animals that have evolved consciousness

OK.

[soapbox]
"Also like humans, apes have a marked faculty for language. (This, of course, is intertwined with their powers of reason.) Their vocabulary is enormous, their grammar complex, and their conversations deep and meaningful. "

I'm afraid this assertion simply isn't true. Their vocabulary is not enormous, it is limited to a small number of phrases, that signify, among other things, quality of food, presence of predators, etc. Grammar among apes is not complex, but quite limited, in the sense that their language is not generative. Human language is generative, in that we can create new utterances almost at will, using a) our vocabulary, and b) the rules of grammar. Apes simply don't have the sophisticated grammar required to make their language generative. Human language is constantly evolving (thing slang, neologisms, etc.), and there is _zero_ evidence that apes have this capacity. Human language is structured at multiple levels, meaning it can be analysed in terms of phonemes (smallest sound unit), morphemes (smallest meaning unit), words, sentences and discourse. Ape language lacks this property.

Many attempts have been made over the years to teach apes human language, and whilst some have been able to grasp a rudimentary vocabulary (approx. 60 words) and grammar, this fades to vanishing compared to the abilities of a two-year old child, who has more words and knows more grammar, yet has a brain that is almost completely immature.

Second:

There are many cases where brain-damage and congenital abnormalities have left individuals with almost no impairment. This absolutely does not mean that we don't need or use parts of our brains. In cases of brain damage, often undamaged parts modify to take charge of tasks previously done by the damaged brain tissue (e.g., regaining language, or use of an arm). In cases of congenital developmental differences, often the brain will make do with what it has, and simply develop in such a way that the rest of the brain takes on the functions of the missing parts of the brain; if the woman lost half of her brain due to trauma in adulthood, she most certainly would be seriously impaired.

Third:

brain size does not correlate with intelligence. The complexity of folds (gyri and sulci) within the brain is what enables more processing power to fit inside the head, as it increases the (3d) surface area available for connections between neurons. Whales have brains many times larger than those of humans, and are demonstrably not as smart (at least not in ways you or I would consider smart).

[/soapbox]

Originally posted by kyngj
OK.

[soapbox]
"Also like humans, apes have a marked faculty for language. (This, of course, is intertwined with their powers of reason.) Their vocabulary is enormous, their grammar complex, and their conversations deep and meaningful. "

I'm afraid this assertion simply isn't true. Their vocabulary is not enormous, it is limited to a small number of phra ...[text shortened]... onstrably not as smart (at least not in ways you or I would consider smart).

[/soapbox]

…Apes simply don't have the sophisticated grammar required to make their language generative.
….

I vaguely remember seeing a documentary about apes that were taught to do sign language that suggested otherwise: -they could understand simple rules of syntax and produce new sentences that they never produced before (and which they were not simply given by somebody else) by string words together to make a sentence that had correct syntax and semantically made sense.
Their ability to do this is obviously doesn’t match ours but, never a less, they can clearly do this.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i did not author the above, i merely copied and pasted it, to show a number of things, namely the type of dogmatic and unsubstantiated assertions that are associated with the evolutionary hypothesis, and secondly that humans are unique, you can take from that what you want.

If I copy and paste a sourse from a nazistic site, I would certainly be critisized. Can I say, that "I don't have any reponsibility, (your very words) "i merely copiedand pasted it". So you don' think you have *any* responsibility? Of course you have. Don't play 'hide', because we can always find you.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
[b]…Apes simply don't have the sophisticated grammar required to make their language generative.
….

I vaguely remember seeing a documentary about apes that were taught to do sign language that suggested otherwise: -they could understand simple rules of syntax and produce new sentences that they never produced before (and which they were not ...[text shortened]... ability to do this is obviously doesn’t match ours but, never a less, they can clearly do this.[/b]

Hi Andrew,

please take a look at the following regarding Nim Chimpsky and experiments to teach apes sign language...you'll see that claims regarding their abilities to produce language are rather strong based on the data:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nim_Chimpsky

Originally posted by kyngj
Hi Andrew,

please take a look at the following regarding Nim Chimpsky and experiments to teach apes sign language...you'll see that claims regarding their abilities to produce language are rather strong based on the data:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nim_Chimpsky

I also once saw on TV about a parrot that was taught to verbally describe the number and colour and type of objects it saw (for a reward).
For example, if it was shown four red apples it would say “four red apples” and, although it may be argued that it is unimpressive for it to be taught what “four” is and what “red” is and what “apple” is, the fact would remained that it had never specifically been taught to recognise “four red apples” so it clearly had to learn some GENERALLY applied syntax rules; -not bad for a brain the size of a small walnut!
-so I would be surprised if no ape (which have far bigger brains) couldn’t learn a few simple general rules of syntax.