Should Cetaceans be represented at the UN?

[Cetacea]

Beam me down, Scotty, there IS intelligent life on this planet: in the oceans.
Mainstream science is catching up to what has been known to many of us for years. That is, that cetacaens (dolphins and whales) are intelligent, sentient beings and are as intelligent, if not more so, than the human species. And that they more than likely feel love and suffering as much, or more so, than humans.

A new finding, published yesterday is getting scant coverage but is profound nonetheless:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10661-whales-boast-the-brain-cells-that-make-us-human.html

question: should Cetaceans be protected under UN laws and are the Japanese and a few other governments committing genocide?


Cetacean Nation:

http://www.tomigaya.shibuya.tokyo.jp/lilly/cetacean07.html

[Mythsaje]

1. I want whale hunting STOPPED...

I don't care if it's the Japanese, the Norwegians, or the Native Americans doing it.

"It's tradition" is meaningless when it involves the slaughter of an intelligent creature.

[Cetacea]

2. the profit motive is high

In Japan at least, every part of the whale is used except-ironically enough-the brain.

[Mythsaje]

4. Well, murder can be profitable too, I suppose. n/t

[lonestarnot]

24. The underlying reason for Iraq.

[xchrom]

14. the japanese government UNDERWRITES their profit.

programs like whale meat for school children is paid for by the government.

the whaling industry which was in severe disrepair some years agao was underwritten by the government.

there aren't actually a lot of japanese salivating for whaling season to begin for braised whale blubber over mixed greens.

[Cetacea]

15. correct.

The last time I checked the Japanese people were against the slaughter of dolphins and whales. It's the usual story of a few powerful people screwing it up for the majority. Nobody in their right minds can look at footage of the annual Iki Island dolphin slaughters and come away feeling good about what they've seen.

[calimary]

36. WHOLEHEARTEDLY agreed!

UTTERLY and COMPLETELY agreed.

I mean, for Pete's Sake, aren't we past this by now? Whale hunting? Haven't we developed umpteen replacement products for whatever anyone might harvest from a whale? Can't we leave whale hunting in the past - behind us - in the last century where it belongs?

[Dorian Gray]

38. I agree...

I have no problem with people eating meat, but when high functioning mammals are slaughtered in such an inhumane manner, it really disturbs me.

[everythingsxen]

3. That then begs the question....

Should Psitacines be protected? (Parrots) They are most certainly intelligent, definitely have feelings and I will have words with anyone who says they are just "mimics". Our parrot learns words and uses them contextually. I have seen other parrots do the same. It's not just some simple trick.

What about Dogs? Cats? They certainly have feelings.

Doesn't every animal have feelings to one extent or another?

If intelligence is the requirement though, how low or high is the bar set? What if the intellect bar is set higher than say a severely mentally disabled person? Is that person no longer protected?

I think these are just a few of the multitude of questions that such a Pandora's Box unleashes.

The best bet is just to declare whale hunting illegal.

[Cetacea]

5. agreed. But consider this

If humans succeed in destroying the habitats of the Cetaceans, whether it be through pollution, global warming, or specicide, all life forms will vanish.
I agree with you and also feel for all species. But without the oceans, we all perish.

"From space, the planet is blue. From space, the planet is the territory not of the humans, but of the whale."
Sarah Brightman, "Captain Nemo"

[everythingsxen]

8. As I said, I agree that whales should be protected

but your OP title seemed to allude to giving whales actual representation. I was merely pointing out that such an act would cause a plethora of problems.

[Cetacea]

11. you interpreted my op correctly

They were here first, by some 30 million years, and have been living peacefully on the planet for those 30 million years. And dolphins in particular have saved countless humans from shark attacks and drowning.
Some of our own species have returned the favour by butchering them in the most grotesque of manners, and collectively our species are destroying their habitat, which happens to make up most of our planet's surface. And so I believe that they should get special attention.
The whaling moratorium was a good start, but Japan came very close to ending it this year. And a whaling moratorium would not assure that the Cetacean habitat is not destroyed through Global Warming. UN recognition would at least provide a legal wedge to procure lawsuits and such from the global community. For instance, certain companies and/or governments could be prosecuted for war crimes for destroying the
"land" and the natives of an unarmed nation.
Of course this is a long shot and would require a huge leap in our collective egocentric belief that we are the highest form of life on the planet. We are certainly the most destructive.

[everythingsxen]

12. However, we then enter an interesting phase of legalities...

as I gave in my first reply, the example of parrots. Birds are considered to be the most in danger of global climate change, canaries in the mine as I saw one article describe it. Would not they also have such a legal desire to be represented?

Furthermore, if we give Whales, Dolphins and Porpoises (and Manatees while we are it, I suppose), will we be involved in legal battles of Porpoises suing/demanding compensation from Dolphins, who occasionally go on murder sprees? Would Whales demand Giant Squids be arrested for murder/attempted murder? Or would the Whales POV be that the Squid should just be exterminated? Which leads me to Octopi. They are highly intelligent beings as well, shouldn't they be protected and given representation too?

I am not trying to be a jerk here. I really do see what you are saying, but it seems like it would be a never ending series of various groups coming forward demanding that Species X be given full citizenship status in the world. Unfortunately man is a species that does not like to share and I seriously doubt that you could convince any sort of majority to accept sharing the world with whales, let alone the hundreds of other species which would make demands to be recognized.

As for us humans being the most destructive, that is certainly true, however, to quote Paul Mua'Dib from Dune He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing. (Although I am sure someone else in the real world said it long before..) We are the ones capable of destroying the Earth, therefore we control it.

As a complete and utter sidetrack of the conversation though, have you ever seen a Role-Playing Game called Blue Planet? http://www.leisuregames.com/acatalog/Main_Catalogue_Blue_Planet_RPG__Fantasy_Flight__52.html

I know it is a total sidetrack, but in the game you can play a human, gene-geneered human, Whale or Dolphin which is pretty damn cool IMO.

[Cetacea]

13. To your first answer, no.

Dolphins have only two natural enemies. (well, one, actually) the shark. And more recently, man.
Regarding canaries in the goldmine: if the oceans are destroyed, the canaries won't matter. We already know about Global Warming. What I am talking about is stopping it while protecting our neurological cousins who happen to live in the oceans.
I can see that you are having a hard time accepting that Cetaceans may be the superior life form on this planet, and I understand that and am not trying to offend you. Control does not imply intelligence.

You are also ignoring the advances made in human/dolphin interspecies communication and the very real limitations imposed by smaller brains that lack the areas needed for complex communication and critical thinking ,the areas that distinguish us from the apes. Only the dolphins feature the frontal cortex, and it appears to be not only larger but more complex than ours . I disagree with you that man would not want to share the planet with other life forms. If we do eventually crack the complex Cetacean language code (they seem to have no problem figuring out our language...)
it would be as exiting in scope to speaking with aliens.

[everythingsxen]

18. I beg to differ on the enemies bit..

http://luna.pos.to/whale/gen_art_killer.html
http://www.believermag.com/nonbookreviews/mammal_dolphin.php (Sarcastic, some jokes, but true)
http://outside.away.com/outside/magazine/0999/199909outthere.html (Quoted below)

*SNIP*
It's true that dolphins and porpoises often occupy the same territory, with sometimes murderous results. Off the northeast coast of Scotland, bottlenose dolphins sometimes surround a group of harbor porpoises, single out an individual, and ram it repeatedly, using their beaks to toss the unfortunate creature in the air. The porpoises die of multiple injuries, including skeletal fractures and severe internal trauma. Scientists have observed similar interactions between bottlenose dolphins and harbor porpoises off Virginia. The contest is manifestly unequal. Male bottlenose dolphins can reach a length of 13 feet and weigh more than 1,400 pounds, while harbor porpoises are among the smallest of the cetaceans, averaging about four feet, nine inches and 130 pounds.
*SNIP*

Also listed on the Dolphin predator list: Orcas

My point was not whether Oceans mattered or not, my point was that if we are deciding that animals of a certain level of intellect get representation at the UN based on whether they are going to die from climate change, my point was that birds will die out from climate change first and that parrots are intelligent beings.

I seriously doubt Cetaceans are the "superior" form of life, at least from any sort of objective point of view. They have no cities, do not build anything or use technology, and seem to have no real ambition aside from raping their females, murdering their kids and murdering porpoises. Aside from that, it seems like their "superior" strategy is to eat, sleep, poop and die. Very similar to everything else on Earth but hardly superior. We have intelligence, I am not saying that the smarter animals of planet do not have intelligence, but they are for the most part hyper-specialized to a certain role and have no driving force to evolve, adapt and build. In short they lack motive.

And I do not disagree that Dolphins et.al. can communicate, the problem is what do they have to say? "I like fish" "I like sex" "I feel happy" "I feel sad" is, in all honesty, most of what that conversation would consist of.

As for man sharing the planet, you are seriously a dreamer. I am not saying that as an insult, but it would never happen. I mean, we kill each other because our skin is different colors or we don't worship the same god. You really think a pack of psychotic, hairless apes who routinely kill each other are going to give equal time to a bunch of fish? I think not. Humans would exterminate the dolphin rather than admit an "animal" was equal to them. (I am speaking in an abstract generalization of all humans, obviously many exceptions exist, but the majority would, I believe, follow the POV I just gave.)

[Cetacea]

20. so, human-like behavoir in dolphins disturbs you?

Your snip contains a key phrase: they singled out a porpoise.
My first thought was: why was this porpoise singled out? Why was this act performed in a concerted fashion?
The brain of the bottle-nosed dolphins is the most simular to man's among all of the cetecea. That is more than likely the reason why they are nearly universally loved and why they are the easiest to work with (and play with). And you of course find similar social behaviors.
We do not find violent behavior in the larger-brained whales.



As far as tool building is concerned, the jury is out on whether or not we will succeed in destroying the planet once and for all. Most of our tool building is devoted to dealing with the problems that gravity imposes on us. Cetaceans are for the most part weightless. Problem solved. Another area we devote our tool making skills to is in the area of communications. Cetaceans have the technology built into their bodies. The ability to transmit in stereo (even pan the sounds from left to right channels and vice versa) and the ability to transmit and receive signals over the span of hundreds to thousands of miles (larger whales)nullifies their need of special gadgets like telephones, and , for that matter, the internet. And of course there is sonar, but I do not wish to get into the area of cetaceans and the military here.

Intelligence: There is no universally agreed definition of "intelligence." However, a commonly used definition is "the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience." I would have to add "play" to the definition. The fact that dolphins have passed many intelligence tests with flying colors is well documented. But of greater significance to me is the fact they understand our language enough to even participate in the experiments to begin with. And they do so with obvious pleasure and intense curiosity.

All this and so much more from a species that has been perfectly adapted to their alien-to-us environment since the time humans were tree-shrews...I, for one, would have many questions for them.

[everythingsxen]

35. Id din't say it distrubed me,

I had mentioned dolphin murders before, you said they didn't and I was providing evidence to refute, which brings us back to the original problem:

If Cetaceans are brought into the UN, wouldn't there be legal ramifications like:

• Having to break up Dophin genocides.
  
• Would the UN women's council want to help dolphin females who are being raped?
  
• The UN is a woefully bloated organization already, what happens when we add animals to it?
  

[Cetacea]

42. you call them animals

I consider them part of an intelligent culture. We are animals too, so using that term would be redundant and in context, demeaning.
And my answer to your other questions would be yes, of course, though I am sure that you'd find less occurrences of such instances as compared to human nations. I agree that the UN is not by any means perfect, but is the best UN that we have. I would welcome any suggestions that you have and I appreciate your thought-provoking responses.

[everythingsxen]

54. I was not using animal as a pejorative,

simply as a differential from human. I consider birds, great apes and a vast portion of the animal kingdom to be intelligent. Elephants, whales, chupacabras, whatever, they are all pretty intelligent in their own context. I am not trying to belittle any animal species, I just do not see them having a voice at the UN that would not result in insanity.

The best suggestion I have is one that applies to all facets of the UN: Scrap it and start over. In essence we need a one world government, with each member state being similar to the states of the US or EU and the organization needs to have actual teeth with it's own independent military arm drawn from all member states. If then we were to incorporate Cetaceans and other sentient non-humans, I would form them into their own mini-council which would have certain veto powers and tie breaking powers, similar to the League of Non-Aligned Worlds from Babylon 5. (I hate having to use a fictional comparative, but I cannot think of a real world version)

[Cetacea]

57. some good ideas there

Thanks!

[Mythsaje]

41. You DO know that there are two different orca populations, right?

One that ONLY eats cold-blooded prey like fish and one that also eats warm-blooded creatures such as seals and other cetaceans? Apparently the two groups do not intermingle, though they will communicate with one another in passing.

I find that bit of information VERY intriguing.

Another thing to note, and this is the most interesting of all, is that orcas do NOT consider humans to be prey.

[everythingsxen]

44. That is interesting

however, it does not change my stance that adding animals to the UN will create a legal nightmare that will go on for centuries. Various species of animals need to be protected, yes absolutely. Given a seat at the UN? No.

[Mythsaje]

46. I don't think anyone is actually considering that seriously...

Hell, the U.N. can't even keep various populations of HUMANS safe from one another. But the wholesale slaughter must stop.

[everythingsxen]

55. And I agree with that entirely

I think however Artiechoke and I are now engaged in a speculative and somewhat semantic debate about the practicalities of actually including sentient non-humans into a governing body of the world. (I am not calling Artie out, simply pointing out that we are in fact discussing it)

[Mythsaje]

56. Even if they are sentient, as we understand it,

without the ability to communicate both ways, it's impossible to consider such a thing seriously.

I've long had the weird thought that, for all we know, the damn things are swimming around in the ocean contemplating higher mathematics and theoretical physics.

[Warren DeMontague]

6. If bush can send a fucking Walrus to the UN, why not?

[Cetacea]

7. LOL. Boltin' John is an insult to walruses. nt

[chknltl]

9. Only if they request representation.

How wonderful that we may have found a second sentient species right here on this planet to communicate with. I once read a pair of books on metaphysics from the late 1970s which claimed that cetaceans were sentient as well. Much of what I read from those books I believe in to this day. I am pleased that one of the more outlandish assertions I read there has been possibly proven to be true.

[Zhade]

10. I hope they're not sentient.

I sure don't want to hear what they think of us, warranted as it would be.

[booksenkatz]

16. Ember and Colt vote YES

They're the two humpback whales my 7-year-old son "adopted," one with his own money -- he only gets a few bucks of allowance per week, he saved up a long time to do it. He's a whale lover -- one is never too young to start!

:bounce:

[Cetacea]

17. that's wonderful!

Thank you for sharing that.

[flvegan]

19. CITES is a UN treaty, so some (in a way) do.

As far as whaling goes, the IWC is a spineless bunch of hacks without the heart to enforce much of anything. The question of sentience coming from science scares the hell out of me. Maybe they should look the word up first.

That's why, until science et al catch up, I count on Sea Shepherd:



http://www.seashepherd.org/leviathan/

[T Town Jake]

21. Sorry. But sometimes accepting cultural diversity and embracing tolerance...

...for those different from ourselves involves accepting things we, with our Western outlooks, might find distasteful.

This issue is a case in point. Get over it.

[Cetacea]

22. get over it? can you eloborate? eom

[T Town Jake]

23. Yes. Let go of your cultural superiority attitudes and latent racism...

...that is all. Thank you.

[Cetacea]

25. you are out of your....league...here

I was quite clear in blaming the governments, and not the people.
Sorry, but you are obviously projecting.

[T Town Jake]

26. Explaining cultural imperialism and racism away is never the answer...

...those "governments" you whine & complain about were elected by their people.

Please catch up to the rest of us in the 21st Century. Thanks.

[Cetacea]

27. Ok...right.

I thought you were being serious.

[T Town Jake]

30. I'm serious about not having much use for Cultural Hegemonists, and other such racists...

...which you sure do seem to resemble in certain ways.

[Gwerlain]

29. So, you'd say that accepting the Nazis'...

"cultural differences" like exterminating people who were/are different from them, would be an important part of your values? Sorry, I ain't "down with" that. Killing sentient beings is pretty much a no-no for me, and most people. I like "racism" coming from someone who thinks it's OK to kill the race of whales, but not OK to criticize people for killing sentient beings just because they're not human. I'm really impressed. You can probably tell. :sarcasm:

[T Town Jake]

31. Godwin's Law from Reply #1! That must be some kind of record....

...welcome to Ignore. Goodbye.

[Gwerlain]

32. It is an honor...

to be ignored by someone who believes that killing something that can think and feel like they do is OK. I believe I'll return the favor.

[Cetacea]

33. Thank you. I was about to respond...

...but you stated it much more eloquently than I would have. Also,
the poster has a poor understanding of Godwin's Law.

[Gwerlain]

34. My pleasure. Glad I could help.

I'm pretty committed on this particular subject; one of the high points of my life so far was an expedition to Kealakekua Bay to photograph the spinners as they were headed out to go hunting. Besides, it's always fun to tease the Neanderthals, if perhaps a little bit unkind.

[Blue-Jay]

28. Will they appoint a representative who will attend the meetings?

No?

[Bucky]

47. What if there's a typo and we accidently admit crustaceans into the UN instead?

[Cetacea]

48. LOL ! eom

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. I'd hope that whales are better...

than some of us at interpreting the conclusions in pop science articles.

[Cetacea]

39. pop science to you,vindication for many

who have been doing dolphin research for thirty years.
And I certainly would not consider the authors of this report to be "pop" scientists.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. Well, no.

The author of this report isn't a scientist at all, he's a journalist.

Now, the authors of the actual study are probably embarassed about how the journalist chose to write about their work, and appalled that lay persons would misinterpret this to mean that whales are as intelligent and sentient as humans.

[Mythsaje]

43. Natural scientists tend toward conservatism in this regard...

witness the fact that they're just NOW beginning to realize the actual intelligence of dogs and various species of birds.

[Cetacea]

45. the journalist was reporting what was given to him

by the researchers. If you think scientists aren't exited about this finding, you are mistaken.

[Gwerlain]

50. I thought they were pretty clear...

"'It’s absolutely clear to me that these are extremely intelligent animals,' says Patrick Hof of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, and co-discoverer of the whale spindle cells with Estel van der Gucht of the New York Consortium in Evolutionary Primatology, both in the US.

"'We must be careful about anthropomorphic interpretation of intelligence in whales,' says Hof. 'But their potential for high-level brain function, clearly demonstrated already at the behavioural level, is confirmed by the existence of neuronal types once thought unique to humans and our closest relatives,' he says.

"'They communicate through huge song repertoires, recognise their own songs and make up new ones. They also form coalitions to plan hunting strategies, teach these to younger individuals, and have evolved social networks similar to those of apes and humans,' Hof says."

I'm hearing, "intelligent, but not the way we usually think of intelligence." Which is hardly surprising. And which is nevertheless intelligence.

[undeterred]

49. Crustaceans too.

[baldguy]

51. Even if they could be made to understand human-style representitive govt

I don't think they'd care.

[StraightDope]

52. Though I personally believe that cetaceans are sentient...

I don't feel comfortable in making a determination that that is in fact the case without the ability to communicate with them in a meaningful fashion.

[eridani]

53. Only if we can learn their languages and vice versa

An old science fiction story I read once mentioned a war memorial reading "In Memoriam. For all the brave men and women, dolphins and pre-sentient computers who made the ultimate sacrifice."