you made initially was,
" I have had people deny that there were important differences between man and beast, which is totally absurd,and merely obstructionist. "
Message 18280171
So the term "important" was yours, not mine.
Whether things are important is in the mind of the viewer. It is subjective, not objective. To me, snow is snow, and it's really not important what kind it is. I just want it to look pretty for awhile, then go away quickly. To Inuits, there are many differences, and they are vastly important.
All I was pointing out is that it's not absurd to say that in the evolutionary scheme of life the differences between man and beast aren't important.
Context is all.
You and I are looking at photographs of two young women. They are obviously different. To me, the differences aren't important. To you, since one is the photo of your first love, to whom you were engaged, who died tragically in a car crash on the eve of your wedding, the differences are vital. One is incredibly precious to you, the other is meaningless to you.
Sure, there are differences between men and beasts. Nobody in their right minds would deny that.
But are they important differences? That's a matter of belief and context. And to say the differences can never be considered other than important is, I think, too narrow thinking. |
