Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Do Animals Believe In Supernatural Beings?
Straggler
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 196 of 373 (601570)
01-21-2011 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by New Cat's Eye
01-21-2011 2:21 PM


Re: Inferring Motivations
CS writes:
A chimp learning that certain hand configurations correspond to certain items or actions is not the same as a human developing verbal language during brain development.
What about a human mute physically incapable of verbal communication at the age of 2 - Is that comparable?
CS writes:
I would put a fairly hard line just past the genus Homo....
How do you react to the claim by some scientists that chimpanzees are members of the genus homo? Link
CS writes:
Still though, I think language is key to religious belief, or any abstract thinking really.
Then where do young children stand in relation to the ability to abstract reason and what is the known evidence regarding apes and their ability to abstractly reason?
CS writes:
I don't think there'd be enough overlap to infer religious beliefs in chimps.
There still seems to be an "obviously comparable to human" and an "obvioulsy NOT comparable to human" bias going on here.
Where does that "border" lie?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-21-2011 2:21 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-21-2011 3:17 PM Straggler has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 197 of 373 (601575)
01-21-2011 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Straggler
01-21-2011 2:45 PM


Re: Inferring Motivations
What about a human mute physically incapable of verbal communication at the age of 2 - Is that comparable?
Deaf would probably be better as the mute could still have good language skills even thought they couldn't talk.
I just did a bit of Googling on deaf child development and they do have consideral problems.
How do you react to the claim by some scientists that chimpanzees are members of the genus homo?
I don't think they should be included in Homo, and if they should, then I guess I'd have to move my line. **shrugs**
Then where do young children stand in relation to the ability to abstract reason and what is the known evidence regarding apes and their ability to abstractly reason?
For children, there seems to be a critical period during brain development where language acquisition is best fit. I don't have a link off the tips of my fingers, but I think I've read that the acquisition of language also has a big impact on the brain development. I'd say that you'd have to be after that critical period before you had any reasonable ability to abstract reason.
Since we do our thinking in our language, I don't think that apes' thinking is anything caparable to ours because they don't have a language to think in. Ergo, they don't have much of any ability for abstract reason.
There still seems to be an "obviously comparable to human" and an "obvioulsy NOT comparable to human" bias going on here.
Where does that "border" lie?
Whether they have enough language developed to string together thoughts into abstract reasoning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Straggler, posted 01-21-2011 2:45 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by Straggler, posted 01-24-2011 1:37 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 198 of 373 (601677)
01-22-2011 11:51 PM


No Language in Animals
When did this discussion turn from 'do animals believe in supernatural beings' to 'do animals possess human-like linguistic capabilities'? For anyone with even a slim exposure to the outside world, the answer to the latter question should be pretty obvious: no animal has yet to be found that possesses (or can even be taught) human-like linguistic communication. On top of that, there have already been several threads here discussing this notion; do we really need another?
If one wishes to disentangle the claims so far made that a language-like communicative channel must first exist between a human researcher and his subjects, they will find themself horribly unsuccessful if they attempt that task by pointing out higher-level cognitive functions and language-like abilities in primatesnone of these things have a shred of evidence backing them, and are laughable claims even to the layman let alone a majority of the scientific community.
A better approach might be to argue that such a communicative channel is not necessary to infer supernatural beliefs from the observance of outward actions/behaviors. Successfully demonstrating this would go far to counter one's opponents who claim that higher-level communication is necessary for inferences of these beliefs.
Why not present that argument? It would save time.
Jon

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Straggler, posted 01-24-2011 1:26 PM Jon has replied

Straggler
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 199 of 373 (601814)
01-24-2011 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Jon
01-22-2011 11:51 PM


Re: No Language in Animals
jon writes:
A better approach might be to argue that such a communicative channel is not necessary to infer supernatural beliefs from the observance of outward actions/behaviors. Successfully demonstrating this would go far to counter one's opponents who claim that higher-level communication is necessary for inferences of these beliefs.
Why not present that argument?
Feel free to present that argument.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Jon, posted 01-22-2011 11:51 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Jon, posted 01-24-2011 8:19 PM Straggler has replied

Straggler
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 200 of 373 (601817)
01-24-2011 1:37 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by New Cat's Eye
01-21-2011 3:17 PM


Re: Inferring Motivations
CS writes:
I just did a bit of Googling on deaf child development and they do have consideral problems.
Apparently not if their parents are also deaf and are capable signers.
CS writes:
I don't think they should be included in Homo, and if they should, then I guess I'd have to move my line. **shrugs**
Move your line on what basis?
CS writes:
Whether they have enough language developed to string together thoughts into abstract reasoning.
If I remember correctly there are a couple of intriguing case studies of humans who have been denied language acquisition (for whatever reason) but have still been able to demonstrate considerable ability to think abstractly.
I'll look them up.
Is your criteria of language acquisition in this context based on the idea that without language abstract thought is impossible? What role do you think language is essential for with regard to holding superstitious beliefs?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-21-2011 3:17 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-24-2011 2:30 PM Straggler has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 201 of 373 (601829)
01-24-2011 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by Straggler
01-24-2011 1:37 PM


Re: Inferring Motivations
CS writes:
I just did a bit of Googling on deaf child development and they do have consideral problems.
Apparently not if their parents are also deaf and are capable signers.
Because they're developing language. It does make me wonder how their abstract thoughts are organized when not by audible words.
CS writes:
I don't think they should be included in Homo, and if they should, then I guess I'd have to move my line. **shrugs**
Move your line on what basis?
On the basis of not everyone included in Homo being close enough to humans to assume they think like we do.
If I remember correctly there are a couple of intriguing case studies of humans who have been denied language acquisition (for whatever reason) but have still been able to demonstrate considerable ability to think abstractly.
I'll look them up.
I'd read 'em...
Is your criteria of language acquisition in this context based on the idea that without language abstract thought is impossible?
I won't claim impossibility, but yeah, pretty much.
Abstract thikning does use language.
quote:
Abstract concepts elicit greater activity in the inferior frontal gyrus and middle temporal gyrus compared to concrete concepts,...
...
These results suggest greater engagement of the verbal system for processing of abstract concepts...
What role do you think language is essential for with regard to holding superstitious beliefs?
Generally, for abstraction.
quote:
Abstraction uses a strategy of simplification, wherein formerly concrete details are left ambiguous, vague, or undefined; thus effective communication about things in the abstract requires an intuitive or common experience between the communicator and the communication recipient.
I.e. language.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Straggler, posted 01-24-2011 1:37 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Straggler, posted 01-25-2011 8:27 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 202 of 373 (601884)
01-24-2011 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by Straggler
01-24-2011 1:26 PM


Re: No Language in Animals
Jon writes:
A better approach might be to argue that such a communicative channel is not necessary to infer supernatural beliefs from the observance of outward actions/behaviors. Successfully demonstrating this would go far to counter one's opponents who claim that higher-level communication is necessary for inferences of these beliefs.
Why not present that argument?
Feel free to present that argument.
My recommendation was as advice to youbefore you make yourself look more ridiculous than you already look.
But, carry on.
Jon

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Straggler, posted 01-24-2011 1:26 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by Straggler, posted 01-25-2011 8:14 AM Jon has not replied

Straggler
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 203 of 373 (601952)
01-25-2011 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by Jon
01-24-2011 8:19 PM


Re: No Language in Animals
As (again) AdminMod put it this thread poses the question: "What evidence might look like and try to resolve one way or another what we can say we know about this topic."
If you have nothing to say in answer to that question what is the purpose of your participation here?
jon writes:
My recommendation was as advice to youbefore you make yourself look more ridiculous than you already look.
Coming from one who regularly looks utterly imbecilic I suppose I should proceed with caution on the basis that it takes one to know one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Jon, posted 01-24-2011 8:19 PM Jon has not replied

Straggler
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 204 of 373 (601953)
01-25-2011 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 201 by New Cat's Eye
01-24-2011 2:30 PM


Re: Inferring Motivations
CS writes:
It does make me wonder how their abstract thoughts are organized when not by audible words.
Why do they have to be audible? Anyway - The perfectly normal cognitive abilities of those born deaf into already signing households refutes this.
CS writes:
On the basis of not everyone included in Homo being close enough to humans to assume they think like we do.
Well how similar do they have to be? Your line seems pretty arbitrarily placed. You move it to wherever your incredulity demands.
CS writes:
Stragger writes:
If I remember correctly there are a couple of intriguing case studies of humans who have been denied language acquisition (for whatever reason) but have still been able to demonstrate considerable ability to think abstractly.
I'll look them up.
I'd read 'em...
I haven't looked these up yet. So what ones were you thinking of?
CS writes:
Straggler writes:
Is your criteria of language acquisition in this context based on the idea that without language abstract thought is impossible?
I won't claim impossibility, but yeah, pretty much.
So chimps are incapable of abstract thought as far as you are concerned? As are pre-lingual infants? And those brain damaged adults who have lost linguistic ability?
CS writes:
I.e. language.
Firstly you seem to be conflating an ability to think abstractly with an ability to communicate abstract thoughts to another being. They are not necessarily the same thing are they?
Secondly why does communication of abstraction have to be linguistic?
I'll look up those case studies. Soon.....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-24-2011 2:30 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-25-2011 10:33 AM Straggler has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 205 of 373 (601963)
01-25-2011 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by Straggler
01-25-2011 8:27 AM


Re: Inferring Motivations
CS writes:
It does make me wonder how their abstract thoughts are organized when not by audible words.
Why do they have to be audible? Anyway - The perfectly normal cognitive abilities of those born deaf into already signing households refutes this.
I'm not saying they have to... I said I wonder how it works otherwise. I'd guess it'd be more visualizing words that they've read, rather than "saying" them in their head.
Do you have any ideas on how abstract thinking could work without language? (anybody?)
Well how similar do they have to be?
Enough to have language.
Your line seems pretty arbitrarily placed. You move it to wherever your incredulity demands.
My disingenuous alarm is going off.... Must I restate my entire position?
I think religious belief requires abstract thought and abstract thought requires language. The line is drawn on the basis that other homos would be close enough to humans to have language. Chimps do not have language. If you move chimps into homos, then not all the homos would be close enough to have language so the line must be moved.
I haven't looked these up yet. So what ones were you thinking of?
Huh? I wasn't thinking of them.
So chimps are incapable of abstract thought as far as you are concerned? As are pre-lingual infants?
Yes.
And those brain damaged adults who have lost linguistic ability?
Depends on what you mean by "lost"... whether the brain has lost the function or if just the mouth has. Obviously, the latter would still be capable.
Firstly you seem to be conflating an ability to think abstractly with an ability to communicate abstract thoughts to another being. They are not necessarily the same thing are they?
No, not necessarily. But an isolated man with no language abilities wouldn't be able to come up with something that I'd readily call a "religious belief".
How would the thoughts even be structured?
Secondly why does communication of abstraction have to be linguistic?
I don't suppose it does, but that's the way it is. Any ideas on how it could be otherwise?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Straggler, posted 01-25-2011 8:27 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by Jon, posted 01-25-2011 12:43 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 209 by Straggler, posted 01-25-2011 1:13 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 206 of 373 (601983)
01-25-2011 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by New Cat's Eye
01-25-2011 10:33 AM


Re: Inferring Motivations
To add to some of what you've said:
Do you have any ideas on how abstract thinking could work without language? (anybody?)
Interestingly, deaf sleep-'talkers' do their sleeptalking in sign language. The specific medium doesn't seem overly important to the system of Language. That said, if chimps were capable of Language, there is no reason they should not be presenting the same evidence as deaf humans (since, obviously, chimps cannot use their vocal apparatus for the task). No animal, chimps included, have shown this ability. Thus, I think it's safe to say that so far humans are the only critters with Language abilities.
Secondly why does communication of abstraction have to be linguistic?
I don't suppose it does, but that's the way it is. Any ideas on how it could be otherwise?
And, of course, this brings us back to the same old problem as before: even if these critters held beliefs in supernatural beings, how on Earth could we possibly know without communicating with them linguistically? No other means even half as reliable have ever been found for relating such ideas.
Jon

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-25-2011 10:33 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by Straggler, posted 01-25-2011 1:05 PM Jon has not replied
 Message 216 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-25-2011 5:07 PM Jon has replied

Straggler
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 207 of 373 (601985)
01-25-2011 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by Jon
01-25-2011 12:43 PM


Penguin Death Rite
Jon are you aware of this fascinating example of penguins indisputably exhibiting belief in an afterlife?
Example writes:
Did you ever wonder why there are no dead penguins on the ice in Antarctica - where do they go?
It is a known fact that the penguin is a very ritualistic bird which lives an extremely ordered and complex life.
The penguin is very committed to its family and will mate for life, as well as maintaining a form of compassionate contact with its offspring throughout its life.
If a penguin is found dead on the ice surface, other members of the family and social circle have been known to dig holes in the ice, using their vestigial wings and beaks, until the hole is deep enough for the dead bird to be rolled into and buried. The male penguins then gather in a circle around the fresh grave and sing:
"Freeze a jolly good fellow"
"Freeze a jolly good fellow."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by Jon, posted 01-25-2011 12:43 PM Jon has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2981 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 208 of 373 (601987)
01-25-2011 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by Straggler
01-21-2011 1:39 PM


Frontal and pariental lobes
But on the basis of the behaviour described a degree of religiosity, I think, would be a perfectly valid and evidentially supported scientific hypothesis worthy of further investigation.
Yeah, but in the same sense as telepathic dogs is worthy of further investigation, subjectively speaking. If you'd like to, go ahead and investigate.
Funding for such an inquiry might be a bit hard to come by though.
What is required cognitively to possess beliefs about imaginary beings doing things like creating stuff
Other than the parietal lobe, frontal lobe and thalamus (source), nothing is really required. But those three seem to be a must.
Considering the earliest evidenced origins of human/homo belief in such things might be the way to start?
By what I have read on it, it seems to correlate with the evolvement of the frontal lobes and pariental lobe. Something unquie to humans. Coincidently, so is religion, apparently.
I think the only sure way is to do a neuro scan while the ape is shown symbols and their "shrine," or whatever evidence that we think suggests belief, I'm just going with your example. The same that is done with humans and our religious symbols.
If there is found to be activity in the brain that reacts to the symbols and not the same to other non-religious symbols, it would be a good start to the investigation. Higher level of cognitive testing can then follow. Or something like that(?) seems like the ideal process to the question of whether apes are or can be religious.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by Straggler, posted 01-21-2011 1:39 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by Straggler, posted 01-25-2011 1:31 PM onifre has not replied

Straggler
Member (Idle past 95 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 209 of 373 (601988)
01-25-2011 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by New Cat's Eye
01-25-2011 10:33 AM


Which Came First - The Concept Or The Linguistic Expression of the Concept?
Which came first the concept or the Linguistic expression of the concept? The concept surely? How could it possibly be otherwise? Why could anyone invent the language to express put the water in the cup unless they already held the concept that they wanted to communicate to others?
CS writes:
Do you have any ideas on how abstract thinking could work without language? (anybody?)
Mentalese?
Straggler writes:
So chimps are incapable of abstract thought as far as you are concerned? As are pre-lingual infants?
CS writes:
Yes.
Self-awareness, problem solving abilities, the ability to associate symbols with real objects and use of tools all require some basic degree of abstract thought don’t they?
CS writes:
I think religious belief requires abstract thought and abstract thought requires language.
Even if we accept this as a given - With a basic ability to think abstractly and some notion of cause and effect I fail to see why a basic belief in imagined entities as causal agents should be considered an impossibility? Regardless of verbal communication skills.
CS on the absence of language writes:
How would the thoughts even be structured?
A good question. This case study doesn’t answer it as such. But it certainly challenges the assumption that language is required for thought.
Link writes:
I saw that he was studying mouths, he was studying people. Even though he was frightened, he was still watching: what is happening, what is happening?
I walked up to him and signed, Hello. My name is Susan. He tried to copy that and did a sloppy rendition of Hello, my name is Susan. Obviously he didn’t know what he was doing. It wasn’t language. And I was shocked.
He looked Mayan and I thought, well, if he knew Mexican sign language, he wouldn’t try to copy. That’s not a normal thing to do, even if you don’t know the language. I couldn’t walk away. I slowly figured out that this man had no language. As I said, I could see that he was very intelligent. I could see he was trying very hard. I was twenty-two years old. I had no idea of what I was doing. I was faced with how to communicate the idea of language to someone without language.
He’d just try to form signs and copy what I was doing. But his facial expression was always, is this what I’m supposed to do?
That question was on his face all of the time. It was terribly frustrating. It went on hour after hour, for days and days and days. Then I had an idea. If I died tonight, I may have had only one truly brilliant thought in my life. What was it that attracted me to this man? His intelligence and his studiousness, the fact he was still trying to figure things out-those two things.
I decided to stop talking to him. Instead, I taught an invisible student. I set up a chair, and I started being the teacher to an invisible student in an empty chair. Then I became the student. I would get into the other chair and the student would answer the teacher. I did this over and over and over. And I ignored him. I stopped looking at him.
What happened is that I saw a movement. I stopped. I was talking to an empty chair, but out of my peripheral vision I saw something move. I look at Ildefonso and he had just become rigid! He actually sat up in his chair and became rigid. His hands were flat on the table and his eyes were wide. His facial expression was different from any I’d seen. It was just wide with amazement!
And then he started-it was the most emotional moment with another human being, I think, in my life so that even now, after all these years, I’m choking up [pauses]-he started pointing to everything in the room, and this is amazing to me! I’ve thought about this for years. It’s not having language that separates us from other animals, it’s because we love it! All of a sudden, this twenty-seven-year-old man-who, of course, had seen a wall and a door and a window before-started pointing to everything. He pointed to the table. He wanted me to sign table. He wanted the symbol. He wanted the name for table. And he wanted the symbol, the sign, for window.
The amazing thing is that the look on his face was as if he had never seen a window before. The window became a different thing with a symbol attached to it. But it’s not just a symbol. It’s a shared symbol. He can say window to someone else tomorrow who he hasn’t even met yet! And they will know what a window is. There’s something magical that happens between humans and symbols and the sharing of symbols.
That was his first Aha! He just went crazy for a few seconds, pointing to everything in the room and signing whatever I signed. Then he collapsed and started crying, and I don’t mean just a few tears. He cradled his head in his arms on the table and the table was shaking loudly from his sobbing. Of course, I don’t know what was in his head, but I’m just guessing he saw what he had missed for twenty-seven years.
It’s another frustration that Ildefonso doesn’t want to talk about it. For him, that was the dark time. Whenever I ask him, and I’ve asked him many, many times over the years, he always starts out with the visual representation of an imbecile: his mouth drops, his lower lip drops, and he looks stupid. He does something nonsensical with his hands like, I don’t know what’s going on. He always goes back to I was stupid.
It doesn’t matter how many times I tell him, no, you weren’t exposed to language and The closest I’ve ever gotten is he’ll say, Why does anyone want to know about this? This is the bad time. What he wants to talk about is learning language.
The only thing he said, which I think is fascinating and raises more questions than answers, is that he used to be able to talk to his other languageless friends. They found each other over the years. He said to me, I think differently. I can’t remember how I thought.
Life Without Language

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-25-2011 10:33 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by onifre, posted 01-25-2011 1:16 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 213 by Jon, posted 01-25-2011 3:00 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 217 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-25-2011 5:28 PM Straggler has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2981 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 210 of 373 (601990)
01-25-2011 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by Straggler
01-25-2011 1:13 PM


Re: Which Came First - The Concept Or The Linguistic Expression of the Concept?
Which came first the concept or the Linguistic expression of the concept?
[ABE correction]
When it comes to god-concepts, I thought we agreed in the other thread that the linguistic expression creates the concept. Right?
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Straggler, posted 01-25-2011 1:13 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Straggler, posted 01-25-2011 1:38 PM onifre has replied
 Message 215 by barbara, posted 01-25-2011 3:53 PM onifre has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024