The chimp who thought he was a boy

[OP ED]

Y'know, FourB, you'd probably accomplish more in these discussions if there were less insults and more ideas in your posts. Just a thought.

I'm not out to "accomplish" anything.
This is who I am, how I talk.

If nomo were a stranger in a bar saying what he said, I'd be no different.

Oh okay. I thought you were participating in a discussion and trying to make reasonable points about issues relevant to all species on this planet.

My mistake if you're just amusing yourself. if you're not trying to accomplish anything, then i guess you aren't suprised when you do not.

please continue.

[FourthBase]

Also, as I understand it, quite a bit of the languages of specific Whale/Dolphin groups are being decoded. That it hasn't been finished yet tells you nothing regarding the ability of humans to do so.

We are relying on computers to do it. Yes, humans created computers. No, that is not relevant to this discussion. If a human were somehow able to live with dolphins for a year, he or she would not be able to understand or produce an iota of dolphin language without the help of a complex computer program.

Rather it merely suggests we have more pressing concerns in general than conversing with Dolphins.

Perhaps we shouldn't.

Step A: Converse with animals.
Step B: Worldwide meat consumption plummets.
Step C: The extra grain at the world's disposal feeds starving populations, the damage to the environment caused by sustaining a meat-based diet disappears, our karma skyrockets.

Even with the minimal effort being placed in these fields, understanding of these languages is only a matter of time. I don't see Whales placing the learning of our languages as a high priority either, so this is not particularly suprising that it is taking so long.

Come on.

[FourthBase]

Y'know, FourB, you'd probably accomplish more in these discussions if there were less insults and more ideas in your posts. Just a thought.

I'm not out to "accomplish" anything.
This is who I am, how I talk.

If nomo were a stranger in a bar saying what he said, I'd be no different.

Oh okay. I thought you were participating in a discussion and trying to make reasonable points about issues relevant to all species on this planet.

My mistake if you're just amusing yourself. if you're not trying to accomplish anything, then i guess you aren't suprised when you do not.

please continue.

I'm absolutely making reasonable points. If a little profanity and well-deserved hostility toward nomo prevents a person from reading and processing those reasonable points, then I would suggest growing a pair of figurative testicles.

[Penguin]

OP ED:
Rupert Sheldrake and others might disagree about animals not having any kind of collective coherence (sure we all do, but thats a lil woo yet :p )

Im getting at that we humans have discovered ways to use many things - but not the responsibility to balance that newfound processing power discovered / evolved / ?. We have the means to shape the planet, but not the wisdom to use it responsibly. No other species has that kind of influence - and pride themselves for that.

"Also, as I understand it, quite a bit of the languages of specific Whale/Dolphin groups are being decoded. That it hasn't been finished yet tells you nothing regarding the ability of humans to do so. Rather it merely suggests we have more pressing concerns in general than conversing with Dolphins. Even with the minimal effort being placed in these fields, understanding of these languages is only a matter of time." -OP ED

Mhhm, how many researcher groups are currently investigating this issue with sensory deprivation tanks and LSD? (not to say its the only valid means but I think the scope of the research may be a little confined in scope, as is the case with most brain chemistry research as well.)

[FourthBase]

#@&$*!!

On second thought, maybe animals do have a better command of language than some humans.

You done got owned, son. That's the downside to the personal tone, it gives a hack like you an excuse to avoid being accountable for the substantive garbage you've posted.

[OP ED]

Also, as I understand it, quite a bit of the languages of specific Whale/Dolphin groups are being decoded. That it hasn't been finished yet tells you nothing regarding the ability of humans to do so.

We are relying on computers to do it. Yes, humans created computers. No, that is not relevant to this discussion. If a human were somehow able to live with dolphins for a year, he or she would not be able to understand or produce an iota of dolphin language without the help of a complex computer program.

Rather it merely suggests we have more pressing concerns in general than conversing with Dolphins.

Perhaps we shouldn't.

Step A: Converse with animals.
Step B: Worldwide meat consumption plummets.
Step C: The extra grain at the world's disposal feeds starving populations, the damage to the environment caused by sustaining a meat-based diet disappears, our karma skyrockets.

Even with the minimal effort being placed in these fields, understanding of these languages is only a matter of time. I don't see Whales placing the learning of our languages as a high priority either, so this is not particularly suprising that it is taking so long.

Come on.

Of course, we are largely forced to rely on computers for this, as the ability to vocalize in the same manner as marine mammals is something we do not possess, this in tandem with our inability to hear much of their communication makes this the only real way to study the languages. Surely this hasn't escaped your notice.

As to your ideas about meat eating, there may be some validity to these points, although I've never personally eaten a Dolphin. I prefer fish, something the Dolphins have in common with me.

I'm absolutely making reasonable points. If a little profanity and well-deserved hostility toward nomo prevents a person from reading and processing those reasonable points, then I would suggest growing a pair of figurative testicles.

So be it. Your [yet again] insult aside, I believe there is a time and place for extreme sentence enhancement. Where I live "motherfucker" is a term of endearment, so don't take my comments as being indicative of my being personally offended. I was merely pointing out the tendency of these weighted terms, especially in the context of philosophical disagreement, to enable distraction from more relevant points. Also, not so much the language itself, as directing it towards others maliciously, to attack, is considered particularly distasteful in rational argument.

So, if someone is feels insulted by your insults, you feel they should feel insulted, is what you're saying?

I'm not certain that strategy makes sense to me, but you're welcome to it, if it works for you.

As to Penguin's ideas re: Rupert Sheldrake, I do believe in the interconnectedness of various lifeforms. However, I have not yet concluded that LSD/S.D. is the best context for rigorous linguistic studies.

[Penguin]

OP ED: Please have a look at the John Lilly autobiography I linked above. Its pretty relevant to this discussion (especially dolphins, language and mind), and has pretty unorthodox methods and views..Thought provoking, so to say. Im not signing on to his opinions, I merely find tangents with my own views, and I find some of his ideas of merit.

I also think, as he did, that we are currently overlooking the biggest tool we have to understand the bioelectrochemical brain processor we have, and the mind its linked to - experimenting with all kinds of known psychedelics to ascertain their effects on it, and how those effects differ from its normal modes of operation. And to discover what other modes of action this wetware/mind combo is capable of, when stimulated in a specific way by a molecule. Thats illegal now, and only source for data are anecdotal psychonauts who discuss their heroic and unheroic adventures on the internets.. Lilly was a pioneer in this area as well, as in many others.

OP ED: Yeah, Im not convinced either, but I do find the idea intriguing
Too bad I dont have access to a tank, acid and dolphins to test it out myself

[Penguin]

Hey BTW, if someone IS willing to fund such a test, I will be a willing test monkey!

[OP ED]

I already own a copy, thank you though. I find Lily's ideas to be fascinating, but not conlcusive of anything other than his own internal positions.

I prefer the book about metaprogramming, personally.

[Penguin]

Yes, thats true..

I also first read the Metaprogramming book years back. First book that got me to connsider myself as a biocomputer with selfprogramming abilities

[FourthBase]

Of course, we are largely forced to rely on computers for this, as the ability to vocalize in the same manner as marine mammals is something we do not possess, this in tandem with our inability to hear much of their communication makes this the only real way to study the languages. Surely this hasn't escaped your notice.

Just as the inverse of that situation hasn't escaped yours, right?

As to your ideas about meat eating, there may be some validity to these points, although I've never personally eaten a Dolphin. I prefer fish, something the Dolphins have in common with me.

That's what I think is underlying much of the animus toward the possibility of animals having language, the eventual realization that if we can talk to one animal then we can talk to all of them. And as much as I've encountered meat-eaters' bravado in the form of shit like "I'd tell it to get in my belly, lulz", there ain't no fucking way a human being with a functional conscience will eat an animal that has intelligibly communicated a desire not to be eaten. Which is why it's stil so important to so many misguided or malevolent people to keep animals and their language at bay (and their freedom to enjoy the taste of meat intact) with the 10 foot pole of Unintelligibility. I would love to take that pole and smash it over my knee into a billion little pieces.

By the way, as for dolphins eating fish, I never said dolphins were morally superior to humans. That's precisely what has made humans really human, and (our better specimens anyway) superior among the animals: our heightened capacity for enlightenment.

[Penguin]

I agree with what you said there, FourthBase. (Vegetarian since one smoky night 12 years ago - when it suddenly stuck me - Why am I actually eating animals, when I dont have to? The only answer I could think of was "for no reason". So I stopped.)

But I dont think fulfilling an ecological niche function of a predator makes the predator immoral. By fulfilling its role it is actually keeping the system in balance and preventing wide damage to other niches by unchecked population growth of, say, plankton eating fish or herbivore populations.

Ask any australian how nice rabbits and poisonous frogs are when they have no natural enemies on the continent.

[Eldritch]

It was science, this was the '70s, and the gauntlet had been thrown down by none other than Noam Chomsky. While nonhumans may communicate with one another, the MIT linguist said, they are fundamentally incapable of language.

If that were true (and I don't think it is), that would mean that they were also "fundamentally incapable" of lying.

Which puts them "head and shoulders" above Noam Chomsky, right there.

[compared2what?]

We are animals. Or anyway, I am. You guys may be entirely machine-generated for all I empirically know. But I take it on faith that you're not.

Wherever Orz said, "good job getting emotionally manipulated," or words to that effect?

What Orz said. In terms of straight-up old-fashioned con-artist type bad charities (as opposed to political, intelligence, or criminal fronts) there's a strong preference for animal welfare and children's oriented mission statements, because (a) inherent fundraising advantage; and (b) people stop thinking when confronted with the prospect of children and animals in distress. At least cute animals. Those things quite naturally provoke strong feelings in animals like us.

It's worth remembering, because other animals like us do, and if they do and we don't, they have a power we don't. While tripping through the fields of boring documents, I've noticed a few that appear to be animal welfare groups funded, opaquely, by the Christian right, but much patronized by the warm-hearted, trusting, animal-loving left.

I find that a little creepy. The artificial creation of new groups of single-issue voters or maximizing the political potential of extant ones is bad for democracy. You may have noticed that.

So. Carry on. But know your enemy. They know you, and they can read your posts. I emphatically say to the natural emotional response to knowing that truth: Fuck that, I'm speaking freely.

One nice aspect of which is that I can then say: No need for paranoia. Just know your animal self, and on what issues you may be susceptible to emotional ambush, so that you are prepared to recognize and repel one in the event that some dishonest animal decides to attempt to launch one in your direction some day.

Seriously, the most nuanced and complete piece of writing I know of on how these forces form an intricate and difficult to detect pattern that favors power is this. The man's no fool. I guess I should repeat that I mean that seriously. Because I do.

[erosoplier]

Okay,

Seriously, the most nuanced and complete piece of writing I know of on how these forces form an intricate and difficult to detect pattern that favors power is this. The man's no fool. I guess I should repeat that I mean that seriously. Because I do.

Then

This video is not available in your country.

Can somebody please tell me what I'm missing out on here?