This post has been prompted by more
thoughts connected to the book “The First Word,” by Kristine
Kenneally, as well as the book “Evolutionary Consciousness” by
Robert Ornstein.
What I've been thinking about are the
considerations one might apply to understand why dolphins, who's
brains are larger than ours, don't have the same degree of language
that we have. This is probably not that new, but it certainly is a
fresh perspective for me.
It boils down to only 4 broad
categories:
- Movement in three dimensions within a gravity well.
- The differences in the ongoing physical variations between sea and land based environments.
- The differences in species food chain integration because of the first two categories.
- The fact that, also because of the first 3 above, you would have had no need, let alone ability, to create fire, or tools, in the first place.
Let's look at these one by one.
The first consideration is obviously
significant when you think about it in terms of adaptation strategies
concerning movement up and down, as well as forward and back, when
gravity is a prominent factor. Not only do plant species have to be
quite clever in the competition for light, as well as to get their
seed more widely dispersed, animals have to be at least as clever in
negotiating a landscape of these plant variations, as well as the
other animals moving within the same arena.
One could well argue that the sensory
integration with motor skills, in this context, would be greater than
that required for simply thrusting through a medium where relative
degrees of buoyancy more effectively counters gravity than air does.
Certainly the processing required for echo location under water is
significant, as signified by a dolphin's brain. In air, however,
processing sight and sound, as well as integrating the more varied
motor skills demanded by gravity, would not only be an absolute
necessity, it would require its own uniquely capable processor;
especially if the creature was ever to develop higher amounts of mass
to allow for more strength, size (in the sense of height for better
seeing distance), as well as a bigger brain.
Wings certainly have an inherent limit.
Multiple legs have advantages and limits, especially when having
flexibility for a wide range of environmental conditions are desired.
Two legs and two arms, however, with feet that provide subtle balance
and leaping abilities, as well as hands that can grasp, with arms
that can lift or carry, is quite another matter.
This, in and of itself, would demand a
brain with huge amounts of neuronal plasticity so that sensory data
could be quickly approximated in one abstracted grouping, so that
other groups could have set, very complex motor responses, at the
ready for instant reactions.
The second consideration concerns how
much continuous variation is a given in a land based, as opposed to a
sea based, environment. In this do we see how boundaries that are
always in flux will favor the species with the most adaptability. If
you think about the explosion of brain size that occurred at about
the time of homo erectus; creating a brain able to do so many things
that hadn't even been invented yet, in the light of providing maximum
plasticity for any combination of physical environments, and the
specific sets of unique, neuronal abstractions each would require,
perhaps its not so surprising after all.
This is where we can now segue into the
third consideration. For it is here that, given the complexities of
different, constantly changing, environments, that integrating
successfully into whatever given food and risk situation that might
be at hand, being able to address the problem with the coordinated
action of a group would be undeniably advantageous. It also
illustrates why higher orders of motor skills become quite
beneficial; especially when you consider how throwing (the first
utilization of ballistics) a rock might evolve into throwing a spear,
as well as why we were suddenly able to think of making extensions of
our faculties with tools in the first place. At that point, grasping,
and having a handle on things began to explode. From there
coordinated action, in league with ever more abstraction, would lead
to task division, and skill specialization.
In all of this do we see the ever
present layering of abstractions; first in the grouping of neuron
connections to approximate sensory data into instantly recognized
bits of experience. Experience that has been associated with set
elements of fear, joy, or curiosity. These then access other neuron
groupings that experience as has indicated as a successful motor
response. Because we then start cooperating, shared experience is
given a common reference; at first with gesture and primitive sounds,
but with each generation passing things along, giving the benefit of
experience already associated to the new generation, and they then
building on from there, I don't see that much reason for surprise at
all for why we ended up with a language ability that is as amazing as
it is now.
The last consideration is simply a
logical result of what we've already summed up to this point. As with
tools, and extending our various physical faculties, there is no
better metaphor for the idea of becoming an effector, and
manipulator, of your environment than the mastery of fire. Would
there have been alchemy, and then any kind of science, if we first
didn't start lighting things up as it were? Would there have been the
smelting of metals? Would there have been any kind of applied power
beyond that of muscle?
The interesting thing in my mind that
still begs a questioning mind is why all of this ended up with an
entity so self aware, and contemplative. The individual point of
perceptive reference that puts the sentient into consciousness. I'm
pretty sure that it has to do with the creation of so many external
boundaries that an inner sense of self, separated from everything
external, was inevitable, but that's certainly only an opinion. It's
an assertion that deserves a lot more observation and consideration.
#Cosmolosophy #MyCosmosPhilosophy
No comments:
Post a Comment