31–40 of 206 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, technically apes don't have tails, monkeys do, so the chimpanzee talk would be an ape talk. Learned that from her too
In the same sense that "there's no such thing as a tree" or "there's no such thing as a fish", there's"no such thing as a monkey".
That's sad news. She completely changed the way we thought about primate intelligence. Fun fact: she really liked the Far Side cartoon about her. https://static0.srcdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2022/...
Gary Larson cartoon incident
One of Gary Larson's Far Side cartoons shows two chimpanzees grooming. One finds a blonde human hair on the other and inquires, "Conducting a little more 'research' with that Jane Goodall tramp?"[114] Goodall herself was in Africa at the time. The Jane Goodall Institute thought the cartoon was in bad taste and had its lawyers draft a letter to Larson and his distribution syndicate in which they described the cartoon as an "atrocity". They were stymied by Goodall herself: when she returned and saw the cartoon, she stated that she found the cartoon amusing.[115]
Since then, all profits from sales of a shirt featuring this cartoon have gone to the Jane Goodall Institute. Goodall wrote a preface to The Far Side Gallery 5, detailing her version of the controversy, and the institute's letter was included next to the cartoon in the complete Far Side collection.[116] She praised Larson's creative ideas, which often compare and contrast the behaviour of humans and animals. In 1988, when Larson visited Goodall's research facility in Tanzania,[115] he was attacked by a chimpanzee named Frodo.
The gap between us and the chimpanzees is, at the same time, "tantalizingly small" and "too big". We have learnt to communicate with them, but they also don't seem to ask questions, at least not the way that humans do. There is obvious intelligence in their eyes and deliberation in their movements, but they seem to be content with an almost static culture. Which was also true for the Neanderthals. What was the last s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, technically apes don't have tails, monkeys do, so the chimpanzee talk would be an ape talk. Learned that from her too
In the same sense that "there's no such thing as a tree" or "there's no such thing as a fish", there's"no such thing as a monkey".
If you don't like paraphyletic labels for aesthetic reasons, just include the apes to make it monophyletic. The main reason we don't is that many people have strong, visceral reactions to being called a monkey.
You can't do that to fish or trees without including a bunch of things that are obviously not trees and fish.
When I was young, not knowing who Jane Goodall was, I was dragged into lunch by event planner who showed her around Beijing, and wondered why this lady was talking about chimpanzees so much. This was the year the Nokia released Snake, I remember getting enamoured/distracted by her monkey talk and lost a near perfect snake run.
Sorry for your loss.
You don’t have to be a biologist or zoologist to appreciate what Jane Goodall brought to the world. Her work transcended science. It touched on compassion, respect for all living beings, and a deep curiosity about the natural world that inspired generations. She didn’t just study chimpanzees; she taught us what it means to observe with empathy, to advocate with conviction, and to act with hope. Her legacy will echo f…
You don’t have to be a biologist or zoologist to appreciate what Jane Goodall brought to the world. Her work transcended science. It touched on compassion, respect for all living beings, and a deep curiosity about the natural world that inspired generations. She didn’t just study chimpanzees; she taught us what it means to observe with empathy, to advocate with conviction, and to act with hope. Her legacy will echo f…
Imagine what kind of world we would live in if we put these kinds of human beings in charge instead.
The gap between us and the chimpanzees is, at the same time, "tantalizingly small" and "too big". We have learnt to communicate with them, but they also don't seem to ask questions, at least not the way that humans do. There is obvious intelligence in their eyes and deliberation in their movements, but they seem to be content with an almost static culture. Which was also true for the Neanderthals. What was the last s…
Perhaps expecting change makes change more likely. Also, when things are scarce and life is tenuous you are less likely to experiment. Why waste the resources? Why take the risk? When surplus calories became commonplace is when cultural change took off.
The gap between us and the chimpanzees is, at the same time, "tantalizingly small" and "too big". We have learnt to communicate with them, but they also don't seem to ask questions, at least not the way that humans do. There is obvious intelligence in their eyes and deliberation in their movements, but they seem to be content with an almost static culture. Which was also true for the Neanderthals. What was the last s…
Maybe asking annoying questions?
To elaborate, there seems to be a difference between physical curiosity and intellectual curiosity.
Many mammals, especially when young, are very curious about their environment, peeking, sniffing, burrowing in the ground etc. So are human children.
But the ability to ask more abstract questions "why do the stars shine?" does seem to be limited to humans alone, and maybe not even all humans. And it is very uncertain if archaic humans had it as well.
Rest in peace, Jane.