Theos-Talk Archives (August 2001 Message tt00277)

Thanks for the update, and explanation.

Dennis

----- Original Message -----
From: Michele Lidofsky <officerjenny@mindspring.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Story on Cloning -- Should interest
theosophy


> Dennis Kier wrote:
>
> > They have taught gorillas and chimpanzees to use sign language to
> > express themselves. Some of the Chimps taught it to their
offspring
> > later on.
>
> Hello Dennis,
>
> It was hoped that this transfer would occur, but after
> twenty-odd years of training, there are still no communities of
> independently signing primates anywhere. For a while it looked as
> though some signs were being passed on to primate infants, but
> disappointingly, as time went on, it became obvious that without
> continued drilling, the learned association faded and were gradually
> lost.
>
> As far as your losing the physical ability to talk - remember that
you
> still maintain the human ability to organize thought into language -
as
> you "spoke" through your post.
>
> Here are some observations I put together for another ng regarding
> animal "signing" abilities -
>
> As far as your question goes about conversing with other species -
the
> problem is, other animals don't have any analogs to language - even
> simple language - of their own. Animals "communicate" their states
of
> mind - anger, fear, threats, appeasement, to one another (within the
> same species at least) using facial gesturing, scent and posture.
But
> animal "communication" resembles human language in only a very
> superficial way (use of some sounds), and none has the equivalent of
> anything like words - much less symbols for nouns, verbs, or
sentences.
> Not even simple ones. This would necessarily limit attempts at
> "conversation", because ordering symbols into structured thought is
how
> we humans share ideas or concepts such as who did what to whom and
when
> or why.
>
> That doesn't mean that they don't understand a remarkable lot. They
do,
> because they're very smart. They can be taught an amazing number of
> things, and if we are very bright, we may learn a small part of what
> they know, and can teach us. Remember, discursive or symbolic
thought
> is only a small part of consciousness. Despite the way it "feels" to
us
> humans, it's far from the only part.
>
> Some comments on Koko and sign language in primates...
>
> The question of the validity of the claims made by the Koko project
and
> others like it have been heavily disputed by the linguistic
community,
> and by whistle blowers in the primate community itself. I would
like to
> offer some observations in the interest of equal time.
>
> To begin with, the apes (including Koko) did NOT "learn American
Sign
> Language. " This preposterous claim is based on the myth that ASL
is a
> crude system of pantomimes and gestures rather than a full language
with
> complex phonology, morphology and syntax. In fact the apes had not
> learned *any* true ASL signs.
>
> Before defining the hand gesturing that Koko has been trained to do
as
> "linguistic ability", "conversing" or "sign language"- please read
the
> words of the ONLY deaf native signer on one of Washoe's research
teams.
>
> "Every time the chimp made a "sign", we were supposed to write it
down
> in the log...They were always complaining because my log didn't show
> enough signs. All the hearing people turned in logs with long lists
of
> signs. I watched really carefully. The chimp's hands were moving
> constantly....I just wasn't seeing any signs. The hearing people
were
> logging every movement the chimp made as a sign. Every time the
chimp
> put his finger in his mouth, they'd say "Oh, he's making the sign
for
> "drink," and they'd give him some milk....When the chimp scratched
> itself, they'd record it as the "sign" for "scratch"...When {the
chimps}
> want something, they reach...{The trainers} would say, "Oh, amazing,
> ...it's exactly like the ASL sign for "give"." It wasn't."
>
> At best, the apes have been trained to make gestures that their
trainers
> have agreed to interpret as that of a request for food, drink or
> tickling/play - which comprises over 99% of their spontaneous
signing
> output. They clearly do not get the idea that a particular sign
might
> refer to a kind of object. To an ape, the sign for TOOTHBRUSH can
mean
> "toothbrush", "toothpaste", "brushing teeth", "I want my
toothbrush", or
> "It's time for bed". "Juice can mean "juice" "where juice is
usually
> kept", or "Take me to where the juice is kept". (When children are
> sorting pictures into groups, they know thematic associations, but
> ignore these when learning word meanings; to them, a "dax" is a dog
or
> another dog, NOT a dog OR its bone).
>
> (There is a big difference between making the sign for banana and
> knowing 'This means "banana"' and making a gesture because 'If I do
> this, she will give me some banana.)'
>
> To arrive at the vocabulary counts, often the same movement is
credited
> to chimps or apes as different "words", depending on what the
observer
> thinks is the appropriate word in the context. This has been
admitted by
> Francine Patterson, Koko's trainer. (Patterson in particular has
found
> ways to excuse Koko's performance on the grounds that the gorilla is
> fond of puns, jokes, metaphors and mischievous lies).
>
> The primates seldom sign spontaneously (though it is represented as
if
> they do) but instead have to be molded, drilled , and coerced with
> treats. This raises the question of whether they are in fact
> demonstrating language or are instead highly trained animal acts.
> Kanzi, the bonobo, is said to use his "graphic symbol" computer for
> purposes other than requesting food or play, but at best, only four
> percent of the time.
>
> (Some quotes excerpted from Steven Pinker, "The Language Instinct")
>
> best, Michele
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>