0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
the only non modern species with whom they co-existed, namely Neanderthals
it's easy to see how it might have set the stage for subject-verb-object sequence that is an important aspect of natural language.
Quote from: cheryl j on 15/11/2015 08:18:35 it's easy to see how it might have set the stage for subject-verb-object sequence that is an important aspect of natural language.Apart that is, from Latin, Greek, Hebrew, German, Irish, Arabic, Sanskrit, AngloSaxon....indeed practically all the sources of English apart from French......Otherwise, a perfectly sound hypothesis.
To me, it's a more persuasive idea than many, like, say, Steven Pinker's, which basically says that when brains get big and complex, language inevitably poofs into existence.
Puppypower, I'm not sure you consider visual perception a form of language. How is it by itself a shared form of communication? I'm assuming you don't mean art, but the actual sensory experience itself. It's seems like a big stretch of the normal definition. I'm not sure what you mean at the end here :"Since we all have DNA and the DNA is very conservative, the natural part of the brain is still there. The subjective part, due to language, is not the same as the DNA part that is connected to natural instinct. Modern humans, since about the time of civilization, have formed a secondary subjective center; ego, that is separate from the primary center; DNA. "Are you saying that because languages do not use the very same words or grammar, language does not have a biological basis? That ego or the self has no biological basis? There's a lot of evidence that they do have neurocorrelates, even if there are subjective elements. The most obvious one being that genetic defects, brain injury like strokes or complications of brain surgery, can cause very specific kinds deficits in both language and even the experience of self.
Visual perception uses the light that reflects off objects as the letters of its alphabet. For example, the light reflecting off the cat allows us to see and know this is a cat. The reflected light is like the letters, words, sentence and paragraphs of a visual language. There are three primary colors from which endless colors can be mixed. There are also textures and patterns as part of that language. Spoken language uses sound and written language uses light that reflects off of, or around symbols, to represent things, actions, etc. The direct visual language is more accurate and more universal than spoken and written language. If I say to you, I saw a black cat, the sounds will trigger the image of a black cat, from your visual memory. But this may not be the exact black cat I saw, because this is an approximation. The words will trigger the image of a black cat but all blacks cats are not the same in terms of a direct visual experience. The more words you use the closer you may become. The visual language is fast and this direct experience may occur in an instant.
The inner self is the center of the human personality. It is connected to the DNA and natural instinct. I call the inner self the primary center, which humans have in common with animals. This center is both software and hardware dependent; firmware. The inner self makes use of various sensory based languages; photon alphabet, sound wave alphabet (running water), emotional/sensory tone alphabet (feeling in my heart), taste and smell alphabet, etc. If I eat something, my enjoyment is a natural reaction to a good food story that the brain interprets from a range of tastes and smells. I may not be able to put that experience into words in such a way that I can induce the same feeling in another. They will need to taste it form themselves to trigger the inner self with its own language.
Because cultural language is an approximation, language helps to induce a center that is different from the inner self. I can this secondary center the ego. The ego then creates a potential with the inner self. This can become conscious as the feeling tones of subjectivity. Subjectivity is what gives us choice and willpower since it allows us to depart from the inner self, even if we think we are on the same page, due to inner feelings. Language adds a subjective gap that compounds, adding continuous potential to the inner self, which then adds currents from the inner self †o lower potential. This can be subjectively interpreted by culture and language to mean something else.
What is human, in the sense of being different from animals, is the subjectivity created by cultural language. Animals also have language, but their language is not extensive enough to develop a secondary center that is stable.
You have clearly never lived with a dog, or watched a kangaroo look after its joey. Or indeed any other bird or mammal, whether a solitary female, paired for life or living in a herd. What distinguishes humans behaviourally from practically every other species is irrational hate. Especially that which comes from faith.
This love comes from your mother since you were born.
A lot of science is about things you can't see, like most of the electromagnetic spectrum or the mechanism of evolution, but we infer the existence of such things from the evidence of what we can see.
Now you mentioned QuoteThis love comes from your mother since you were born. as being uniquely human. Having dealt with human mothers that reject their children, and animal mothers that treat not only other mothers' children but even the young of other species as their own, I am impelled to ask you exactly what you mean by this, and how you have observed it in humans but not in any other species.