I find this completely flabbergasting. Not only is Pinker according to sources a strong defender of evolutionary view of nature, he also is very interested in language. Dear Mr Pinker, please let me ask you a question. How do you think language has evolved in humans if it can not be in monkeys? And how do you defend such an idea.
Even more disturbing but somehow more understanding is that Pinker is research fellow on Harvard. There is already no need to lambast this crook institution. It just got worse by the day, and this is even more proof.
2 comments:
I think I can help: A part of the paradigm of evolution that you are dealing with is that time in evolution is not like time for you and me. Even if humans and great apes are millions of years apart, in evolutionary time it is just a blink of an eye. So if apes DID ever evolve to have the cognitive faculty to learn language it doesn't make sense to say that they must have it NOW as compared to say, millions of years from now. And furthermore, the development of language could have been something uniquely human due to some environmental stimulus at a certain point in developmental history. For example, when early hominids began to leave the trees, perhaps those who could communicate while hunting (verses just eating fruit at leisure) could survive and reproduce better. I think you should read more on evolution before you start publicly affronting people about their evolutionary ideas. Would you like me to suggest some reading? Email me at david@nonprofitmediaproductions.com. Thanks, and good luck!
Sir: of course time in evolution is not the same as for example my life. Your example badly describes why my reasoning should not hold, and hardly. Perhaps monkeys have no language but that is not the point. Rather why monkeys can not have language.
Post a Comment