Specializations > Psycholinguistics

Animal interaction/communication

<< < (4/4)


--- Quote from: zaba on October 29, 2014, 10:03:48 AM ---
--- Quote ---Since we hardly understand animal communication as it is, it's very difficult to try and categorise different animals by their capability for communication and language, and even as complex as we might think of our human communication, I would dare say that it would be very arrogant to think of our form and state of communication as superior or even more complex ... we simply don't know yet.
--- End quote ---

Yes, that's my point. It's hard to say which beings have more or less communicative abilities than others. It seems premature and arrogant to posit a continuum, like those medieval chains of being: God-angel-man-mammal-amphibian-fish-insect-plant. Simplistic and anti intellectual. Do bats have more communicative abilities with sonar than ants with pheromones? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
--- End quote ---

What? No, no, it would be premature to explicitly and absolutely categorise animals along the continuum with any certainty, but not to speculate, based on observation, that capabiltiy for communication (possibly) follows a continuum.

Where us humans end up on that continuum, and where other animals end up on it relative to us, is difficult to say; but that does not rule out the speculation that the capability is (possibly) a smooth gradient and not an abrupt event.

Pramod Kumar Agrawal:
In my view, animals are psychological entities and communicate only for their biological and psychological need and purposes.
Pramod Kumar Agrawal


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version