4 ms·

I saw a meme that I think about fairly often: Great apes have learnt sign language, and communicated with humans, since the 1960's. In all that time they've nev

I saw a meme that I think about fairly often: Great apes have learnt sign language, and communicated with humans, since the 1960's. In all that time they've never asked human questions. They've never tried to learn anything new! The theory is that they don't know that there are entities that know things they don't. I like to think that AI are the great apes of the digital world.

20k 11mo ago
Its worth noting that the idea that great apes have learnt sign language is largely a fabrication by a single person, and nobody has ever been able to replicate this. All the communication has to be interpreted through that individual, and anyone else (including people that speak sign language) have confirmed that they're just making random hand motions in exchange for food They don't have the dexterity to really sign properly
- krapht 11mo ago
  Citation needed.
  - joncrocks 11mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_language#Criticism_and_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_language#Criticism_a... - Not word for word, but certainly casting doubt that apes were ever really communicating in the way that people may have thought.
    - mkl 11mo ago
      That article does completely refute 20k's claim that it was all done by one person though.
    - MangoToupe 11mo ago
      The way linguists define communication via language? Sure. Let's not drag the rest of humanity into this presumption.
  - conception 11mo ago
    Searching for koko ape fraud seems to produce a lot.
    - ralfd 11mo ago
      > In his lecture, Sapolsky alleges that Patterson spontaneously corrects Koko’s signs: “She would ask, ‘Koko, what do you call this thing?’ and [Koko] would come up with a completely wrong sign, and Patterson would say, ‘Oh, stop kidding around!’ And then Patterson would show her the next one, and Koko would get it wrong, and Patterson would say, ‘Oh, you funny gorilla.’ ” More weirdly was this lawsuit against Patterson: > The lawsuit alleged that in response to signing from Koko, Patterson pressured Keller and Alperin (two of the female staff) to flash the ape. "Oh, yes, Koko, Nancy has nipples. Nancy can show you her nipples," Patterson reportedly said on one occasion. And on another: "Koko, you see my nipples all the time. You are probably bored with my nipples. You need to see new nipples. I will turn my back so Kendra can show you her nipples."[47] Shortly thereafter, a third woman filed suit, alleging that upon being first introduced to Koko, Patterson told her that Koko was communicating that she wanted to see the woman's nipples There was a bonobo named Kanzi who learned hundreds of lexigrams. The main criticism here seems to be that while Kanzi truly did know the symbol for “Strawberry” he “used the symbol for “strawberry” as the name for the object, as a request to go where the strawberries are, as a request to eat some strawberries”. So no object-verb sentences and so no grammar which means no true language according to linguists. https://linguisticdiscovery.com/posts/kanzi/ https://linguisticdiscovery.com/posts/kanzi/
      - galaxyLogic 11mo ago
        > So no object-verb sentences and so no grammar which means no true language Great distinction. The stuff about showing nipples sounds creepy.
  - pegasus 11mo ago
    You only need a citation for the idea that apes aren't able to speak sign language?
    - acdha 11mo ago
      They claimed fraud by a single person, with zero replication. That’s both testable so they should be able to support it. At the very least, more than one researcher was involved and more than one ape was alleged to have learned ASL. There is a better discussion about what our threshold is for speech, along with our threshold for saying that research is fraud vs. mistaken, but we don’t fix sloppiness by engaging in more of it.
      - galaxyLogic 11mo ago
        SO why wasn't the research continued further if results were good? My assumption is it was because of the - Fear of the Planet of Apes!
- rightbyte 11mo ago
  I mean dogs can learn a simple sign language?
  - leptons 11mo ago
    Can the dogs sign back? Even dogs that learn to press buttons are mostly just pressing them to get treats. They don't ask questions, and it's not really a conversation.
    - rightbyte 11mo ago
      They can like barf as part of a trick and do "thing we are searching for is in that direction" etc but not very abstract communications.
BOOSTERHIDROGEN 11mo ago
Does that means intelligent is soul? Then we will never achieve AGI.
MangoToupe 11mo ago
> The theory is that they don't know that there are entities that know things they don't. This seems like a rather awkward way of putting it. They may just lack conceptualization or abstraction, making the above statement meaningless.
- sodality2 11mo ago
  The exact title of the capacity is 'theory of mind' - for example, chimpanzees have a limited capacity for it in that they can understand others' intentions, but they seemingly do not understand false beliefs (this is what GP mentioned). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.010
  - MangoToupe 11mo ago
    Theory of mind is a distinct concept that isn't necessary to explain this behavior. Of course, it may follow naturally, but it strikes me as ham-fisted projection of our own cognition onto others. Ironically, a rather greedy theory of mind!
    - galaxyLogic 11mo ago
      If apes started communicating mongs themselves with sign-language they learned from humans that would measn they would get more practice using it and they could evolve it over aeons. Hey, isn't that what actually happened?

20k 11mo ago

Its worth noting that the idea that great apes have learnt sign language is largely a fabrication by a single person, and nobody has ever been able to replicate this. All the communication has to be interpreted through that individual, and anyone else (including people that speak sign language) have confirmed that they're just making random hand motions in exchange for food They don't have the dexterity to really sign properly

krapht 11mo ago
Citation needed.
- joncrocks 11mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_language#Criticism_and_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_language#Criticism_a... - Not word for word, but certainly casting doubt that apes were ever really communicating in the way that people may have thought.
  - mkl 11mo ago
    That article does completely refute 20k's claim that it was all done by one person though.
  - MangoToupe 11mo ago
    The way linguists define communication via language? Sure. Let's not drag the rest of humanity into this presumption.
- conception 11mo ago
  Searching for koko ape fraud seems to produce a lot.
  - ralfd 11mo ago
    > In his lecture, Sapolsky alleges that Patterson spontaneously corrects Koko’s signs: “She would ask, ‘Koko, what do you call this thing?’ and [Koko] would come up with a completely wrong sign, and Patterson would say, ‘Oh, stop kidding around!’ And then Patterson would show her the next one, and Koko would get it wrong, and Patterson would say, ‘Oh, you funny gorilla.’ ” More weirdly was this lawsuit against Patterson: > The lawsuit alleged that in response to signing from Koko, Patterson pressured Keller and Alperin (two of the female staff) to flash the ape. "Oh, yes, Koko, Nancy has nipples. Nancy can show you her nipples," Patterson reportedly said on one occasion. And on another: "Koko, you see my nipples all the time. You are probably bored with my nipples. You need to see new nipples. I will turn my back so Kendra can show you her nipples."[47] Shortly thereafter, a third woman filed suit, alleging that upon being first introduced to Koko, Patterson told her that Koko was communicating that she wanted to see the woman's nipples There was a bonobo named Kanzi who learned hundreds of lexigrams. The main criticism here seems to be that while Kanzi truly did know the symbol for “Strawberry” he “used the symbol for “strawberry” as the name for the object, as a request to go where the strawberries are, as a request to eat some strawberries”. So no object-verb sentences and so no grammar which means no true language according to linguists. https://linguisticdiscovery.com/posts/kanzi/ https://linguisticdiscovery.com/posts/kanzi/
    - galaxyLogic 11mo ago
      > So no object-verb sentences and so no grammar which means no true language Great distinction. The stuff about showing nipples sounds creepy.
- pegasus 11mo ago
  You only need a citation for the idea that apes aren't able to speak sign language?
  - acdha 11mo ago
    They claimed fraud by a single person, with zero replication. That’s both testable so they should be able to support it. At the very least, more than one researcher was involved and more than one ape was alleged to have learned ASL. There is a better discussion about what our threshold is for speech, along with our threshold for saying that research is fraud vs. mistaken, but we don’t fix sloppiness by engaging in more of it.
    - galaxyLogic 11mo ago
      SO why wasn't the research continued further if results were good? My assumption is it was because of the - Fear of the Planet of Apes!
rightbyte 11mo ago
I mean dogs can learn a simple sign language?
- leptons 11mo ago
  Can the dogs sign back? Even dogs that learn to press buttons are mostly just pressing them to get treats. They don't ask questions, and it's not really a conversation.
  - rightbyte 11mo ago
    They can like barf as part of a trick and do "thing we are searching for is in that direction" etc but not very abstract communications.

BOOSTERHIDROGEN 11mo ago

Does that means intelligent is soul? Then we will never achieve AGI.

MangoToupe 11mo ago

> The theory is that they don't know that there are entities that know things they don't. This seems like a rather awkward way of putting it. They may just lack conceptualization or abstraction, making the above statement meaningless.

sodality2 11mo ago
The exact title of the capacity is 'theory of mind' - for example, chimpanzees have a limited capacity for it in that they can understand others' intentions, but they seemingly do not understand false beliefs (this is what GP mentioned). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.010
- MangoToupe 11mo ago
  Theory of mind is a distinct concept that isn't necessary to explain this behavior. Of course, it may follow naturally, but it strikes me as ham-fisted projection of our own cognition onto others. Ironically, a rather greedy theory of mind!
  - galaxyLogic 11mo ago
    If apes started communicating mongs themselves with sign-language they learned from humans that would measn they would get more practice using it and they could evolve it over aeons. Hey, isn't that what actually happened?