Bear Wild
Well-Known Member
It is much more complex than that if you are up on your avian behavior studies. They do not symbolize words in the sense of a connection to written words but your description is far to simplistic.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Have any intermediary life forms, particular in the way of apes, developed writing?
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
I take it that you mean intermediaries from previous primates to Homo Sapiens?
The simple answer would be "no". Current understanding is that the writing of text goes back to around 5500 years ago, and the writing of numbers to around 40 thousand years ago.
Writing is a very recent development even by the perspective of the Homo Sapiens Sapiens subspecies alone. Even Neanderthals were extinct or nearly so by the time when we began writing numbers.
History of writing - Wikipedia
Timeline of human evolution - Wikipedia
Whether current apes and other animals may develop the ability to write given enough time and proper selective pressure is another matter entirely. I feel certain that they will.
Sure, if we happen to feel like it (and, of course, to be theists of a Abrahamic-like persuation to begin with).
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Can you give an example, along with a website that I can read more about the particular case?
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
What about their having a speaking language of their own with words, sentences and discourses, please?
Regards
____________
[55:2]اَلرَّحۡمٰنُ ۙ﴿۲﴾
It is God, the Gracious
[[55:3]عَلَّمَ الۡقُرۡاٰنَ ؕ﴿۳﴾
Who has taught the Qur’an.
[[55:4]خَلَقَ الۡاِنۡسَانَ ۙ﴿۴﴾
He has created man.
[[55:5]عَلَّمَہُ الۡبَیَانَ ﴿۵﴾
He has taught him plain speech.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 55: Ar-Rahman
Last edited:
I don't think that we have much in the way of evidence for or against that hypothesis.
Bear Wild
Well-Known Member
Although there is no question that human communication is the most complex your presentation of animal communication is far to simplistic. We are just beginning to understand bird communication and there is much more to learn. Personally I have been following blue jay calls where I live and there is an amazingly varied calls used in different situations with patterned responses. There is much more going on than just simple mating and warning calls. Hopefully we will be able to understand more in time but we must get away from the prejudice that because we do not understand their communication that it must be simple. This prejudice has held back research until very recently and we are finding were not so smart in what we knew.
Here is one article to start with. There is so much more.
"Experimental evidence for compositional syntax in bird calls"
To****aka N. Suzuki, David Wheatcroft Michael Griesser Nature Communications volume 7, Article number: 10986 (2016)
Here is the link.
www.nature.com/articles/ncomms10986
Bear Wild
Well-Known Member
Although there is no question that human communication is the most complex your presentation of animal communication is far to simplistic. We are just beginning to understand bird communication and there is much more to learn. Personally I have been following blue jay calls where I live and there is an amazingly varied calls used in different situations with patterned responses. There is much more going on than just simple mating and warning calls. Hopefully we will be able to understand more in time but we must get away from the prejudice that because we do not understand their communication that it must be simple. This prejudice has held back research until very recently and we are finding were not so smart in what we knew.
Here is one article to start with. There is so much more.
"Experimental evidence for compositional syntax in bird calls"
To****aka N. Suzuki, David Wheatcroft Michael Griesser Nature Communications volume 7, Article number: 10986 (2016)
Here is the link.
www.nature.com/articles/ncomms10986
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Hello my natural friend!!!!
What a great article. Read the whole thing it was so interesting.
I would still say that the vocalizations of animals and birds are so primitive, that they can only be considered the very beginning stages of syntax, and not talking in the manner that we usually think talking is, aka like humans talk. I propose that this is not because they are unable to use syntax, as your study shows, but because they are too limited in the sounds they can make. Human vocalisms are far more numerous, meaning the combinations are virtually unlimited. Add to that the increased COMPLICATED syntax we have by creating whole complex sentences due to our increased intelligence.
There are certain exceptions to this rule. Comes to mind a particular parrot that learned to not just mimic human words, but could understand human speech and use it to communicate. That's true language. Also comes to mind apes that have learned with human help non-verbal languages.
Bear Wild
Well-Known Member
I have learned a lot from you in our discussions. It was from your posts that I became involved in learning more about affective neuroscience by the way. Thanks.Hello my natural friend!!!!
What a great article. Read the whole thing it was so interesting.
I would still say that the vocalizations of animals and birds are so primitive, that they can only be considered the very beginning stages of syntax, and not talking in the manner that we usually think talking is, aka like humans talk. I propose that this is not because they are unable to use syntax, as your study shows, but because they are too limited in the sounds they can make. Human vocalisms are far more numerous, meaning the combinations are virtually unlimited. Add to that the increased COMPLICATED syntax we have by creating whole complex sentences due to our increased intelligence.
There are certain exceptions to this rule. Comes to mind a particular parrot that learned to not just mimic human words, but could understand human speech and use it to communicate. That's true language. Also comes to mind apes that have learned with human help non-verbal languages.
gnostic
The Lost One
What a load of craps, paarsurrey.
You have made many claims about god being responsible for writings...
...and you have quoted a couple passages, one about pen/writing and the other about language being taught, with “God did it”, from the Qur’an, a collection of teachings from Muhammad, not from God, that was only written after Muhammad’s death.
If that’s the case, then you need to show evidence that - what you say in your posts and what you quoted from the Qur’an - to be correct.
But by saying this “It is evident and evident needs no evidence, please.” then it has become quite apparent, you have no evidence, and wishes to avoid providing one.
By not providing any evidence to support your claim or the claims from Qur’an passages, then your posts are nothing more than personal opinions of your personal belief.
Your evasiveness have only demonstrated that (A) you are either too ignorant to understand about the history of languages and history of writing, or (B) you want to save face, by not answering the question by asking questions of your own, in the hope that you can misdirect @TagliatelliMonster and @ChristineM so that they will forget that you have no evidence.
Either way, you are employing a typical theist’s dishonest tactics to avoid providing evidence for one’s claims of how your god invented human languages and human writings.
You are fooling no one, paarsurrey, but you are demonstrating that your words cannot be trusted.