A Canadian neuroscientist, Philip Low (Stanford / MIT) and 25 more researchers can lead many people and organizations in a very embarrassing situation, as they are about to ...

1. Scientists mortally hurt anthropocentrism
A Canadian neuroscientist, Philip Low (Stanford / MIT) and 25 more researchers can
lead many people and organizations in a very embarrassing situation, as they are about
to sign a manifest that mortally hurt anthropocentrism.
Anthropocentrism is the way of thinking in which the human being is seen as the
center of the universe or creation. In other words, all anthropocentrist believe and
propagate that absolutely everything in nature and universe revolves around the
human being. This privileged status of the human being has never been proven by any
anthropocentrist or scientist. However, anthropocentrism can be found in all religions,
including in the oriental ones.
The main reason for some people and organizations address us in favor of
anthropocentrism is to gain followers. This discourse helps to convince more easily
people that their souls could be saved. Generally, anthropocentric people and
organizations promise to work to save the souls of everyone who repent of their sins,
since those unconditionally accepted their beliefs and values. Usually, these beliefs
and values are assigned to sacred sources, because it commands respect and fear.
Many people is anthropocentrist because it could to freak out just thinking on
possibility it could be abusing, killing and eating beings that are similar to itself. In
other words, anthropocentrism is also a way that human beings have found to justify
some of their acts and assuage their consciences simultaneously.
The scientists manifest will create a huge conflict, because when it formally will
recognize the existence of consciousness in all mammals, birds and other creatures,
like octopus, also is recognizing that anthropocentrism is not feasible. In other words,
the scientists manifest makes infer that human being is not as special as the
anthropocentrists believe possible.
Neuroscientists have deduced that some beings of fauna are also conscious because a
study showed that some of their brain structures are equivalent those responsible for
the production of consciousness in humans. This study involved dogs, dolphins,
chimpanzees, bonobos, dogs and a species of bird called pica-pica. However, scientists
admit that they are unable to measure the similarity between consciousnesses of
different species. However, they think the task of producing artificial consciousness
become less painful, since the animals brains have far fewer neurons to be studied.
Scientists dismissed the possibility that all animated bodies from micro to macro
cosmos are conscious and the level of consciousness may vary depending on the
sophistication of each entity. As the roots of trees without any consciousness of
themselves could know that they need to avoid obstacles? As conscienceless electrons
could know what are the particles that they need to repel or attract? How can cells to
express consciousness? To sum up, scientists will give a big step when they recognize
consciousness in animals, but maybe this is just the tip of the iceberg.

2. Indeed, the scientists manifest will lead many people to claim new laws on protection
of animals. However, no one needs to become a vegetarian because of it, because
human beings exert only a natural prerogative of who is at the top of the food chain.
We should remember that animals do not have any crisis of conscience for devouring
each other or humans. A crisis of conscience is unique to humans, because only we can
cultivate beliefs and values at this level.
The main consequence of the scientists manifest in favor of animal consciousness can
start a new vision that is more appropriate to the personal and social development. In
this new vision, human beings would be just one of the gears in the mechanism of
nature. They are a very sophisticated gear, but without any systemic privilege. To learn
a more realistic view of the human being that fits this idea, read the article "What are
we?" of this same author.