What Separates Humans From Animals Is That Humans Have The Ability To

For all that separates u.s.a. from gorillas and other great apes, we are family (Image: Bruce Davidson/naturepl.com)

We are unlike whatever other animal, but the differences are surprisingly difficult to pin downwards. The Gap by Thomas Suddendorf is the most comprehensive attempt notwithstanding

"THIS volume is most yous," goes the beguiling first judgement of The Gap. It reminded me instantly of the refrain from a Carly Simon song: "Y'all're so vain, I'll bet you remember this vocal is about you. Don't you? Don't you lot?"

Advertisement

There is indeed something vain about we navel-gazing humans, arrogantly pondering our specialness even as nosotros destroy the environment and with it the species that are purportedly inferior to us. Author Thomas Suddendorf, an increasingly visible presence in this field, is well aware of this dilemma but he brings considerable cross-disciplinary expertise to bear.

"In that location is something vain about humans, pondering our specialness even every bit we destroy the environment"

A psychology professor at the Academy of Queensland, Australia, he is a specialist in the cerebral development of children and non-human primates, and in The Gap he combs through evidence from areas as various as creature behaviour, anthropology and psychology to sympathize and explicate the chasm that seems to separate animals and humans.

The volume begins by setting upwards an intriguing premise. The gap exists, Suddendorf says, through our own deportment: "The answer to the question of why we appear so dissimilar from other animals is that all closely related species accept go extinct. We are the terminal humans." In other words, we killed off our nearest relatives.

With that thought implanted in readers' minds, Suddendorf gives us a quick tour of what we know of our remaining close relatives, the not-human being primates. For me, this is one of the most engaging chapters in the book, as Suddendorf has spent time with these animals and leaves us with some indelible images.

Have this gem from when he encountered gorillas in Uganda: "The silverback was lying on his side studying his fingernails. He then casually grabbed his barrel cheek, lifted information technology a little, and let i rip." It's a piquant reminder that for all our separation from other primates, nosotros are family.

With the familiar caveat that absenteeism of evidence is not prove of absence, Suddendorf attempts to nail down what he thinks are the crucial differences between us and other animals. He writes: "There appears to be a tremendous gap betwixt homo and animal minds." But why? Is it downwardly to brain size? Non really. Elephants and whales trump us. What about brain size relative to body size? Well, shrews and mice practise much better on that front.

It becomes obvious that such coarse measures are not going to help. "As it stands… it is not clear what information technology is most our brains that causes our minds to exist special," admits Suddendorf. Much of the volume has this kind of back-and-along feel about it. Take a human trait. Is it unique? Well, maybe, but it's a question of degree.

Consider tool employ. It's evidently a significant human achievement, only other animals are pretty good at it, too. Chimpanzees employ leaves as toilet newspaper, or equally umbrellas. New Caledonian crows are expert at fashioning tools with leaves or sticks to get to their food, at times fifty-fifty using a shorter stick to get to a longer stick which they then use to attain the food.

Or how near the controversial mirror self-recognition test? Chimps, orang-utans and gorillas recognise themselves in a mirror so pass this test. Monkeys, such as baboons, capuchins and macaques, fail. There's besides shaky bear witness that dolphins, elephants and fifty-fifty magpies pass the test.

The so-chosen rich interpretation says that those who pass the test are self-aware. The lean version says that the test tells united states of america trivial: "any animal that manages to avoid bumping into things, or biting itself in a fight" has the ability to distinguish cocky from non-cocky. Suddendorf lays out the arguments, but favours neither.

Regardless of interpretation, he says, the fact that humans and some primates pass, while others fail, tells us something. "The potential for mirror self-recognition evolved between 18 and 14 million years agone in the shared ancestor of hominids… We do non know what this creature looked like, but it is likely to have known what it looked like."

Fascinating, simply neither here nor in that location when information technology comes to explaining the gap. So Suddendorf segues into what he thinks are the central differentiators. The most obvious is language. Despite Alex the talking parrot, or Koko the gorilla and Kanzi the bonobo – both of whom were trained to produce and sympathise signs – it is clear that human languages are a globe apart from anything animals seem to take achieved.

Suddendorf sounds a note of caution in asking: "Are we but biased because we have not fully deciphered what birds, monkeys or whales are maxim?" Merely he likewise answers the question: most animal vocalisations seem to exist under emotional, not cognitive, control. Homo chat involves reasoning about what others know, desire or believe; animal communication does non. "Man language is exquisitely capable of representing meaning that goes beyond the here and now," he writes. And language, unlike animal communication, seems tailored to agreement the minds of other humans.

In the capacity that follow, Suddendorf elaborates on the theme that human minds are unmatched when it comes to imagining scenarios. They travel back in time by thinking about the by, or flash forward in thinking about the hereafter, simulating new scenarios by nesting one scenario within some other, and so on. And he reminds us we are unique in both our want to share the contents of our minds and in our success in doing then. This enables the evolution of a second powerful class of inheritance to go with genes: the passing of cultural knowledge downward generations.

Evolution of the gap

In making his case for our unmatched minds, he besides considers theory of mind – the ability to gauge what is going on in some other person'due south head – too as intelligence, culture and morality. Similar language and mental fourth dimension travel, though, these huge subjects require a volume each rather than a mere chapter.

So, information technology's not surprising that Suddendorf's endeavour to be comprehensive comes at a cost. The best parts are the descriptions of what we know well-nigh animals in each of these arenas. But to become to them, you have to offset read about humans. A reader familiar with more in-depth books may feel a chip underwhelmed; someone without prior reading may end upwards wishing for more depth.

Given this trouble of depth versus breadth, it's probably unfair to argue for a widening of the book. But one angle deserving of greater representation is neuroanatomy, and details of the recent revelations that might assist explain the gap. For instance, there is a growing literature well-nigh so-called von Economo neurons (New Scientist, 21 July 2012, p 32). They are found in the fronto- insular and anterior cingulate cortices of the human brain, regions linked to self-awareness. Intriguingly, the same neurons are found in the brains of apes, whales and elephants. This has led to suggestions that these structures might play a role in establishing social relationships.

That said, the book comes into its ain in a chapter on hominins that went extinct over the past 6 million years, such as the massive-jawed Paranthropus boisei, which survived for over a million years. While he acknowledges that he'due south neither a geneticist nor a palaeoanthropologist, Suddendorf deftly argues for when and why uniquely human traits might have evolved.

He gives reasoned, highly plausible suggestions. For example, in considering the emergence of Acheulean stone tools, especially the two-sided paw axe, he says: "These tools were carried over distances and used repeatedly, implying some foresight of their time to come utility." Mayhap this correlates with budding scenario-building minds, writes Suddendorf, even as he cautions that plausibility should non be mistaken for proof.

Such cautionary notes are welcome, as is the tone of the concluding chapter. Suddendorf speculates on whether the gap volition decrease, stay the same, or increase. While he thinks the gap will widen equally our minds connect e'er more in the cyberworld, information technology might also widen for reasons we should exist aback of: climate change and the destruction of habitats. "Apes may join Neanderthals and Paranthropus as half-forgotten creatures… And then our descendants may be even more baffled by their credible uniqueness."

"The gap between the states and other animals will widen as our minds connect ever more in the cyberworld"

All in all, this is a thought-provoking volume that gives new significant to the phrase "know thyself" – making it clear the endeavour should go beyond navel-gazing to ponder the larger significance of being human.

The Gap: The science of what separates the states from other animals

Thomas Suddendorf

Basic Books (Buy from Amazon*)

This commodity appeared in print under the headline "Time to know ourselves"

(*When you buy through links on this page we may earn a small commission, but this plays no office in what we review or our opinion of it.)

More on these topics:

• evolution
• books and art

Source: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129531-100-what-separates-us-from-other-animals/

Posted by: bruntonthersellse1961.blogspot.com

Share this post