Humans are not different from animals.

1. I would like to point out the likely biased nature of such a webpage, which as you know, is written by humans and based off human findings (which proves our superior cognitive ability, that i do not contest), which are obviously biased by said human's education that shows human supremacy as something we should have by right. That being said, i have another thing to say. Art, literature, philosophy and religion are human concepts that don't need to apply for other animals for them to be considered our equals. (I consider religion as a default of humanity, as do many people too). literature comes from language, and i should remind you that humans existed long before the first letters were wrotten (by them). An-humans must have a form of self reflection that can't be as complex as ours (humans') since we have a language to express our notions. An-humans surely think about things such as "Dam, i'm hungry, i should go find a lizard to eat" in an intuitive way. There are still too many things that biologically link us to an-humans for us to consider ourselves different because of one attribute. A bird is still an animal, even though it has wings. 2. Emotions link us to animals very deeply: Love is recurent in many popular songs (pop-music); love is an emotion that ensures reproduction between members of the same species, and therefore the survival of the species. It is expressed by chimical substances that have nothing to do with our improved cognitive abilities. This emotion is also what guides us through our lives, which leads people to marry, live with one person, and so on. Other animals act similarly, although some species don't spend their lives with one partner, which is also the case with humans (adultery, divorce, multiple girlfriends/boyfriends/wives/husbands...). This is a point in which we are very close to an-humans. I am not qualified to develop the sociological aspect of animal behavior, so i'll stop here. 1. You could very well imagine any other animal species could attain our level with enough time to evolve (it wouldn't be the same species as the one from the beginning of course) and develop. We have the illusion things happened fast for us. But that's not true. 10^11, that's the number of humans that have stepped on Earth since we were apes. (it's aproximated http://en.wikipedia.org... ). Do you still think we have made great advancements, considering the number of humans it took? 2. I don't know Marx or Nietzsche as being infamous philosophers. The question is not: "What is better for society, and which one is more moral: humans being animals or humans not being animals?". 3. Those are human concepts. You can't apply everything we invent to an-humans. Can you make gradient maps? No, well birds can. They can't imagine living without it, nor would they live without it. The same way, there are different ways society could be organized in such a way that anhumans are given the same privileges. Instead of integrating an-humans in our society, we should give them space for themselves (as opposed to occupying the whole planet and every single bit of land) and let them live with no human intervention. That's how we would consider them our equals in rights, give them freedom.