Quote:Morality is a discussion we have about which rules should govern our interaction. To be able to have such a discussion is unique to our species.
Well, no. Idealistic assertions and wishful thinking aside, morality has historically served as a set of rationalizations to provide socially acceptable reasons for why we find some behaviors proper and not others. "There is no morality, only moralities" (Nietzsche). Sometimes these rationalizations take the form of dialogue, but, as history shows, for practical purposes they more often than not take the form of a monologue.
The very fact that the morality of some peoples allows for cannibalism, whereas others' does not, seems rather more important than the fact that you can plead your case for not being eaten before a cannibal tribunal--who may in fact find your assertions incomprehensible, or, from their perspective, absurd. This fact is also more relevant to the question of whether "species" is an accurate, or even useful, unitary concept.
I call morality a fig leaf because it attempts, pitifully and inadequately, to conceal far more base and basic drives and instincts. Nietzsche has discussed the subject quite thoroughly, and I refer you to his works if you have any more questions.
In sum, to be able to have discussions about morality may be unique on this planet to what you call humans, but, again, that fact has nothing to do whatsoever with my particular point about the concept of species, and whether humans can and should be considered a unitary species.
Anyway, I've made my point, so that's all for me on this subject. Feel free to take the last word, if you like.