what if morals, rather then religiously or rationally authoritative, are normative value statements. maybe rational ethical abstracts (?maybe otherwise?) are a divider between humans and animals. how do we know that animals don't employ their own ethical abstracts for deciphering morality. or, maybe we shouldn't ask the question "do animals use other ethical abstracts for deciphering morality?", maybe we should try to adopt a not all to common form of contemplation of the ethical and of the world in a philosophical manner in general. i venture the proposition to visit philosophical contemplation in the meta-paradigmatic or meta-abstract mind set. in accomplishing such a form of contemplation, we may finally understand the (open ended) maybe infinite possibility of other methods of entanglement via some sort of languageing; a languageing beyond our grasp.