Xenu, Hmm ... Yes, there is a sort of synergy in the language/culture interaction and, to a degree, semantics attempts to address that aspect of the matter. As to how 'culture' is represented? ... Good question. Important part of being human? Yes, but in a peculiar, sense: As the 'tool' that unifies a group in that it integrates the group's knowledge and creates an integrated 'society'. Therefore, as 'Technology'! Don't feel bad, I'm not sure I understand it either. Seems to be a framework, paradigm, for helping me understand what we call life. and all its manifestations. :m: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! :m:
sargentlard, Tell you want, check this out, then we'll discuss infant cognition: http://www.sru.edu/depts/artsci/sas/hardesty/infant cognitive_files/frame.htm Take care, mate. :m: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! :m:
Culture is technology? That seems to be stretching it. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! How about ...Language + Knowledge + Culture + Technology, etc... I'd say language creates knowledge. Agreed upon knowledge across individuals creates culture. So knowledge and language are needed for culture to come about. However, following what you've been doing, does Technology need culture? It doesn't seem so at first. Any schmoo could make certain discoveries, such as using a stick as a weapon- an uncultured hermit could do so. But in order for technology to be expressed at the level humanity is currently at, a large combination of ideas and embodiment of prior knowledge were needed, i.e. culture. Make sense? I would define what you are doing here as more of "components to human progress" rather than what makes a homo sapien sapien. Sarge, Here comes your next arse kickin' . Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Infants do recognize their mothers by the sound of their voice. The womb isn't closed off to sound and a baby's hearing is quite developed at birth. *kicks Sarge's ass hard, developmental psychology style! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
*sarge busy from arse whooping from chagur and Xenu*Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Ok first of all Xenu and Chagur forgive my childish attempts here and here goes.. Sp Xenu how do you descibe adopted infants....those who are born from a differnt than then the one who raised them?? why can't they recognize why the one rasing them isn't their biological mother???? Interesting indeed.... Also bit off topic..(sorry chagur).. Is really true that that a child will respond to music in the mother's womb...and it will actually benefit the child's intelligence levls in the futurePlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
They recognize the voice as being familiar, the voice they heard in the womb. So they remember the voice as a voice they heard before, not as "this is the voice of my mother". I'd venture to day that an infant has no concept of "mother". Rereading my previous post, I can see how it could have been misleading. Infants may recognize the sound of all kinds of voices that are heard in the womb. I've heard this before. A child can hear music in the womb, but I'm guessing it does little in terms of intelligence. It may allow the child to get an early grasp at music. It may affect their emotions a bit too. It may give them an affinity toward Mozart or Metallica.
Culture is technology? No! Change that to 'culture is a technology?'; then, Yes! ... does Technology need culture? I don't believe so. A lot of technology was created prior to 'culture'. But again, certain technologies may require a 'culture'. What comes to mind is the different use of gunpowder: European vs. Chinese. Maybe that's why I think of 'culture' as a 'technology'. "components to human progress" Progress? Hell, as far as I'm concerned, once our species left its ecological niche ... it found itself on the a slippery slope to madness! As you may have noticed, I do 'stretch' things a bit. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
