The naked ape

steddyeddy

A book came out years ago called the naked ape. It was written by a zoologist called Desmond Morris and he took a novel (for the time anyway) view of the human species. He looked at us as he would any other animal and described our mating, fighting, eating and child raising activities just as he would be describing a lion or a chimpanzee. The book generated a lot of criticism at the tme, particularly from right wing groups who objected to the human species being viewed as an animal.

Some people claimed that Disney was resposible for anthropomorpsising animals giving them human emotions. What's your view on this, is there a line between animal and humans or are we just another ape? Is Disney responsible for giving us a more "human" view of animals by conveying them with emotions and feelings?

My view is that there is no line between humans and animals and we are indeed the naked (hairless) ape. The discovery of nuerotransmitters that convey emotion in other animals shows us that we are not unique.

ScumLord

From inside the human species we seem very different but taken as a whole we're just like every other animal on the planet. We don't really do anything that's totally unique we just do more advanced versions.

I think it's a big mistake to ignore the fact your an animal, I think to elevate yourself above your animal nature you need to be critically aware of the fact you are a simple animal prone to animal behaviour.

antodeco

Pics or GTF.. wait, ape you said?










male or female?

.Henry Sellers.

I agree, sure just look at that documentary "Planet of the Apes".

Where To

We're just an animal, but we are different from other animals.

Do you think any other apes give a damn about us?

positron

I thought (probably incorrectly) that the whole human / animal distinction is something certain religious institutions promoted (animals have no soul etc). Certain other religions see no "line" between animals and humans, and that of course is scientifically more accurate too - we are distinctly different to other species in the planet, but so is every living organism, big or small.

antodeco

.Henry Sellers. wrote: »

I agree, sure just look at that documentary "Planet of the Apes".

Yeah, I found that documentary very good. Wait a minute. WAIT A MINUTE?? That was earth? You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!

ScumLord

Where To wrote: »

We're just an animal, but we are different from other animals.

No more different than a bird is from a mouse. If you stood a human beside a dog you could point out far more commonalities than you could differences.

--Kaiser--

steddyeddy wrote: »

A book came out years ago called the naked ape. It was written by a zoologist called Desmond Morris and he took a novel (for the time anyway) view of the human species. He looked at us as he would any other animal and described our mating, fighting, eating and child raising activities just as he would be describing a lion or a chimpanzee. The book generated a lot of criticism at the tme, particularly from right wing groups who objected to the human species being viewed as an animal.

Some people claimed that Disney was resposible for anthropomorpsising animals giving them human emotions. What's your view on this, is there a line between animal and humans or are we just another ape? Is Disney responsible for giving us a more "human" view of animals by conveying them with emotions and feelings?

My view is that there is no line between humans and animals and we are indeed the naked (hairless) ape. The discovery of nuerotransmitters that convey emotion in other animals shows us that we are not unique.

Of course we are animals. We are also the 'paragon of animals' as put by Shakespeare. If you think there is no line between humans and other animals then you have quite a warped mentality

BBDBB

dont mind me piddling in the corner

Im just marking my territory

ScumLord

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Of course we are animals. We are also the 'paragon of animals' as put by Shakespeare. If you think there is no line between humans and other animals then you have quite a warped mentality

What's the line?

Where To

ScumLord wrote: »

No more different than a bird is from a mouse. If you stood a human beside a dog you could point out far more commonalities than you could differences.

The same could be said between a human and a piece of coral. Or a rock and and a tree.

It's the differences that define the existence of anything, not the commonalities.

orestes

On a genetic level we're animals, but we're capable of abstract thought and self-reflection, and even if other species have neurotransmitters to convey emotion they don't have a cerebral cortex capable of higher thought. Yes we have animalistic impulses, drives, instincts, desires, etc. but we're so far beyond merely being animals that it's a bit simplistic to just base it on a genetic/neuroscientific level, especially since we can pretty much choose (or train ourselves) to ignore the animal side of ourselves if we really want to. Animals might be able to feel emotion, but we can build spaceships.

sbsquarepants

ScumLord wrote: »

From inside the human species we seem very different but taken as a whole we're just like every other animal on the planet. We don't really do anything that's totally unique we just do more advanced versions.
.

Well i've yet to see a monkey point it's arse to monkey mecca and thank some holy ape spirit for it's existence! So there is that:D

Of course we're animals, the only real difference between us and other primates in particular is our intelligence. We just happen to be whole lot smarter than any other animal. We have learned to change our environment to better suit us, somewhat freeing us from the torturously slow speed limit set by evolution evolution. We don't need to wait 1000 generations to grow fur to gradually settle colder northern areas for example, we were smart enough to make clothes, harness fire and so on, right up to now with all our technology and all the natural limitations it allows us to ignore.
But poke us with a sharp stick and we bleed like any other monkey!

iDave

steddyeddy wrote: »

My view is that there is no line between humans and animals and we are indeed the naked (hairless) ape. The discovery of nuerotransmitters that convey emotion in other animals shows us that we are not unique.

Creationist outrage in 5...4...3...2...

Adhamh

Yes, of course we're related to apes, but we truly are special and evolution has bestowed upon us capabilities far, far beyond our nearest cousins in the animal kingdom.

I don't know why this is so controversial or needs so much defense. In the words of V.S. Ramachandran the whole idea than we're merely just another ape, with nothing special to us, is just the secular version of original sin.

steddyeddy

Where To wrote: »

We're just an animal, but we are different from other animals.

Do you think any other apes give a damn about us?

Yes humans who have worked with apes will say that apes like gorillas and chimpanzees can develop a bond with them.

This is a video of a boy who fell into a gorilla enclosure. A female gorilla lifted up the boy and carried him towards a place where he could be helped by zookeepers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mcv2e9qvO9M

steddyeddy

Adhamh wrote: »

Yes, of course we're related to apes, but we truly are special and evolution has bestowed upon us capabilities far, far beyond our nearest cousins in the animal kingdom.

I don't know why this is so controversial or needs so much defense. In the words of V.S. Ramachandran the whole idea than we're merely just another ape, with nothing special to us, is just the secular version of original sin.

I would completely disagree that we have abilities far far beyond the other apes. We are special but so is every other animal on the planet.

steddyeddy

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Of course we are animals. We are also the 'paragon of animals' as put by Shakespeare. If you think there is no line between humans and other animals then you have quite a warped mentality

Or a scientific mentality. An objective mentality.

ScumLord

orestes wrote: »

On a genetic level we're animals, but we're capable of abstract thought and self-reflection, and even if other species have neurotransmitters to convey emotion they don't have a cerebral cortex capable of higher thought. Yes we have animalistic impulses, drives, instincts, desires, etc. but we're so far beyond merely being animals that it's a bit simplistic to just base it on a genetic/neuroscientific level, especially since we can pretty much choose (or train ourselves) to ignore the animal side of ourselves if we really want to. Animals might be able to feel emotion, but we can build spaceships.

You can train a dog too, animals have their on version of culture too, Dolphins have distinct behaviour and hunting techniques throughout the world. They had to teach themselves how to do different hunting techniques.

There's no doubt the human is the greatest animal that has ever lived but it's arrogance is unmatched. But we still act like the ape that we are, everything a person does can be predicted and is just a reaction to the environment the same as any other animal.

We are special and unique but those are just our particular adaptations. Birds flying adaptation is just as special and unique.

Ush1

To answer your question, it is not Disneys fault for some people attributing human characteristics to non human animals, it's OUR fault, as in, it's just human nature.

We are set up to have an anthrocentric view of life and everything around us. It's basically why it took so long for the theory of natural selection to come along, it's an extremely counter intuitive idea.

sbsquarepants

steddyeddy wrote: »

I would completely disagree that we have abilities far far beyond the other apes. We are special but so is every other animal on the planet.

AFAIK no other species has our capacity for introspection and higher reasoning. It's fairly obvious to anyone with eyes that animals have emotions and personalities of their own, but they are very limited when compared to ours. Apes that have learned to sign for example don't have deep conversations with their handlers. It's more kind of "want food" type stuff. That would strongly suggest that there is something different about us.
Animals - but different animals.

orestes

ScumLord wrote: »

You can train a dog too, animals have their on version of culture too, Dolphins have distinct behaviour and hunting techniques throughout the world. They had to teach themselves how to do different hunting techniques.

There's no doubt the human is the greatest animal that has ever lived but it's arrogance is unmatched. But we still act like the ape that we are, everything a person does can be predicted and is just a reaction to the environment the same as any other animal.

We are special and unique but those are just our particular adaptations. Birds flying adaptation is just as special and unique.

The only other animal that has come anywhere near close to human development was the neandterthal, and they aren't around anymore. People are beyond just reacting to their environment, the fact that we're even having this discussion shows that, and that sets us apart from other animals unless Douglas Adams was right and the dolphins are really messing with us and the mice are experimenting on us or something like that. I didn't say that we're not animals, but we're far beyond being just animals. I'm not saying we're better or more important than other animals or that it gives us some kind of right of domination or anything like that, but we are different since we are capable of abstract thought and expression.

Seachmall

I've nothing to add to this discussion but read People Watching too and any/all of Paul Ekman's books.

People Watching covers the more of the same of the Naked Ape but more regarding social habits and patterns while Ekman covers the evolution and purpose of emotions in humans.

Dwork

My missus says I act like an animal all the time. A jack-ass.

seamus

orestes wrote: »

I'm not saying we're better or more important than other animals or that it gives us some kind of right of domination or anything like that, but we are different since we are capable of abstract thought and expression.

I'm fairly convinced that the only difference between humans and other animals is language - our ability to communicate ideas concisely. Other animals are capable of abstract thought, of differentiating between past, present and future, as well as emotions, sympathy and empathy which for a long time we thought were exclusively human traits.

Many animals have shown learning behaviours by mimicking what their parents and peers do, this is communication at its base level and is the foundation on which intelligence is built - the ability to communication ideas and processes across generations.
Then you have vocalisations, another step up, which allow for emotion and intent to be conveyed.

Then you have more specific vocalisations, observed in apes, which communicate more specific ideas. This is likely the beginning evolution of language. The ability to communicate specific ideas or intentions would be a huge boost to any species' ability to survive and adapt. To think about how you communicate a simple idea with a simple vocalisation, just think of training a dog. One word commands, and the dog understand what you want to do.

There would be both a biological and memetic component to the evolution of language - changes in vocal chords allowing for more control over their voice, but also experimentation by individuals introducing new vocalisations into the "vocabulary" which survive if they work.

This eventually leads to spoken language which allows for ideas to be relayed and recalled very accurately. So rather than just watching what the guy next to you is doing and trying to copy him, he can actually tell you what he's doing, step by step and direct you in recreating it accurately.

The spoken word does have shortfalls in that ideas tend to lose accuracy as they are transmitted until after 20 generations the recalled idea only barely resembles the original. Written language then is the next evolution of language because it allows for ideas to be more accurately recorded. Errors and deviations are then only introduced during copying. The printer was a revolution in this regard as it improved accuracy immensely.

Why do I think the only difference between us and the apes is language?

Imagine that tomorrow, everyone woke up and found themselves unable to speak. We could make some vocalisations with our mouths, but no words. In fact, we couldn't even comprehend words - the written word was just shapes on paper and recordings nothing more than gibberish. Sign language, forgotten. You remember how to do things, but permanently lack the ability to communicate to anyone with any accuracy past pointing and making noises?

How long do you think it would be before we all ended up living in tiny communities, fending for ourselves and basically acting like apes? I'd give us a few months.

ScumLord

orestes wrote: »

The only other animal that has come anywhere near close to human development was the neandterthal, and they aren't around anymore.

Well, by many accounts Europeans are the bastard children of humans and Neanderthals. But even before the Neanderthal there were actually a whole lot of upright walking apes. It's sort of unusual we're the only ones left.

People are beyond just reacting to their environment, the fact that we're even having this discussion shows that, and that sets us apart from other animals

Everything is a reaction. Humans are getting good at predicting things now but throughout history we have always learned from mistakes. Every behaviour is essentially a reaction to something otherwise it's coming out of nowhere. Our ability to imagine and plan ahead is our unique ability but it's not totally unique. Other animals have shown more basic versions of it.

I didn't say that we're not animals, but we're far beyond being just animals.

This may be just one of those matter of opinions that we won't agree on. I think we are just animals, we're a fairly unique animal but still just fundamentally an animal and everything that applies to the rest of life on this planet applies to us too. Our technology gives us this perceived notion of grandiose but it wouldn't at all surprise me to find out every other living creature regards itself in the same high esteem. If any one of us was dumped in an unknown environment with no other people around we'd quickly learn that there's nothing at all special about us and we'll die just as easily as any other creature.

I'm not saying we're better or more important than other animals or that it gives us some kind of right of domination or anything like that, but we are different since we are capable of abstract thought and expression.

It's true but despite how amazing all our achievements are it's an evolutionary adaptation that's no more spectacular than birds developing flight and it's no guarantee we'll last any longer than any species that came before us. That is the ultimate test. If we're around as long as crocodiles we can start patting ourselves on the back.

SpiderHead

ScumLord wrote: »

What's the line?

that would be the line in the Zoo

Ava_e

Interesting study here, out a few days ago, about how monkeys reject food from humans who are mean to other humans.

http://fragments-of-truth.blogspot.ie/2013/03/monkeys-reject-food-from-people-who-are.html

AnonoBoy

Ewan McGregor played him in that film I Love You Desmond Morris.

It didn't mention the ape thing though and Jim Carrey was riding him in it.

It was good enough.

Cungi

I think we're pretty much the same as every other animal. But we do have an ability that no other animal can match.
The ability to destroy.

ScumLord

Cungi wrote: »

I think we're pretty much the same as every other animal. But we do have an ability that no other animal can match.
The ability to destroy.

Every animal has the potential to destroy. The only thing stopping ants from stripping the Amazon down to the bare ground is their small size but they do decimate areas of forest in their quest for food.

There's nothing unique about humans propensity for violence. It's a rule of nature that the bigger stronger animal kills the weaker ones.

What is unique to humans is our ability to meet a strange human and not decide to fight them straight away. Just look at cities with millions of people in them. If that was a city full of dogs it would be a chaotic violent mess.

Then you have humans actively conserving other life, pretty much unheard of in any other species. Humans are by far the nicest animal on the planet considering our abilities.

Cungi

ScumLord wrote: »

Every animal has the potential to destroy. The only thing stopping ants from stripping the Amazon down to the bare ground is their small size but they do decimate areas of forest in their quest for food.

There's nothing unique about humans propensity for violence. It's a rule of nature that the bigger stronger animal kills the weaker ones.

What is unique to humans is our ability to meet a strange human and not decide to fight them straight away. Just look at cities with millions of people in them. If that was a city full of dogs it would be a chaotic violent mess.

Then you have humans actively conserving other life, pretty much unheard of in any other species. Humans are by far the nicest animal on the planet considering our abilities.

True. Other animals do have a capacity for violence but nowhere near Human scale. We have the ability to destroy all life on this planet.

What about self-destruction. Is any other animal capable of that?

ScumLord

Cungi wrote: »

True. Other animals do have a capacity for violence but nowhere near Human scale. We have the ability to destroy all life on this planet.

That's an ability we developed though. It's not like humans go out with the intention to destroy life. We go out with the same desires as other animals, territory and food. We just so happen to be very good at everything we do. So whereas an ant may try to strip a forest of everything we do our best not to but end up doing it out of perceived necessity.

What about self-destruction. Is any other animal capable of that?

Yes, the males of many species are killed in the act of copulation. Chimps get depressed and die. Self destruction is usually a symptom of something gone wrong. The majority of humans don't wake up and try and kill themselves every morning.

Cungi

ScumLord wrote: »

. So whereas an ant may try to strip a forest of everything we do our best not to but end up doing it out of perceived necessity.

Fair point.

ScumLord wrote: »

Yes, the males of many species are killed in the act of copulation. Chimps get depressed and die. Self destruction is usually a symptom of something gone wrong. The majority of humans don't wake up and try and kill themselves every morning.

the majority of us don't but we all have that ability
Copulation isnt exactly suicide though. I mean a male black widow spider doesnt know he's goin to be killed by the missus though, does he?

The actual act of suicide. Intentionally ending your own life. Can other animals do this?

ScumLord

Cungi wrote: »

the majority of us don't but we all have that ability
Copulation isnt exactly suicide though. I mean a male black widow spider doesnt know he's goin to be killed by the missus though, does he?

The actual act of suicide. Intentionally ending your own life. Can other animals do this?

Do other animals even understand the concept of death? If they can't relate to other animals that they see dying they may not know they can kill themselves, they may think if they jump of a cliff they'll only get hurt a lot. If you think of it death isn't something we experience ourselves, we have to imagine what it's like to die.

Wibbs

We can step outside evolution and "cheat" it to suit us. No other animal does this. They're essentially slaves to evolution.

steddyeddy

Wibbs wrote: »

We can step outside evolution and "cheat" it to suit us. No other animal does this. They're essentially slaves to evolution.

Actually that's a very good point!

Cungi

ScumLord wrote: »

Do other animals even understand the concept of death? If they can't relate to other animals that they see dying they may not know they can kill themselves, they may think if they jump of a cliff they'll only get hurt a lot. If you think of it death isn't something we experience ourselves, we have to imagine what it's like to die.

Good point. AFAIK only elephants seem to have a concept of death. Though that may be the way we perceive their behaviour around their dead.

As you say animals may not have concept of death which would seem the ability of suicide seems to be a human-only trait.

Also without a concept of death or an afterlife, then praying to a creator would seem to be a human-only trait as well.

1ZRed

Where to closed his account! :eek:

bullets

steddyeddy wrote: »

A book came out years ago called the naked ape. It was written by a zoologist called Desmond Morris and he took a novel

I was asked once upon a time about who I admired or who inspired me and I
could not think of anyone. Out of not been able to think of anyone else
I blurted out Desmond Morris since I could not think of anyone else at the time.

Loved his observations on things. As a teenager I had his book Manwatching which came after the Naked Ape. I was fascinated with how right he got it with human behavior. He also had books about catwatching, babywatching and body watching which I never read but must give the bloke a google again to see if he's still alive or dead or produced anything else. I remember watching footage of him years ago where he identified more with animals than he did with his fellow man.

~B

kowloon

Have a copy of Manwatching somewhere, must have a look for it now.

--Kaiser--

Do people actually not realise a difference between humans and other animals? Or are ye just being namby pamby tree hugger types?

kowloon

If any other animal developed to a point where they could threaten us intellectually, culturally or whatever we would destroy them. We wouldn't allow another species to gain the advantages we have.
I'm not sure if we destroyed or interbred with our other close relatives, I read that we interbred with Neanderthals, not sure what the story is with the others. Perhaps someone from the Anthropology forum can enlighten us?

I do have this thought in the back of my head that some day the cat will strike up a conversation with me in perfect English.
'Wait a second, you can speak?!'
'Of course I can, I just choose not to, the way I see it us cats have it pretty easy and there's no point in rocking the boat'
'I could just tell everyone that you can speak..'
'and who would believe you?'
The cat is Bill fcuking Murray.

Wibbs

steddyeddy wrote: »

Actually that's a very good point!

Even a stopped clock...

But yea we were a veggie eating small enough bipedal ape, copped that meat was bigger bang for the buck calories and nutrients wise so we took up eating the stuff, scavenging at first. Problem was we didn't have the teeth or claws to render it down, so we made our own outa stone. Then because our stomach acids are weak, we predigested meat and other foods by cooking them with fire. External digestion. We weren't very cold adapted, but that didn't stop us. No Siree. We went and nicked fur from other animals and with fire moved into new territories. We need air and water and food and warmth to survive, yet over 40 years ago we stood on the moon. That's the difference. We alone of the animals have the potential to become near gods. If it can be imagined and we survive one day we will likely make it happen.

Wibbs

kowloon wrote: »

I'm not sure if we destroyed or interbred with our other close relatives, I read that we interbred with Neanderthals, not sure what the story is with the others. Perhaps someone from the Anthropology forum can enlighten us?

Wrong discipline I'm afraid. Yea we got jiggy with Neandertals and with folks we called Denisovans from Asia, who were as different from Neandertals as we were genetically speaking. Others? Well some modern populations have deep genetic markers that predate modern humans so Homo Erectus is another likely bed partner.

And remember the amount of fossil humans so far found is tiny, like crazily tiny and mostly just bits and pieces. EG Neandertals, the closest to us, the ones we know the most of? We don't have a full skeleton. The ones you see are mixtures of different folks, mostly lads. Who knows what other people lay out there yet to be found. The world is a huge place and much of it hasn't been explored archaelogically. Somebody could have found something on a farm or on holiday that sits in a drawer and it could change everything. Hell as a kid I found Neandertal stone tools in France and Spain on holliers(I was a weird kid with patient parents ).

Plus most of those finds have no DNA in them to test. It takes rare circumstances to preserve it for the kinda time periods we're chatting about and most places don't have those conditions.

kowloon

Wibbs wrote: »

Wrong discipline I'm afraid.

Feck, not going to live that one down!

ScumLord

Wibbs wrote: »

We alone of the animals have the potential to become near gods. If it can be imagined and we survive one day we will likely make it happen.

I think the greatest potential of the human species is to act like sperm bringing life from this planet to others. Anywhere we go in space we have the potential to leave behind life even if unintentionally. We'd be like smart asteroids, specifically targeted at the stars with the highest potential to support life.

Capt'n Midnight

seamus wrote: »

Imagine that tomorrow, everyone woke up and found themselves unable to speak. We could make some vocalisations with our mouths, but no words. In fact, we couldn't even comprehend words - the written word was just shapes on paper and recordings nothing more than gibberish. Sign language, forgotten. You remember how to do things, but permanently lack the ability to communicate to anyone with any accuracy past pointing and making noises?

How long do you think it would be before we all ended up living in tiny communities, fending for ourselves and basically acting like apes? I'd give us a few months.

We'd just use sign language, same way that people who spoke different languages have done upon first contact since the days of Babel

Capt'n Midnight

And what is it that separates us from the animals ?


The Liffey :pac:

ashers222

first book I ever requested as a kid was called the human difference, it was a philosophical, social sciencey, biological typey view of human nature and explores how we differentiate from the animal kingdom. It was very good, five stars.


(the answer is our self awareness btw, which is also the same ability which allows us to create and destroy the world around us in equal measure ironically)