From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!nuscc!hilbert!smoliar Tue Nov 19 11:09:24 EST 1991
Article 1240 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!nuscc!hilbert!smoliar
>From: smoliar@hilbert.iss.nus.sg (stephen smoliar)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Animal Intelligence vs Human Intelligence
Message-ID: <1991Nov8.123437.27285@nuscc.nus.sg>
Date: 8 Nov 91 12:34:37 GMT
References: <1991Oct24.234823.7560@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com> <37443@shamash.cdc.com> <1991Nov6.224055.8763@sun!kla>
Sender: usenet@nuscc.nus.sg
Organization: Institute of Systems Science, NUS, Singapore
Lines: 43

In article <1991Nov6.224055.8763@sun!kla> kla!zardoz@sun.com (Phillip Wayne)
writes:
>In article <37443@shamash.cdc.com> map@svl.cdc.com writes:
>>
>>Upon analyzing the videos, it was discovered that a large majority of
>>the signs that Nim gave were revealed to him (unknowingly) by the
>>humans, fractions of a second before he signed.  Tares (who prior to
>>the experiment thought apes had language) concluded that Nim was
>>using signs as a perceptual-level mechanism to get what he wanted -
>>no different in principle from a dog shaking hands for a treat.  
>
>Excuse me? In a fraction of a second I make a sign, and Nim hands it `
>back to me? Cute. How do I sign that fast?
>
It is really very simple.  There is more to body language than the motor
primitives of the sign language.  (Before you stick your neck out too far
on the matter of what can and cannot be communicated through body language,
I suggest you take a look at some good source material, such as some of the
essays in Ray Birdwhistell's KINESICS AND CONTEXT.)  Tares' explanation makes
perfect sense to anyone who has studied body language.

>>Tares further concluded that Nim had no understanding whatsoever of the
>>meaning of the signs he used without prompting - he merely associated 
>>one perceptual level thing (a sign) with another (e.g., apple, bird).
>>In short, all Nim needed to do what he did was a functioning sensory 
>>apparatus, memory, and the ability to associate one object with another -
>>nothing even remotely close to a conceptual faculty was required.
>
>That is a basic definition of language. Associating one set of signs
>for a perception. I hope you never meet an AmeSLan signer. You 
>will probably never believe that they are actually intelligent.
>
I hope YOU never meet Oliver Sacks.  Since I am already risking sounding too
pedantic, I might as well also refer you to SEEING VOICES.  The bottom line
is that you are selling both language and ASL far too short.  There is a vast
complex of relationships among language, thought, and behavior;  and it is very
easy to get lost in that complex.  I think Tares report deserves far more
consideration than you are willing to give it.
-- 
Stephen W. Smoliar; Institute of Systems Science
National University of Singapore; Heng Mui Keng Terrace
Kent Ridge, SINGAPORE 0511
Internet:  smoliar@iss.nus.sg


