"In this book here, (M.V.Kline) Master, I read one of these super-pseudological terms. It spoke of 'theriomorphism'. It is the twin error of anthropomorphism, said he. Now, this latter, the attributing of human characteristics to animals, indeed is an error, but the former, theriomorphism, the attributing of animal characteristics to humans seems to be no error, not EVER."
"You are correct here. Man is absolutely and completely an animal PLUS something (ideational). With regard to the first, the animal characteristics, one can freely cross-attribute, calling me a beast even. With regard to the 'plus something', one simply cannot attribute it to animals, otherwise they WOULD be humans. The definition of a human is an animal plus an extra ideational degree. Thus, one may call a man as being on heat or thirsty, but not a cat as being cruel or obscene. Herodotus mentioned a goat that tubbed a woman. It may have been the outcome of circumstantial smelling situations. But when he remarks that it happened in plain sight of everybody, that is anthropomorphistic error. It is third degree, i.e. not for the goat, but for humans only. Indeed, there is no need for the first term, for theriomorphism."