Forum Moderators: open
cog-ni-tion: The mental process of knowing, including aspects such as awareness, perception, reasoning, and judgment.
The article suggests that because the people of this tribe have no counting skills they are somehow less cognitive than the rest of us. So, perhaps had the Roman Empire not fallen we would all be writing dates with letters instead of numbers. How would that make us less cognitive?
I genuinely believe that these tribal folks are probably quite happy with their status-quo, in fact it appears they have gone to some effort to keep out encroaching influences. Why would it matter if one word means "one", or "a few", and another word means "more than a few"? Sure, for those of us with "modern educations" numbers are like gospel, ask any businessman.
We could look at the example of New York, where an island was acquired for a handful of trinkets. To the seller, those trinkets probably represented something new and exciting, and besides that, they probably laid claim to a lot more land.
All of the terms used to define "cognitive" are subjective. Any mental process is going to differ from another. I recently admitted to not knowing what TV shows currently appear on prime time - does that mean I'm somehow less cognitive than someone who not only knows what is showing, but who can also recite the names of the cast and fill me in on the entire plotline? I hope not. My awareness of television, in this example, has just increased to the point where I can recognize drivel from substenance. It's a matter of my perception - a part of my cognisance.
Finally, I suppose that if I were to go live among the tribal people mentioned in the article then there would be many, many things I'd have to learn, and quickly, in order to simply survive. Counting seems pretty insignificant when you live on a tributary of the Amazon River, and your daily routine consists of hunting, gathering, and avoiding deadly critters.
I didn't get that from it at all... They have no native counting system, therefore they can't count. I didn't get any kind of condescending overtone from the article.
Although I find it fascinating that something that seems as second-nature as counting is actually a totally learned thing. All human societies naturally develop a language, but mathematics isn't an automatic, natural skill.
I always knew there was something unnatural about math class. ;)
So does this mean you're sticking around? ;-)
The article suggests that because the people of this tribe have no counting skills they are somehow less cognitive than the rest of us
Actually, I don't think that the article suggests that at all; to me it seems like the headline ("Study Suggests Language Shapes Thoughts") is pretty well chosen.
This study was apparently designed to help answer (or begin to answer) the linguistic/philosophical/psychological (depends on your background or interests!) question 'does language influence how we are able to think about things?' - and seems to come up with the answer 'yes, at least in the case of numbers'.
-B
I'd agree with that. Quantification leads to "property", and property leads to dispute. Tribes without words for "own" "mine", "theirs", "ours", etc, don't have words like "theft" or "steal".
>>Study Suggests Language Shapes Thoughts
Thought also shapes language, and actions shape thought and I don't know why they needed a new study. Native American languages are filled with similar examples in which language shaped thought.
Exact counting is needed for merchants. If you're a hunter/gatherer, "one" bird might mean "hungry" while "many" birds means "full bellies". In order to maintain their way of life I hope the tribe has a word that means "go". Be handy to use that one on the people doing the study.
Just imagine, Ill have slightly less than one of those oh yeah, and 2 of those 3 times.... Mad
My pup, Pierre, understands when I tell him there are 1 or 2 ducks to retrieve. He has all the awareness, perception and reasoning necessary to perform the single task or two tasks when requested. Possessing cognitive ability and using it are two different things. It just takes some training/schooling to use it more effectively.
I don't believe for one minute those people are less cognitive than I after years of school , books, etc.
Counting seems pretty insignificant when you live on a tributary of the Amazon River
We could look at the example of New York, where an island was acquired for a handful of trinkets. To the seller, those trinkets probably represented something new and exciting, and besides that, they probably laid claim to a lot more land.
I know what you are saying, but this is a bad example - the native people they "traded" with had no concept of land ownership and no intention of selling land to anyone - and the other side was well aware of that fact.
despite his lack of language.
Don't be so sure that a dog has a lack of language. Some studies suggest that dogs on average (depending on breed) are cabable of understanding as much as a 2-year-old human child. Dogs also can understand implied hand signals (like when you point to the ducks) better than our kissing cousins, the primates.
I read that study and wasn't too surprised by what it found. Those of you who are bi-lingual can atest to the fact that the English language is not quite a comprehensive as some other languages. Many languages are more elborate than English, more descriptive. Numbers are really no more than descriptions. Beyond that, somebody did have to invent math and therefore numbers. Even the numbering system we use is not the only one ever invented. I can't remember what civilization, but one used a numbering system based on 12 instead of 10. A twist of fate and that could have been our standard counting system.
We humans only learn what we need to. If you don't have a need to count, you don't have a need for numbers.
I can't remember what civilization, but one used a numbering system based on 12 instead of 10.
I'm not aware of any major society that used base 12 -
there are groups that actively seek to promote it though:
[polar.sunynassau.edu...]
[dsgb.orbix.co.uk...]
But, on my search, I found this too.
Mayan's counted by 20.
[civilization.ca...]
base 12 - apparently not used as a general number system but widespread use for time and weight measurement
Even the British were using weight measurements based on 12 into modern times.
This produces the number 12 as an alternative base for a "natural" number system, known as the duodecimal system.
They start out talking about why the 12 was used (becuase they could count on their fingers that way) but it does say, as quoted above, the fact that they did that created a system to count by 12.
Whether it's used for weight or otherwise does not discount it as a counting system.
There are several ways to use your fingers for counting. A method still in use during the 20th century in the Middle East uses the thumb to point to different parts of each finger. Each finger can be used to indicate three numbers, so the four fingers of one hand cover the numbers 1 - 12. This produces the number 12 as an alternative base for a "natural" number system, known as the duodecimal system.
Again, the page does not support your contention that there was a society using base 12.
My comment was:
I can't remember what civilization, but one used a numbering system based on 12 instead of 10
I did not say it was a base or otherwise system. Just a numbering system. That would include counting the weight of something or the hours of day, which we currently do use and I didn't think about. I beleive your statement:
Even the British were using weight measurements based on 12 into modern times.
There have been other counting systems other than the one based on 10. Which is also supported in the article.
The statement you have quoted in entirety still says that the counting used produced a system that counted by 12. It is irrelevant that it was not a "main" counting system.
But beyond that, for the rest of you reading this little spat and giggleing ;) ...
Why do we count hours by 12 instead of 10? How long would it take you to adjust from 24 hours in a day to 10 or 20? Since we didn't grow up learning that system, it would make it very difficult for us to deal with it if some researcher came along and asked us to calculate time of day based on that (10/20) system. That is exactly what the people in the study are dealing with.
Even the British were using weight measurements based on 12 into modern times.
I think this is a confusion with the pre-decimal currency that applied in the UK and Ireland until 1971:
(ie, in February 1971, 2.4 old pence were exchanged for one new penny)
But no one has mentioned that the Babylonians used base 60, and we all still follow them in this in counting time as 60 seconds to the minute and 60 minutes to the hour, as well as counting 360 (6 * 60) degrees to the circle.
However, I think this is getting off-topic, in that the thrust of the original article is that you need some sort of counting system in your language to be able to count.
What would be interesting to know is whether memebers of the Pirahã who learn a second language (eg Portuguese) sunsequently improve their ability to estimate numbers.
I wouldn't wish that on them. ;) Next they'd be living in ranch-style houses, watching TV all the time, and using credit cards.
Cultural assimilation is one of the few areas where I adhere firmly to slippery-slope arguments.
watching TV all the time
Of course, if they're intelligent, they'll only watch repeats [webmasterworld.com] ;)
