anthropomorphized

I have been accused of anthropomorphizing pets, trees, dolls, toys, wild animals, stuffed animals and food sources.  It is always stated as if I am silly and ridiculous but sweet, and probably crazy.

The way I understand this fine word, is that we silly folk are giving animals, etc,etc, human traits, feelings, beliefs, needs, thoughts and behaviors that they can't possibly have because they are not human. (Circular, isn't it)

I get what they are saying.  I understand that I can't read the mind of a goat.  But I do know that those naturalists (not the naked ones) that watch a species for a long time, frequently find behaviors that seem  both caring and meaningful.  There seem to be attachments to other individuals.  There seems to be education of their young, and protection of their young and...playing.

But I'm probably just anthropomorphizing.

The real question is, did we anthropomorphize ourselves?

Have we been separating ourselves  from other species based on facts, or wishful thinking, or did we just make it up from whole cloth to explain why our destructiveness, selfishness and greed is not a problem--we deserve to act like that---because we aren't animals, we are human.  At one time, we even argued about whether women were human vs just anthropomorphized, or the actual possibility that other races were human--and too many argued against on that one also.

We use language to separate ourselves from others, but we don't all speak one language or even all speak with our mouths and tongues.  And some of our language skills are pretty rudimentary.  So perhaps what we do is communicate--only every species communicates, even plants.

We use our problem-solving abilities as proof of our humanness, while calling beaver dams and chimp tools and wasp nests instinct.  (are we also using instinct, but too arrogant to admit the possibility?)

We say only we can remember the past-but recent internet videos document animals reuniting after years and obviously recognizing each other and seeming excited, even joyful to see each other.

We can empathize, (use that seldom enough) but every depressed person with a pet knows the comfort of their furry or feathered friend becoming more emotionally demonstrative at that time.

We claim we are heroic, self-sacrificing, altruistic, but truly, has anyone NOT heard of an animal giving its life to save another?

And Mourning?  Mourning seems universal, though they seem better at moving on unless their loss was the last one in their family--no matter what species.  Nothing sadder than a spouse dying within the year their mate dies, if not, perhaps the dog or cat or swan that suddenly is alone and can't move on--at least not on this plane,  is at least as significant a sign of mourning a terrible loss.

Perhaps we need to quit trying so hard to separate the human species from the rest of life.  Wouldn't we all be better off if we found a new word to describe those traits that make us all better--make all life better, make all species better?

So many words to describe our best selves; loving, kind, compassionate, caring, open, honest, thoughtful, capable, joyful, purposeful, meaningful, curious, empathetic, determined, energetic, excited, happy, sad, mournful, comforting, comfortable, demonstrative, heroic, self-sacrificing, relaxed, sleepy, beautiful, soulful, and on and on and on.

And all of those words we feel---and all of them describe other forms of life.

So do we need to lose the word "anthropomorphize".

Should we maybe just accept we are alive and full of meaning and purpose because we are alive.

Is life what makes us special?

Is that the only word we need?