|
Najakcharmer -> RE: Problems because of syndromes, diseases etc.? (7/4/2007 9:43:55 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GeekyGirl
The POINT is that if people would say just exactly what they mean with nothing added or left out , EVERYONE would understand....abnormals and NT alike.
Yes and no. Studying animal behavior as well as human behavior has given me this answer.
Crocodilian communication involves not just their complex vocalizations, but their body posturing to a very significant degree. Watching a group of alligators behave socially is something that the layperson will be at least 75% blind to, because the majority of what they are communicating to one another is with the subtleties of relative body posturing. A layperson will be able to hear their vocalizations and can fairly easily learn to identify the difference between a mating invitation, a declaration of territorial dominance and an indication of distress. What someone who is blind to the subtleties will not be able to do is to read the whole message that is being communicated, because a good portion of it is being transmitted nonvocally. The posture is the context of the vocalization, and much of the time it actually replaces the vocalization.
The observer who lacks the ability to read croc postures will not be aware that any communication at all is taking place. The trained observer can read volumes about a crocodile's age, sex, dominance status and general state of mind, based on posture alone. Of course another crocodile can also read this clearly; that's the point of the display. They don't have to learn it; it's instinctive. Knowing how to read the social behavior and status of another member of your group is crucial in any social species, so most animals can do so instinctively. Highly social animals like Homo sapiens even have a chunk of their brains specifically devoted to this kind of information processing. Except in some individuals, that part of the brain simply doesn't work, or works very differently. That would be us.
Humans have much more complex vocalizations than crocs do, and they also transmit quite significant amounts of information via facial expression, verbal intonation and pitch, body language and gestures. AS folks like us are not intrinsically well equipped to observe any of those things in humans. The only way I can function in this respect is by observing humans socially exactly as I observe crocodilians and other animals, watching closely for the arbitrary signals I have studied and learned to identify in this species. Like you, I am natively blind to these signals. I do not percieve them instinctively any more than a human can instinctively read crocodile body language without special training and intense observation.
I am not well equipped to understand and process human social signals. I can however apply logical analysis to primate body language and vocalization signals in the same manner that I do to other species. Like almost all other animals, humans transmit a significant volume of information to one another in this fashion. Sometimes this information may complement the verbal message, but at other times it may change the meaning of the vocalization or even contradict the message entirely.
That does sound amazingly stupid and dysfunctional, at least until you look at the basic principles of animal behavior. All animal communication must be percieved and responded to as a holistic unit of vocalization and physical behavior. Responding to a vocalization without correctly observing and interpreting the behavioral context is ineffective, and when you're working with some kinds of animals, really inadvisable. That's simply how animals communicate, and you need to look at the entire communication to interpret its message, not just the vocalization.
When you're an AS working with Homo sapiens, the temptation is to make your own vocalizations on the order of "Bugger off and go bother someone else if you can't just say what you bloody well mean." I understand the temptation thoroughly and quite often give in to it since I'm a curmudgeonly sort. I also understand that Homo sapiens is just like any other zoo animal, transmitting a significant portion of their social communication not through abstract sound-symbols but by pitch, inflection, posture and facial expression. I expect the same from Homo sapiens social communication as I would from any other primate. Monkeys do chatter, screech, scratch and grimace, and if you need to work inside their cage, it's helpful to learn what those behaviors indicate so they don't throw poo at you.
Humans are "saying what they mean" by transmitting information in ways other than just abstract sound-symbols. You and I simply aren't natively well equipped to observe and process that portion of their communication. Fortunately we are exceptionally well equipped to use abstract symbols to explain our own preferences for effective two way communication.
|
|
|
|
