/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.7294218]

could sign language spread among wild populations of ape?

[Anonymous No.7294226]

>>7294218
Probably not. The imitation abilities of apes are impressive and we see advanced behaviors propagating through their populations from time to time but linguistics is particularly complex.

[Anonymous No.7294232]

>>7294218

That has never been observed, even though there have been several opportunities. So probably not. "Literate" apes have tried to use signs to communicate with other apes, but the others never learned.

[Anonymous No.7294278]

No. It's a hoax to begin with.

[Anonymous No.7294290]

>>7294218
yes, in a million years, once we breed them for this for sex

[Anonymous No.7294293]

>>7294278
Have you ever taught a dog a trick? What's so hard about teaching an ape to wave its arms based on its stimuli and emotions?

[Anonymous No.7294296]

Yes

[Anonymous No.7294299]

>>7294293
That's all it is. A trick.

[Anonymous No.7294307]

>>7294299
I see what you mean.

[Anonymous No.7294327]

Apes can learn sign language kind of a little bit. It's debatable.

Roger Fouts claims that his ape that knew sign language taught her child a little sign language. I'm not sure to what degree this is true, but it sounds reasonable.

Apes in the wild have been observed using some simple visual signs to communicate a little.

So it stands to reason that sign language might spread through a wild population of apes a little, kind of. I don't think I would expect them to be having any sort of philosophical discourse or talking in full sentences even or anything like that.

That's just my speculation after having read a few books on the subject.

[Anonymous No.7294372]

>>7294218
not now. other apes have no reason to communicate through sign language or any other more complicated language than just grunting and screaming for basic necessities and concepts. they dont have the desire for knowledge that we do.

[Anonymous No.7294377]

>>7294372
The problem with gorillas learning complex things is that they don't need to. A chimp learns how to use tools to get termites from a hill, but a gorilla can just headbutt the hill and destroy it, then scoop out the mites with his hand. A chimp may need to throw rocks or work as a team to take out a threat, but a gorilla can take on anything alone and with no tactics.

[Anonymous No.7294400]

>>7294377
Unrelated: chimps are using spears in the Serengeti.

That is all.

[Anonymous No.7294432]

>>7294232

It kind of has, chimps who are taught to sign often teach other chimps. Those chimps are also in captivity, but there's no obvious reason why a signing chimp released into the wild wouldn't teach a few signs to others. Chimps DO have culture, after all.

[Anonymous No.7294440]

>>7294400
There's nothing that special about hunting. There's nothing that special about tool creation and use. But put them together and people get all excited for some reason.

[Anonymous No.7294448]

>>7294440
>There's nothing that special about tool creation and use
Tool creation is one of the key factors in the development of modern society, and in the establishing of H. sapiens sapiens as the apex predator.

We'd probably be dead, or we would have progressed far less, without tool creation and use.

[Anonymous No.7294452]

No cuz mankeys r stoopid

[Anonymous No.7294454]

>>7294448
Tool creation and use is essential, but what I meant is it's not special to our evolution. So many animals exhibit basic tool techniques. Tool use cannot be considered alone as the reason we evolved to be so intelligent.
Giant list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool_use_by_animals

[Anonymous No.7294458]

>>7294454
>the reason we evolved to be so intelligent
Yeah, but try to tell these Fedoras about god

[Anonymous No.7294471]

>>7294454
But the chimps intentionally sharpening sticks to use as spears is a cut above the rest. They're actively creating and modifying objects to suit their needs.

[Anonymous No.7294485]

>>7294471
Tool manufacture is pretty rare, yeah. That article only mentions crows and elephants as significantly altering things outside of the primate category. And it's all altering sticks anyway. Biting a stick sharp is a bit above stripping a stick down I guess.

[Anonymous No.7294563]

No, because it takes a higher level of intelligence to teach the language than it does to learn it, and they don't possess that level of intelligence.

[Anonymous No.7294587]

>>7294563
Why stratify types of intelligence as higher and lower? That's an archaic way of thinking about intelligence.
>>7294218
Apes are excellent observational learners, but they rarely exhibit active teaching. Potato-washing by Japanese macaques is a great example of cultural transmission, but the first monkey to do so didn't go around showing the other monkeys. Language transmission isn't so easy, and probably needs to be actively taught.

[Anonymous No.7294592]

>>7294293
How much time have you spent training non-human apes?

[Anonymous No.7294615]

>>7294592
That's a good point. A lot of the "intelligence" we attribute to dogs is just that they're eager to please and cooperative. I still think training to use sign language is doable though.

[Anonymous No.7294640]

>>7294615
But where exactly is the line between "A trick" and "communication" drawn? If chimps know how to sign "I be back in 3 days" is it a trick or communication? If all the other apes know that Bongo will be back in 3 days, does it really matter? He's doing something, and they can understand and react accordingly. It might not be language, but then they ARE gorillas.

[Anonymous No.7294668]

>>7294640
For some reason, people tend to think that language is a magical fairy-tail force that only humans can use, and that if anything that's not a human communicates then it's not really communication, because it's not a human.

Same shit always happens with the Chinese Room thought experiment. People just have this dogmatic faith that only humans can communicate, and they use that as the basis of their circular logic to say that when an animal communicates it's not REALLY language, it's just a "trick"

[Anonymous No.7294675]

>>7294299
If you want to be reductionist like that everything that everybody does is essentially a trick.

[Anonymous No.7294758]

>>7294218
it already has

[Anonymous No.7296374]

bump