Wednesday, 3 October 2012


Hello everyone:
Today, I´m talking about the exposition’ video Mark Pagel.  I´m agree with them, but only punctual points.  For example I agree in the idea that the language is a powerful army and involved a social learning based in the imitation.  However I´m disagree in the point that the animals would be lower that human.  In first place, Mr. Pagel be a speciesist, obviously he is a science men, for this reason he believe that in the power of natural selection like a benefit in  favor of  the human.  But, nobody today know about the exactly origin the language and the point in the history evolution that the human way separate that the chimpanzee.  For this reason I believe that Pagel is wrong, because he lack of background that affirm this point. All that him say is a suppose.  Moreover he doesn’t show the investigation to support his affirmations.
In relation to my language I think so that the Spanish, like other language, is important for the identity formation while his operate like a way of expression, because we could communicate a lot of ideas that the mind allow; although the imagination is infinite.  This processes his called view of the world.  Thanks to this imaginary we build our culture. The culture don’t consist in the materials or the hand axes that explain Pagel, it is in each one of the persons.

Isa.


8 comments:

  1. "obviously he is a science men" XD hahaha He love you :'( don't treat to him this form!
    The video stink out to Darwin xD

    ReplyDelete
  2. You point of view is a good option to debate with Pagel and a lot of other people.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes me too, I only found reason in a few of things

    ReplyDelete
  4. It is interesting you say he has no research to support his ideas...I wonder if he would agree

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree, language is important for the identity formation :)

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think that not only pans could develop "intelligence" and "concience"; cats, dolphins, dogs, lions, bees and more animals could try to destroy us, in order to rule this world...

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree he is very speciesist and it is strange that he doesn`t consider the genetic evolution, bieng a biologist.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Good post Isabella. you also have made a good point in the sense he should show more concrete evidence.

    ReplyDelete