Nicholas Humphrey - How Humans Differ from Other Animals

Physically, humans and animals seem similar. Mentally, humans seem so superior. What’s so special about human nature? Language? Culture? Compare brain structures and functions of humans and animals. Human brains have advantages, in complexity and capacity of association for example, but are they sufficient to account for the vast superiority of human mentality?

Nicholas Humphrey is an English psychologist, based in Cambridge, who is known for his work on the evolution of human intelligence and consciousness. His ten books include Consciousness Regained, The Inner Eye, A History of the Mind, Leaps of Faith, The Mind Made Flesh, Seeing Red, and Soul Dust. He has been the recipient of several honours, including the Martin Luther King Memorial Prize, the Pufendorf medal and the British Psychological Society’s book award.

Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[jonahansen]

He's wrong about the "depth" and "range" of animal consciousness being below that of humans. Consider the perception that dogs have from odors. It is different in both range of odors as well as the way they are perceived. We can't really imagine it.

[EugeneKhutoryansky]

Even insects possess language. Also, in 2015, scientists published research showing that some ants recognize themselves in a mirror. Regarding the person in this video: By denying full awareness in other animals, he is failing in the very criteria he believes to be important: Recognizing that beings other than ourselves also possess beliefs, desires, and intentions.

[Soli_Deo_Gloria_.]

How ? Imago Dei.

My Redeemer lives !
Jesus Christ is risen !

[jerryk]

Indoor plumbing, that's a big one

[analoguedragon]

Two biggest unsolved questions: the emergence of life and the emergence of human consciousness. We are nowhere near to solving them.

[mrshankerbillletmein]

It is not obvious that by chance random forces produce complex functional systems capable of communication.

[kencusick]

This seems simple to me. Complex Language created the ability to conceptualize beyond our immediate perceptions. It allows us to think of possible future events and ourselves in these events. It allows us to create that which we cannot directly perceive. But at the same time we exist and perceive the immediate now. Other animals can only perceive the immediate now or a very limited future tied to immediate actions being taken.

[Samsara_is_dukkha]

The words "problem" and "consciousness" are used repeatedly in this conversation. It is a mistake to define living as a "problem" since life is simply an ongoing process. To define life as a "problem" virtually guarantees a miserable existence. Meanwhile, the term "consciousness" lacks a definition. That being the case, the use of the term is meaningless.

The Human sense of "separate self" is a dangerous illusion as evidenced by the fact that Humans have been at war with nature and with each other since the beginning of "civilised living" 10, 000 years ago. As the sense of separate self grew stronger over time, the conflict intensified as evidenced by the increasing power of weapons from sticks and stones, to spears, bows and arrows, to guns and cannons, to nuclear, chemical and biological weapons capable of extinguishing all life on Earth. In effect, the Human notion of "separate self" defines an illusory subject/object relationship that labels other organisms ("objects") as either useful/good or useless/bad leading to such abuses as murder, rape, war, genocide, massacres and slavery of which there are countless examples.

Other than that, we are pretty much the same as animals: we are born, we live, we die.

[maxwellsimoes]

It isnt true. Guys shows animal though his conscieness. Here are big problems when gos conscieness NEVER figuret out brains animal. Guys keep out Darwin processes showing nature true in experience proceedings.

[dimaniak]

Consciousness is unnecessary for survival

[williamburts]

How do humans differ from animals? Well, can animals come closer to truth or is that something reserved only for humans?

[helisoma]

Fundamentally at the behavioral level there's no difference...at least between us and the great apes. We are able to abstract reality and art and mathematics and time...through as he said Language....which is the difference. But i don't see consciousness being different only the ability to abstract our identity (spirit etc). They simple don't need to reach the same heights.

[SandipChitale]

Long term intentionally and planning and abstract thought are the key. Recursive introspection and to be able to imagine alternative scenarios as well.

But mechanism wise i.e. physiology etc there is no difference.

[TheTroofSayer]

To answer the question in the title, we provide an axiomatic framework of fundamental principles that apply universally, to all brained organisms*:
1) Bodies wire neuroplastic, DNA-entangled brains. Why? Because *experiences* wire neuroplastic brains (Doidge, 2007)** and experiences are intercepted by bodies. The body is the interface that gives meaning to experiences;
2) UAL - Unlimited Associative Learning (Birch, Ginsburg & Jablonka, 2020)*** - assumes association to be a fundamental principle, and defines boundaries for what constitutes consciousness. UAL**** can be extended to single-celled organisms and indeed, some authors have argued, in principle, to extend it to the subatomic domain and the quantum void;
3) Top-down causation engages with bottom-up causation, such that the bottom-up constrains what the top-down can command. UAL's emphasis is on top-down causation, while the body's emphasis is on bottom-up causation. Associations proceed only as far as the body is predisposed to give meaning to them;
4) The preceding point 3 is integral to addressing the entropy problem.

At 3:01, Nicholas Humphrey arrives at a pivotal insight, "... in terms of cognitive functioning, language was the most important step."

So, returning to the question in the title - how *do* humans differ from other animals? With Humphrey's insight, the answer should by now drop out as self-evident. Humans with hands and vocal apparatus are predisposed to written and spoken language in culture, while animals with four paws, fur and limited to the making of barking (or meowing or chirping or other sounds) can never be so predisposed. From this, we arrive at the notion of horizon of options. Humans in culture have a vastly extended horizon of options in comparison to a frog in a pond or a bird in a tree or a fish in the sea or a cow in a field. The development of language therefore provides the catalyst for the step-wise leap to the vastly extended horizon of options in human culture, and this catalyst is contingent on the human form (biology/physiology).

NOTES AND REFERENCES
* brained organisms - to keep things simple. Actually, our axiomatic framework applies universally, top to bottom, to include the subatomic domain - there are grounds for extending UAL to the subatomic domain.
** Doidge, N. (2007). The Brain That Changes Itself. Penguin Life.
*** Birch J., Ginsburg S. & Jablonka E. (2020). Unlimited Associative Learning and the origins of consciousness: a primer and some predictions. Biology & Philosophy, 35(6), 1-23.
**** In previous comments, I've made reference to the semiotic theory of CS Peirce and the biosemiotic theory of J von Uexküll. In this instance, for those who are unfamiliar with semiotic theory, UAL provides an alternative foundation to work from.

[whitefiddle]

I'd like to see some research done that explains why gorillas don't play poker given that we know dogs do.

[samc]

Similar to a pair of termites boasting about having social complexity and adapting their environments

[jamesruscheinski]

might language have developed from deeper consciousness / spirituality, connecting with God?

[Masterfailure-bi]

Animals aren’t concerned beyond now. What’s happening tomorrow afternoon is not a worry.

[jamesruscheinski]

could human brain have developed awareness of subject in nature? what could be a subject in nature?

[CesarClouds]

We all know - or should know - how we differ.