Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,809 Year: 3,066/9,624 Month: 911/1,588 Week: 94/223 Day: 5/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Science and Speech in Determining "Human" Kind
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1 of 268 (423454)
09-22-2007 11:03 AM


For forum "Is It Science"
In many messages IamJoseph asserts that speech is a marker of the "human" kind. A typical post is
Message 177
The other error is in darwin's specie categorising, whereby he fails to acknowledge that humans are different from all other life forms, not by skeletal and biological dna imprints which are common to all life - but via 'SPEECH'. Speech is not a result of evolutionary processes, and we cannot expect dogs and zebras to talk in the next million years - they have not attained this attribute after many millions of years of apparent evolution, and this fact stands as a powerful opposer of ToE. Not factored by Darwin. In the big picture, the correct differentials must first be made on the hovering, transcendent variations between life forms, namely as GROUND ROOT BASED [VEGETATION], WATER BASED [FISH], AIR BORNE [FOWL], LAND BASED [ANIMALS/MAMMALS] - AND SPEECH ENDOWED LIFE FORMS.
The question is how do we ascertain this "speech endowed" characteristic using science.
sci·ence -noun 1. a. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
- b. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
- c. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.
2. Methodological activity, discipline, or study: I've got packing a suitcase down to a science.
3. An activity that appears to require study and method: the science of purchasing.
4. Knowledge, especially that gained through experience.
5. Science Christian Science.
We refer to definition (1). It involves experimentation and testing.
Now to determine whether this "speech endowed" characteristic appears in other animals we need a definition of what we mean by "SPEECH" that we can agree on.
speech -noun 1 . the faculty or power of speaking; oral communication; ability to express one's thoughts and emotions by speech sounds and gesture: Losing her speech made her feel isolated from humanity.
2 . the act of speaking: He expresses himself better in speech than in writing.
3 . something that is spoken; an utterance, remark, or declaration: We waited for some speech that would indicate her true feelings.
4 . a form of communication in spoken language, made by a speaker before an audience for a given purpose: a fiery speech.
5 . any single utterance of an actor in the course of a play, motion picture, etc.
6 . the form of utterance characteristic of a particular people or region; a language or dialect.
7 . manner of speaking, as of a person: Your slovenly speech is holding back your career.
8 . a field of study devoted to the theory and practice of oral communication.
9 . Archaic. rumor.
”Synonyms 1. parlance, parley, conversation, communication. Speech, language refer to the means of communication used by people. Speech is the expression of ideas and thoughts by means of articulate vocal sounds, or the faculty of thus expressing ideas and thoughts. Language is a set of conventional signs, not necessarily articulate or even vocal (any set of signs, signals, or symbols that convey meaning, including written words, may be called language): a spoken language. Thus, language is the set of conventions, and speech is the action of putting these to use: He couldn't understand the speech of the natives because it was in a foreign language.
I think we can agree that definition (1) is the appropriate definition, and that this corresponds with the "Speech is the expression of ideas and thoughts by means of articulate vocal sounds, or the faculty of thus expressing ideas and thoughts" under synonyms. Thus a member of the "speech endowed" kind of organisms would have the "ability to express one's thoughts and emotions by speech sounds and gesture."
We can look at many many scientific studies of communication for these characteristics, where they have been studied in experiments and tested to make sure that what we are seeing is communication from the object of the study rather than a trained response to stimulii.
Now look at the communication of ideas, thoughts and emotions in the following video:
Pay particular attention to the spontaneous things Alex says that is not part of the testing for comprehension.
Please explain how this cannot be considered "speech endowed" by the above definitions.
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 09-22-2007 11:23 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 6 by Rrhain, posted 09-22-2007 9:01 PM RAZD has not replied
 Message 86 by Jon, posted 09-28-2007 2:19 AM RAZD has replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 268 (423458)
09-22-2007 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
09-22-2007 11:03 AM


Where to put it?
You pick.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 09-22-2007 11:03 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by RAZD, posted 09-22-2007 11:32 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 3 of 268 (423462)
09-22-2007 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminNosy
09-22-2007 11:23 AM


Re: Where to put it?
Is It Science?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 09-22-2007 11:23 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 4 of 268 (423475)
09-22-2007 1:31 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 268 (423531)
09-22-2007 6:17 PM


Ruby the fowl-mouthed parrot
Ruby is the same kind of Parrot as the one you presented, and she is even able to mimic accents-- British in this instance.
Of course, she was taught to curse incessantly, which, I have to admit, had me rolling in laughter.
The greater point is how remarkable these birds are.
http://www.poetv.com/video.php?vid=15897

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by IamJoseph, posted 09-22-2007 11:06 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 6 of 268 (423551)
09-22-2007 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
09-22-2007 11:03 AM


Let us not forget that dolphins have names for themselves and each other. The idea that only humans have speech simply isn't true.
Too, one of the things, at least in primates, that helped us to develop speech is our physical body: Our upright posture changed the way our respiratory system functions. Our diaphragms have glottal arrangements afford us an easier time.
Chimpanzees laugh, for example, but because of their stooped over position, they can't do what humans do which is laugh in a continuous stream of air. Instead, each "ha" is its own breath.
Note, this doesn't mean that language is somehow contained in the respiratory system. Instead, it means that with the change in our respiratory system, our ability to use language changed dramatically.
So yes, there is a connection between physiology and language.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 09-22-2007 11:03 AM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by IamJoseph, posted 09-22-2007 11:04 PM Rrhain has replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 7 of 268 (423566)
09-22-2007 10:52 PM


IS 'WHAT?!' SCIENCE?!
HAWKING VISITS THE HOLY LAND - AND I SEE A Scientific 'OOPS'!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'GD REALLY DOES PLAY DICE'
'BLACK HOLES ARE OUT OF SIGHT'
'THE JOY OF A SCIENTIST'S EUREKA CANNOT BE COMPARED TO SEX - BUT IT LASTS LONGER'
World-renown astrophysicist Stephen Hawking concluded a weeklong tour of Israel on Friday. The high point of the visit was not his meeting with dignitaries or academics, but rather his lecture and meeting with young scientists, who were deeply inspired by his writings and struggle with Lou Gehrig's Disease (ALS).
Video: INFOLIVE.TV - La tlvision en direct de Jrusalem 24h/24 - Htels Moscou
# This would-be atheist Icon came to fame with his mathematical proof of time being finite [BHT]. But he seems to have missed the first opening verse of Genesis, the document he is most famous for countering, and which first declared the same conclusion of the universe itself being finite - along with all its components - 3,500 years before Hawkings emerged:
'IN THE BEGINNING'
That, Meastro Hawkings, says there was a beginning - namely its ALL finite. Was that an OOPS or what? - how can something not be infinite when its whole is finite - do the maths!

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Rrhain, posted 09-22-2007 11:27 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 8 of 268 (423567)
09-22-2007 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Rrhain
09-22-2007 9:01 PM


quote:
Let us not forget that dolphins have names for themselves and each other.
Better, let's not forget that dolphins who have names - do NOT have speech. It makes the point more pointed that speech is not a result of the mind or any body organs, and by subsequence, it is not a result of ADAPTATION.
quote:
The idea that only humans have speech simply isn't true.
Single cell amoebas also recognise their offspring - as do lions from a particular growl from their offsrping. Its simply true that Darwin was in error - Genesis was correct here. A sceintific view is derived when one must see the disdained truth and drop the paranoia - by dropping the denial. I too once tried, but found Genesis has a difinitive, challenging case unlike anything else - scientifically too. It is one reason no scientist or forum debaters negate it conclusively today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Rrhain, posted 09-22-2007 9:01 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Rrhain, posted 09-22-2007 11:23 PM IamJoseph has not replied
 Message 217 by bernerbits, posted 10-10-2007 4:48 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 9 of 268 (423568)
09-22-2007 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Hyroglyphx
09-22-2007 6:17 PM


Re: Ruby the fowl-mouthed parrot
Does your PC have speech - seeing it can muster mimmickry better than parots?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Hyroglyphx, posted 09-22-2007 6:17 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by RAZD, posted 09-22-2007 11:25 PM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 29 by Hyroglyphx, posted 09-23-2007 12:59 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 10 of 268 (423570)
09-22-2007 11:11 PM


Q: Is It Science?
A: Yes. Science has not disproven Genesis' vindicated science speech is a unique factor with humans. This is of course a scientific issue for discussion, and dumping it anywhere else is a form of admission.

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by anglagard, posted 09-22-2007 11:56 PM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 218 by bernerbits, posted 10-10-2007 4:55 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 11 of 268 (423573)
09-22-2007 11:23 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by IamJoseph
09-22-2007 11:04 PM


IamJoseph responds to me:
quote:
Better, let's not forget that dolphins who have names - do NOT have speech.
Huh? You're not suggesting that they're using written communication, are you? Are they psychic? No, they're making sound. Sound that has specific meanings is speech. The fact that they're not using their tongues or larynxes doesn't mean it isn't speech.
quote:
It makes the point more pointed that speech is not a result of ... any body organs
Huh? What is speech if not vocal reverberations that impart meaning? How can one speak without using a body part?
quote:
Single cell amoebas also recognise their offspring
Huh? What does that have to do with anything? We're not talking about recognizing. We're talking about names. A name is a specific set of sounds that uniquely identify an individual. Dolphins name themselves. They introduce themselves to each other and the specific sequence of clicks and whistles is used to identify themselves.
quote:
Its simply true that Darwin was in error - Genesis was correct here.
Huh? Where did Darwin say anything about speech?
And where does Genesis say that only humans have speech?
Be specific. I want chapter and verse.
quote:
A sceintific view is derived when one must see the disdained truth and drop the paranoia - by dropping the denial.
Indeed, which is why science developed evolutionary theory and dropped Genesis.
That said, you still haven't responded to the basic issue: Humans aren't the only animals with speech. Dolphins speak, too.
Perhaps you could do us a favor and give us a definition of "speech" that explains why humans have it and dolphins don't.
Be sure not to include aspects of "mind" or "body" since, according to you, speech is not the result of such things.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by IamJoseph, posted 09-22-2007 11:04 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 12 of 268 (423576)
09-22-2007 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by IamJoseph
09-22-2007 11:06 PM


Let's get back to Alex
Does your PC have speech - seeing it can muster mimmickry better than parots?
Your PC would not make the comments that Alex made during the session -- the requests that had nothing to do with the tests, but everything to do with what he wanted. That was not mimicry. Try confronting the evidence rather than ignoring it.
He performed better than a 1 yr old child is generally capable of doing.
Your denial of evidence is not a refutation of it.
Message 10
Q: Is It Science?
A: Yes. Science has not disproven Genesis' vindicated science speech is a unique factor with humans. This is of course a scientific issue for discussion, and dumping it anywhere else is a form of admission.
This does not deal with the issue of speech used by Alex in the video in Message 1, all it does is repeat your personal assertion in denial of evidence to the contrary. Denial is not a refutation of evidence it is:
de·lu·sion -noun1. an act or instance of deluding.
2. the state of being deluded.
3. a false belief or opinion: delusions of grandeur.
4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact: a paranoid delusion.
According to the definition of speech the various communications used by Alex qualify. You need to show how you can include humans and exclude Alex in your assessment.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : msg 10

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by IamJoseph, posted 09-22-2007 11:06 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Rrhain, posted 09-22-2007 11:42 PM RAZD has not replied
 Message 16 by IamJoseph, posted 09-23-2007 12:09 AM RAZD has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 13 of 268 (423577)
09-22-2007 11:27 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by IamJoseph
09-22-2007 10:52 PM


Re: IS 'WHAT?!' SCIENCE?!
IamJoseph writes:
quote:
That, Meastro Hawkings, says there was a beginning - namely its ALL finite. Was that an OOPS or what? - how can something not be infinite when its whole is finite - do the maths!
Physician, heal thyself! I highly suggest you look up the distinction between "infinite" and "unbounded." It seems you haven't paid attention to what Hawking actually said.
Help us out: What is Hawking's actual quote? Be specific.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by IamJoseph, posted 09-22-2007 10:52 PM IamJoseph has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 14 of 268 (423581)
09-22-2007 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by RAZD
09-22-2007 11:25 PM


Re: Let's get back to Alex
RAZD writes:
quote:
Your PC would not make the comments that Alex made during the session -- the requests that had nothing to do with the tests, but everything to do with what he wanted. That was not mimicry. Try confronting the evidence rather than ignoring it.
Now, now, let's not make the same mistake IamJoseph is making. Specifically, he is confusing "speech" with "language." The two are not the same. Writing is not speech, yet both writing and speech use langauge.
It would seem that IamJoseph is really trying to say that only humans have language. And yet, because we have seen that other animals have speech, that necessarily means they have language. Oh, I heartily agree that their use of language is not nearly as sophisticated as ours, but that's a difference of degree, not kind. A child's use of langauge is not nearly as sophisticated as an adult's, but we wouldn't say the child is incapable of language.
Along those lines, there appears to be a window of time wherein if a child is not taught language, he'll never be able to learn it. It appears that the ability to grasp the technicalities of language is a function of the development of the brain.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by RAZD, posted 09-22-2007 11:25 PM RAZD has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 15 of 268 (423587)
09-22-2007 11:56 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by IamJoseph
09-22-2007 11:11 PM


IAJ writes:
Science has not disproven Genesis' vindicated science speech is a unique factor with humans. This is of course a scientific issue for discussion, and dumping it anywhere else is a form of admission.
I am curious about your use of the term 'speech' to connote uniquely 'human.' Personally, since one of the colleges I work for is for the deaf, and since my interaction with the deaf indicates that not only are they every bit equal to the hearing in all human tasks not involving sound, but are also equal to all humans in intelligence on average, shouldn't you broaden your assertions and vocabulary enough to include them?

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by IamJoseph, posted 09-22-2007 11:11 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by IamJoseph, posted 09-23-2007 12:31 AM anglagard has not replied
 Message 267 by IamJoseph, posted 11-03-2007 9:28 AM anglagard has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024