The Monist, Vol. 2, 1891-1892 : $b A quarterly magazineVarious
Philosophy
The Monist, Vol. 2, 1891-1892 : $b A quarterly magazine
Various
Philosophy -- Periodicals
Prof. Max Müller also condemns all efforts of approaching the problem
of the origin of language through observation of children and animals.
The former he calls “nursery philology” the latter “menagerie
psychology.” And it is certainly true that the problem of the origin
of language cannot be solved from observations of children or animals,
because the problem lies in another field. The problem is not how a
ready made language is transferred upon the growing mind of a baby
but how speechless beings developed into speaking beings. And all the
intelligence of clever animals is still very different from the rational
thought of man. This is true, but it is also true that good observations
of animal psychology and also of nursery philology will throw some light
upon the evolution of rational thought.
Prof. Max Müller says:
“How can we attempt to realise what passes within the mind of
an animal?... We can imagine anything we like about what passes
in the mind of an animal,—we can know absolutely nothing.”
We are fully aware of the fact that the problem of the origin of language
is quite different from the problems of animal psychology. A solution of
the latter, which are extremely complex and difficult, would not help
us to solve the former. This being conceded we can nevertheless see
no reason why animal psychology should be condemned and given up as a
hopeless task.
It is not true that “we can know absolutely nothing about what passes in
the mind of an animal.” It is true we cannot see the animals’ feelings
and thoughts, but we can see their actions which reveal their feelings
as much as and sometimes even plainer than the speech of our brother man
reveals his thoughts. Might we not say with the same reason, “We see only
the printed book of a scientist (which is an expression of his views as
much as the behavior of an animal is of its feelings) but we can know
absolutely nothing about what passes in the mind of that scientist. All
we can do is to judge from analogy”? And should we on that account give
up all reading and studying and also all arguing with others?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account