4 ms·

Furthermore, as Isbell points out, of all the species, only humans point declaratively, and we are much better at following the pointing of others to our visual

Furthermore, as Isbell points out, of all the species, only humans point declaratively, and we are much better at following the pointing of others to our visual periphery than to our visual center, and while looking down rather than up. “What was it outside central vision and in the lower visual field that was so urgent for our ancestors to see that it caused neurological changes to enable us to turn automatically in the direction of a gaze and a pointing finger?” Isbell asks. Her answer: snakes. “I cannot think of any other object in the lower visual field that would have been more difficult to see and more unforgiving if missed. The relationship between declarative pointing and the evolution of language is so strong, neurological and cognitive studies find, that the two are, to a degree, interchangeable. And so, Isbell avers, Genesis has it right: the snake made us human.” I disagree with the assertion that only humans point declaratively. Other methods of "pointing" could include a variety of behaviors apparent in the animal kingdom: perked ears (cats), nose / "catching the scent" (dogs / esp. bloodhounds), flickering tongue (snake). [edit] message for the downmodder: wtf?

dazzawazza 17y ago
A cat pricks it's ears to increase fidelity of it's hearing, dogs point with their nose as a learned trait they don't do it in the wild and a snakes 'sees' with it's tongue as it picks up scent trails. None of these behaviours are naturally evolved communication methods, two are evolved traits that better adapt the animal to it's environment and the other is a learned behaviour. If creationism ever compliments evolution it is purely by accident.
- indiejade 17y ago
  A cat pricks it's ears to increase fidelity of it's hearing, dogs point with their nose as a learned trait they don't do it in the wild. None of these behaviours are naturally evolved communication methods This is pure speculation. Who is to say that learned traits can or cannot evolve naturally, over time? Besides, your use of "it's" is wrong. An underlying assumption of the statement "pointing declaratively" is that there's some one or some thing to be declarative to (as in an audience, or partner, or fellow pack member). I liked the article, but it did go about assuming that humans are the only creatures who know how to be declarative. We're probably more verbally declarative than any other species, but I highly doubt we're the only "declarative" species out there.

dazzawazza 17y ago

A cat pricks it's ears to increase fidelity of it's hearing, dogs point with their nose as a learned trait they don't do it in the wild and a snakes 'sees' with it's tongue as it picks up scent trails. None of these behaviours are naturally evolved communication methods, two are evolved traits that better adapt the animal to it's environment and the other is a learned behaviour. If creationism ever compliments evolution it is purely by accident.

indiejade 17y ago
A cat pricks it's ears to increase fidelity of it's hearing, dogs point with their nose as a learned trait they don't do it in the wild. None of these behaviours are naturally evolved communication methods This is pure speculation. Who is to say that learned traits can or cannot evolve naturally, over time? Besides, your use of "it's" is wrong. An underlying assumption of the statement "pointing declaratively" is that there's some one or some thing to be declarative to (as in an audience, or partner, or fellow pack member). I liked the article, but it did go about assuming that humans are the only creatures who know how to be declarative. We're probably more verbally declarative than any other species, but I highly doubt we're the only "declarative" species out there.