Would you consider the Na'vi beasts?

[Tsteu nantang]

I dont, but i've talked to people who do, im just wondering the opinion of the LN forum.  

Topic has been locked as I have made a poll plz go there...

[Payä Tìrol]

They would clearly pass a sentience through self-awareness test, so no.

[Tsuksìm atsawl (KaPTan)]

They would clearly pass a sentience through self-awareness test, so no.

agreed

P.S.

make it a poll... to do this there is a little tab like, two spaces over from the post reply button, it will say post new poll.

[bommel]

make it a poll... to do this there is a little tab like, two spaces over from the post reply button, it will say post new poll.

Yes!

@Topic: No. Why should they be monsters. They respect nature, they are peaceful, ...
Or is it because people are afraid of what they don't know?

[kewnya txamew'itan]

No, I don't think I'd consider the na'vi beasts. To do so would be to repeat the mistakes made when Australia (until comparatively recently) classified the aborigines as part of the local fauna.

I would consider them people, but not human. Human implies being of the homo genus (which despite the ASG calling them homo pandoricus) they are not seeing as they belong to a separate evolutionary tree. Being a person on the other hand, implies only sentience and communication although this arguably includes many animals here on Earth such as dolphins so I think I'll make that "readily demonstrable sentience and communication".

[Human No More]

Just as much as humans are. Sentience doesn't make us not animals either.

[MIPP]

Ok, probably the first answer but... yes. I'd consider them beasts. I mean... if we are human beings and they are not, what are them? Sorry, I also do not think on them as people. People, for me, are humans. As, when you have 30 people and 3 beasts you don't say: "Look, 33 people". You say: "Look! 33 people and 3 animals" So, they are not people and they are not humans. They do not think on sky-people as Na'vis, so why would we think on them as humans or people?
Beats... I don't know... it's the closer we have... after all, they're giants, they're a bit primitive (no technology, they hunt as we did in the past). When I see them, I think about them as Tigers or Lion because they're extremely fast, they climb to trees and they hunt very well. So, they seem wild (i don't know if it is the right word). But, they have something that here on earth differentiate the humans and the beats. They are able to imagine, as we are and beats don't. They have faith, as we may have and beats don't. They speak, as we do and beats... i don't think so. At leats beats, even if they can make some sounds, they haven't a language.
So, they are something between beasts and not beats (never humans, nor people)

[Payä Tìrol]

ASG calling them Homo pandoricus

It does? that makes me cringe >.<
It's already a ridiculous case of convergent evolution, no need to give them the same genus name too

Are they animals? As in, would they fall under that overall Kingdom in Linnaean classification? Yes. So would we. Although, given the presence of plants on Pandora with what basically appear to be nervous and muscular systems, I don't think anything would fall neatly into a terran classification system.
The word "beast" in English on the other hand generally means something more distinct from "animal". It implies a lack of higher thought, of sentience, and it was used quite often by people in the past to refer to humans they thought "inferior" (They clearly didn't refer to themselves as beasts).