How our conceptual framework slowly developed throughout Evolution?: We learned concepts as we learned the language and - as we learned the language - conscious thought slowly developed and became more elaborate.
Part of Chapter V of Scientific Model Of The Brain.
* From the very beginning, we have been learning concepts, as we have been learning the language.
* Learning verbs, adjectives, adverbs and prepositions; learning what things are good for: The simplest method to learn what things are good for and how to accomplish things is to have somebody show us how to resolve the task in question.
* As we learn more and more words, as we find out how to refer to things and actions, as we acquire more and more (conscious) concepts, we become able to spell out, write down, save and transmit natural language scripts, of what things are good for and how to accomplish stuff.
* From the very beginning, we have been learning concepts, as we have been learning the language.
All over the globe, palaeontologists have found fascinating prehistoric figurative cave paintings, such as hand stencils and animal figures. To the degree that it seems reasonable to assume they were made without any clear purpose in mind, these representations are generally understood as pure expressions of art. It is one more of a million other instances, showing how we are constantly projecting our very own conventions into other folks, other times and or other places. If a modern human being paints something on a wall, there is certainly no specific purpose into it; but it is just an expression of art. However, there is no good reason why this must necessarily have been the case for other folks, living in totally different times and places. Indeed, it should not be totally out of mind to conjecture several different specific reasons, why prehistoric humans (not only homo sapiens, but other related species such as Neanderthals as well) may have actually wanted to paint these silhouettes: Perhaps, someone wanted to tell the group he or she had spotted a herd of buffalos,, so that they would all go together to hunt a few of them. Another possibility is that these representations were part of some early form of primitive school lectures, where the instructor use the paintings to teach the name of things to the pupils. Fascinatingly, view in this (very peculiar) light, prehistoric cave paintings could very reasonably be seen as the earliest expressions of writing (after all, the first writing systems began with the employment of clay tokens to count and record goods).
Now, obviously, all these ideas on the possible purpose of prehistoric figurative cave paintings are most absolutely purely speculative, and there is clearly no way anybody could ever bring forward any evidence to ascertain, what the heck was going through the author's mind. Nevertheless, even if we accept that these representations were nothing but pure expressions of art, made without any kind of purpose in mind, there is still something there cannot be any doubt about. Indeed, in any event, we could still say with absolute certainty, that the painter was thinking about the figure in question (whether this was a hand, some animal or anything else). Consequently, even if the author had no intention and the painting had no purpose, for all intends and purposes the author transmitted his or her thought. But, is not the transmission of thoughts what language is all about? Indeed, we can extend the reasoning further: Even if the gesture had been totally unintentional, it would not have taken a rocket scientist to realize, that, from here on out, whenever someone wanted to transmit some thought or piece of information, sketching some figure on a surface was an excellent means to accomplish such goal.
* Learning nouns and the acquisition of the most basic concepts: The first step to acquire a concept is to find out the thing's name, and there is no simpler method to indicate which thing we are thinking about and referring to than to point at the thing in question.
As a matter of fact, it is then not difficult to see a reason why our understanding of the world is so predominantly shaped by the visual modality. Undoubtedly, we learn from other people most of what we know about the world around us. But, clearly, long before we can understand any word anybody says, we can see and perceive everything around us. Long before we are aware of any name, we know perfectly well how everything looks like: all what we need is someone to tell us what is the name, we should from then on recognize the thing by. If we barely understand any language (as when we are babies, or as it would have been the case for a primitive person living tens of thousands of years ago) the most straightforward way for someone to teach us a name is by pointing at the thing and indicating what is the right term commonly used to refer to it. From then on, whenever somebody says that word, at the very least, we will know, we will have a concept of, how that thing looks like. Without a doubt, if we have not yet found out, it will not be long before we also add to our knowledge, what is the thing good for.
Yes, it makes sense to say, that concepts are created or acquired, when they get a name; but we should not forget that names are only the means, not the ends. Indeed, the point here is not to learn the name of things; but to know what are they good for. So far we may have found out, how to refer to things; but we have not yet really accomplish anything, let alone learned how things work. Put in a different way, a language is not of much use, if it only consists of nouns. Rather, we need adjectives, verbs, adverbs and prepositions, as well.
* Learning verbs, adjectives, adverbs and prepositions; learning what things are good for: The simplest method to learn what things are good for and how to accomplish things is to have somebody show us how to resolve the task in question.
Undoubtedly, the most common method to learn how to accomplish something, is to observe somebody else carrying out the task, and then imitate that person's performance. In fact, unless the matter is of the kind that confers any power, we can be sure that our role model will love to show off his or her knowledge and will not hesitate to explain how to go about it. If anything, teaching would havve been quite a bit of a challenge before humans developed any full-fledged language.
It would be useful to imagine how a primitive mother could have taught her kid, how to prepare some food; let us say, some bread. Even more so if there had not been any language available, the most natural and effective way would certainly have been to showcase the process herself. Now, how would you go about it, if you want to show a recipe to someone, who does not speak your language? Even more, what if (much like our primitive mother) you would not speak yourself any full-fledged language? Probably, as you go through the steps, you would point at things and indicate the terms you will employ to refer to them. When it comes to the actions you perform along the way (such as grinding, mixing, kneading, spreading, roasting, etc.), there is, though, no need to say anything. I guess there is a reason, why it is usually a bit harder to remember the right verb commonly employed to describe the specific gesture. However, if you just cannot come up - or simply do not know - the right term, you will frequently utter some sound resembling the noise the action in question produces (for example, wash, hack, stir, bubble, etc.). In all likelihood, that is exactly what our primitive cooking instructor would have done.
* As we learn more and more words, as we find out how to refer to things and actions, as we acquire more and more (conscious) concepts, we become able to spell out, write down, save and transmit natural language scripts, of what things are good for and how to accomplish stuff.
Clearly, through experiences of this sort, humans in the past should have come up with - and humans in the present commonly learn - the names of all kinds of things, as well as acquired knowledge on how to accomplish stuff. In other words, humans in the past conceived or defined most of the concepts known today, so that hundreds or thousands of years later we only need someone else to teach them to us. Clearly, the wheel only had to be invented once. From then on, once it got a name, and everybody could see what is good for and how it works, the knowledge only had to be transmitted and spread over, from one generation to another, to all other folks.
Comments
Post a Comment