Can it be so wrong to believe man still to be an animal? Man, at times, can be animalistic. But to be animalistic, means also, that there are times when he is not. An animal is at all times such, but man seems not to be. Because of his quality of self-reflection? Is man really beyond these base urge? Or is it but a mask he wears for others?
Not to mix words, nor to mix different groups of thoughts. How much is changed by our perception and how much by our ..this is not important for the moment. Does man transcend the status of animal yet, that is the question. Is man an animal, so he must be taught and held as one. For if he is not, if he truly transcends this notion of being, then he must have become something different altogether. I wonder, where then did I err?