4 ms·

> Before language was invented the only way information could be passed down from ancestors to offspring was via mutations in our DNA. Language (in the sense o

> Before language was invented the only way information could be passed down from ancestors to offspring was via mutations in our DNA. Language (in the sense of "use of language appears around 100,000 years ago") is not the only way to communicate information, and many animal species are perfectly capable of communicating information despite not having evolved what is being called "language" in this sense.

yogthos 3mo ago
The difference is that we are able to accumulate information across generations to grow our collective knowledge. Other animals are not able to do that at scale. So, while you are correct that other animal communicate and even teach each other, it's a qualitatively different situation from human communication.
- randomImmigrant 3mo ago
  We really don’t know this for certain at all. We do know crows can communicate information about the face of a person they dislike to their murder, including to new generations. It seems a bit of a stretch to say their cultural transmission is quite that narrow. In general, pre-writing human oral culture seems to have dynamics much in common with such abilities in other animals. Barring error correction mechanisms, oral knowledge can degrade in transmission, limiting its reach and success. This isn’t to say human language doesn’t have its distinctive features that are very useful. But the language came from a different brain, and is suited to the particularity of our brains. We should hesitate to place solely on language something that’s also driven by us having more things to say.
  - yogthos 3mo ago
    We kind of do though since we don't see crows accumulating knowledge at any scale comparable to humans and using this knowledge to shape their environment in increasingly complex ways. And crows very obviously do make tools and even teach each other to do it, so it's not like they don't have the inclination for it. The language itself is a a human invention, and a product of how our brains are wired. However, there's a dialectical process here where the language shapes us in turn, and both our minds and our language evolve together. The reason we have more things to say stems from us accumulating knowledge and expanding out horizons through the use of our language.
    - tptacek 3mo ago
      They're not saying humans don't have profound communication advantages. Obviously the crows don't have nuclear generators and spacecraft. They're saying that the categorical claims about why humans have profound advantages aren't correct.
      - yogthos 3mo ago
        The fact that we are able to accumulate knowledge and apply it to shape our environment in a way that no other species is able to kind of does suggest that we have a profound communication advantage.
        tptacek 3mo ago
        Everybody here agrees that we do.
        yogthos 3mo ago
        Sorry, misread your comment. Again though, it seems pretty obvious that our ability to accumulate knowledge across generations by recording it through the use of language is a categorical advantage over other animals.
    - randomImmigrant 3mo ago
      But scale of knowledge acquisition is mediated by, at minimum, lifespan, and what knowledge there is to verbalize and pass on, no? It’s not like we got the language then built our hands based on the knowledge shared by another person with hands. Instead, these co-evolved. Our language is shaped by that, and we shouldn’t give it too much causal power when it’s only a slice of the system. We are also very unclear on what birds can communicate. They’re social migratory species with 4 color vision and magnetoreception. Their sensory context is deeper and richer in some ways, and whatever communication they layer atop it will be shaped by that. What seems like squeaks and chirps can hold information that another bird, but not humans, can decode. We’re getting better at layering all this context and then interpreting bird song and sounds. But we’re at the beginning of this exercise, not a place where we can make a firm conclusion.

yogthos 3mo ago

The difference is that we are able to accumulate information across generations to grow our collective knowledge. Other animals are not able to do that at scale. So, while you are correct that other animal communicate and even teach each other, it's a qualitatively different situation from human communication.

randomImmigrant 3mo ago
We really don’t know this for certain at all. We do know crows can communicate information about the face of a person they dislike to their murder, including to new generations. It seems a bit of a stretch to say their cultural transmission is quite that narrow. In general, pre-writing human oral culture seems to have dynamics much in common with such abilities in other animals. Barring error correction mechanisms, oral knowledge can degrade in transmission, limiting its reach and success. This isn’t to say human language doesn’t have its distinctive features that are very useful. But the language came from a different brain, and is suited to the particularity of our brains. We should hesitate to place solely on language something that’s also driven by us having more things to say.
- yogthos 3mo ago
  We kind of do though since we don't see crows accumulating knowledge at any scale comparable to humans and using this knowledge to shape their environment in increasingly complex ways. And crows very obviously do make tools and even teach each other to do it, so it's not like they don't have the inclination for it. The language itself is a a human invention, and a product of how our brains are wired. However, there's a dialectical process here where the language shapes us in turn, and both our minds and our language evolve together. The reason we have more things to say stems from us accumulating knowledge and expanding out horizons through the use of our language.
  - tptacek 3mo ago
    They're not saying humans don't have profound communication advantages. Obviously the crows don't have nuclear generators and spacecraft. They're saying that the categorical claims about why humans have profound advantages aren't correct.
    - yogthos 3mo ago
      The fact that we are able to accumulate knowledge and apply it to shape our environment in a way that no other species is able to kind of does suggest that we have a profound communication advantage.
      - tptacek 3mo ago
        Everybody here agrees that we do.
        yogthos 3mo ago
        Sorry, misread your comment. Again though, it seems pretty obvious that our ability to accumulate knowledge across generations by recording it through the use of language is a categorical advantage over other animals.
  - randomImmigrant 3mo ago
    But scale of knowledge acquisition is mediated by, at minimum, lifespan, and what knowledge there is to verbalize and pass on, no? It’s not like we got the language then built our hands based on the knowledge shared by another person with hands. Instead, these co-evolved. Our language is shaped by that, and we shouldn’t give it too much causal power when it’s only a slice of the system. We are also very unclear on what birds can communicate. They’re social migratory species with 4 color vision and magnetoreception. Their sensory context is deeper and richer in some ways, and whatever communication they layer atop it will be shaped by that. What seems like squeaks and chirps can hold information that another bird, but not humans, can decode. We’re getting better at layering all this context and then interpreting bird song and sounds. But we’re at the beginning of this exercise, not a place where we can make a firm conclusion.