{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03508771929824561, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006379585326953748, 'mean_word_length': 5.610526315789474, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 1, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
"Aristotle and the Zoon Politkon": A Response to Abbate

Abstract:Cheryl Abbate's (2016) article in this journal makes the case that many nonhuman animals are "political" in the Aristotelian sense (Politics; Nicomachean Ethics). Moreover, Abbate rejects the claim that anthrôpos (Homo sapiens) is the most political of animals. While the aim to deflate often overexaggerated distinctions between us and other animals is laudable, in the following I suggest that Abbate's evidence from cognitive ethology, and her application of evolutionary principles, fall short of demonstrating other animals to be as political as anthrôpos.