>Answer is already given, for an animal in English is mostly referred to
>as "it", not "who" !
So in other words if I call all I want to abuse, imprison, kill,
eat,... "it",
instead of he or she,
and reason that that is to do with not who and the own ancestors
that is a given answer?
I guess I could give some answers about that, too, but feel to polite
to comment on someone who has not gotten yet that all mammals have at
least two who/I centers, all birds at least one, and that octopei
suspiciously from reports seem like persons/who-s as well.
I guess people have reasons for not wanting to get that not one cat
nor one rat is exactly like the next and that they tend to have
distinct personalities, and people who need to shove away what is
obvious can be told the obvious, and that is likely to have about as
much effect than telling someone into some belief into life after
death that his dead partner decaying
does not have some whatever seeing to that he is not the corpse but
someplace else.
>That "animal" is human's predecessor.
Which animal when exactly at what brain areas development stage
maybe possible to be compared to which in a human embryo?
