FWIW the author acknowledges in a footnote that some of the "human only" traits are contested.
I totally agree that anthropocentrism in a fallacy/trap that we can fall into in all sorts of domains of thought - metaphysics, ethics, behavioral/evolutionary economics or whatever its called, etc.
But, to paraphrase Marshall Sahlins, "'Animals are basically people' is a much healthier perspective than 'People are basically animals.'"[1]. Which is to say, I think we can let our biases slide in this case, because even though we're focusing on ourselves because of our misperceived 'specialness', we can still learn broader truths in spite of this because we aren't actually so special or apart from nature.
I totally agree that anthropocentrism in a fallacy/trap that we can fall into in all sorts of domains of thought - metaphysics, ethics, behavioral/evolutionary economics or whatever its called, etc.
But, to paraphrase Marshall Sahlins, "'Animals are basically people' is a much healthier perspective than 'People are basically animals.'"[1]. Which is to say, I think we can let our biases slide in this case, because even though we're focusing on ourselves because of our misperceived 'specialness', we can still learn broader truths in spite of this because we aren't actually so special or apart from nature.
[1] From intro to http://www.prickly-paradigm.com/titles/western-illusion-huma...