<!--QuoteBegin--Hawkeye+May 21 2003, 06:17 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hawkeye @ May 21 2003, 06:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Sure perhaps birds can sing, but I sincerely doubt is for the enjoyment of themselves and other birds alike. They do that for mating calls and warnings and such things like that. Never for entertainment. So maybe they that's the only sort of thing that will come out of their mouths. The same thing for whales. If the only sound you could make out of your mouth was a singing voice, does this mean you are singing? Not because you enjoy music and singing do you make this noise, but because you have to. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Did you read the article I posted? I assume not.
I'll summarize: what it said, basically, is that most human music shares many characteristics (eg rhythms, scales, harmonies) with bird and whale songs. In other words, birds and whales produce the same general sorts of sounds that we classify as "music" and on the average respond well to. Their vocal equipment could very easily let them make "non-musical" sounds (eg lacking rhythm or having discordant combinations of notes), but they choose instead to produce sounds that tend to appeal to the human ear. Sheer coincidence?
Apart from other creatures having an innate sense of music similar to ours, the only explanation I can see is that we are for some reason specifically programmed to appreciate and imitate bird songs (and whale songs, somehow), but not other types of noise. The simpler explanation lies in our common ancestry, from which it logically follows that other creatures in that genetic line (which is a LOT) have similar predispositions toward appreciating certain types of sound, which is what we label "music".
Much as it might shatter your little world to think of any non-human animal having ANYTHING in common with you... <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Actually, just because it's common doesn't mean it's genetic - it can very well be that the human understanding of music was initially formed by birds songs, and that this general notion has since then been transported to each new generation (thus, it'd be 'memetic'). The same thing could apply to any creature used to such rythmic sounds - seeing that birds are one of the oldest and most successfull kinds of animals still existing, that could mean pretty much every mammal on the planet.
That_Annoying_KidSire of TitlesJoin Date: 2003-03-01Member: 14175Members, Constellation
shouldn't this be in the discussion forums? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
I would personally say that I belive chimps have the ability to apreciate and understand music
just remembered: some scientists has theories about the gorillas(not sure it was gorillas, but it was some kind of monkey-like animal) mind being complicated enough to have some kind of faith...but this is just something i <i>think</i> i have read...
<!--QuoteBegin--Nemesis Zero+May 21 2003, 11:43 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ May 21 2003, 11:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Actually, just because it's common doesn't mean it's genetic - it can very well be that the human understanding of music was initially formed by birds songs, and that this general notion has since then been transported to each new generation (thus, it'd be 'memetic'). The same thing could apply to any creature used to such rythmic sounds - seeing that birds are one of the oldest and most successfull kinds of animals still existing, that could mean pretty much every mammal on the planet. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Interesting theory, and it'd be hard to disprove, since it'd be pretty hard to find a group of people who haven't had music imprinted on them from a fairly young age.
I still lean toward genetics, though. Considering that there are all these isolated groups of birds all over the planet, but they all tend to sing the same general sorts of songs, it seems pretty likely that it's in some way imprinted in them to sing as they do. It's not much of a leap to think that we could have some similar genetic predisposition towards music.
Consider also the whales, who are pretty well isolated from most songbirds and people, and have been for a very long time (and possibly since before they even developed their current vocal mechanisms, since I don't know of too many land-bound mammals that sing).
Finally, why would humans ever respond well to bird songs in the first place?
Well you never heard a whale making a deep coughing noise or a song bird go "AHEM." Perhaps their voice allows them to do something other than sing, but this doesn't mean they are doing it because it is athetically pleasing to them. You have to remember the reason they do this which is to communicate.
Had they made a weird coughing noise, none of the whales would have understood it. It isn't that whales, songbirds can't do otherwise, it is just because that's what they've come to be used to for communication. Perhaps it follows some pattern and rhythem, but this doesn't mean animals think "hey, what lovely music." If it sounds pleasing to the ear, it is coincidence. I've heard more than my fair share of animal cries which put my head in a migraine faster than britney spears can get laid. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Hawkeye+May 21 2003, 03:12 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hawkeye @ May 21 2003, 03:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Had they made a weird coughing noise, none of the whales would have understood it. It isn't that whales, songbirds can't do otherwise, it is just because that's what they've come to be used to for communication. Perhaps it follows some pattern and rhythem, but this doesn't mean animals think "hey, what lovely music." If it sounds pleasing to the ear, it is coincidence. I've heard more than my fair share of animal cries which put my head in a migraine faster than britney spears can get laid. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> So birds and whales make completely random noises that by sheer coincidence happen to sound nice?
Try mashing the keys on a piano sometime. Or sawing randomly at a violin. These are the sorts of noises songbirds would make if they weren't conforming to the standards they do. Out of all the possible combinations of notes and rhthyms, a fairly small number could be termed "melodious" - I don't know the exact numbers, but I've never seen a tune plunked out by random chance that is at all bearable to listen to. And birds not only produce listenable tunes, they improvise new ones, inventing them "on the fly", as it were, without ever slipping up. Same with whales.
Now, something else to consider. If bird and whale songs were solely used for communication, wouldn't the repertoire tend to stay more or less constant? Language simply doesn't work if it's changing too quickly. Of course, it DOES change, but it's a very gradual process. Even humans, arguably the most verbally competent creatures on the planet, evolve language at a slow and steady pace because we generally need new words and syntactic rules to be put in context of familiar ones. If you were to invent an entirely new language and start speaking it, nobody around you would be able to understand it, so any modifications made to a language need to be introduced one at a time. A common example is slang, which simply adds new words and phrases to the lexicon, one by one, without (generally) changing any syntactic rules.
Art, on the other hand (including music, writing, film, you name it) evolves very quickly, because it can be understood as-is. With few exceptions, you generally do not need to have seen a given art form's inspirations to appreciate the art for itself. In some cases, art builds on language, but in that case the language is still more or less the commonly used form, and it's only the ideas expressed that change rapidly.
Whale songs change dramatically from year to year, to the extent that if their sole purpose was in fact communication, it would be evidence of whales being far better with verbal communication than we are, able to completely redefine and relearn their entire language effortlessly. Certain songbirds also change their songs very quickly over time. The simplest explanation seems to be that their music is in large part artistic rather than purely communicative, and hence far more mutable, while still conforming to fairly rigid standards that make it "melodious".
Comments
Did you read the article I posted? I assume not.
I'll summarize: what it said, basically, is that most human music shares many characteristics (eg rhythms, scales, harmonies) with bird and whale songs. In other words, birds and whales produce the same general sorts of sounds that we classify as "music" and on the average respond well to. Their vocal equipment could very easily let them make "non-musical" sounds (eg lacking rhythm or having discordant combinations of notes), but they choose instead to produce sounds that tend to appeal to the human ear. Sheer coincidence?
Apart from other creatures having an innate sense of music similar to ours, the only explanation I can see is that we are for some reason specifically programmed to appreciate and imitate bird songs (and whale songs, somehow), but not other types of noise. The simpler explanation lies in our common ancestry, from which it logically follows that other creatures in that genetic line (which is a LOT) have similar predispositions toward appreciating certain types of sound, which is what we label "music".
Much as it might shatter your little world to think of any non-human animal having ANYTHING in common with you... <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
The same thing could apply to any creature used to such rythmic sounds - seeing that birds are one of the oldest and most successfull kinds of animals still existing, that could mean pretty much every mammal on the planet.
I would personally say that I belive chimps have the ability to apreciate and understand music
The same thing could apply to any creature used to such rythmic sounds - seeing that birds are one of the oldest and most successfull kinds of animals still existing, that could mean pretty much every mammal on the planet. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Interesting theory, and it'd be hard to disprove, since it'd be pretty hard to find a group of people who haven't had music imprinted on them from a fairly young age.
I still lean toward genetics, though. Considering that there are all these isolated groups of birds all over the planet, but they all tend to sing the same general sorts of songs, it seems pretty likely that it's in some way imprinted in them to sing as they do. It's not much of a leap to think that we could have some similar genetic predisposition towards music.
Consider also the whales, who are pretty well isolated from most songbirds and people, and have been for a very long time (and possibly since before they even developed their current vocal mechanisms, since I don't know of too many land-bound mammals that sing).
Finally, why would humans ever respond well to bird songs in the first place?
Had they made a weird coughing noise, none of the whales would have understood it. It isn't that whales, songbirds can't do otherwise, it is just because that's what they've come to be used to for communication. Perhaps it follows some pattern and rhythem, but this doesn't mean animals think "hey, what lovely music." If it sounds pleasing to the ear, it is coincidence. I've heard more than my fair share of animal cries which put my head in a migraine faster than britney spears can get laid. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
So birds and whales make completely random noises that by sheer coincidence happen to sound nice?
Try mashing the keys on a piano sometime. Or sawing randomly at a violin. These are the sorts of noises songbirds would make if they weren't conforming to the standards they do. Out of all the possible combinations of notes and rhthyms, a fairly small number could be termed "melodious" - I don't know the exact numbers, but I've never seen a tune plunked out by random chance that is at all bearable to listen to. And birds not only produce listenable tunes, they improvise new ones, inventing them "on the fly", as it were, without ever slipping up. Same with whales.
Now, something else to consider. If bird and whale songs were solely used for communication, wouldn't the repertoire tend to stay more or less constant? Language simply doesn't work if it's changing too quickly. Of course, it DOES change, but it's a very gradual process. Even humans, arguably the most verbally competent creatures on the planet, evolve language at a slow and steady pace because we generally need new words and syntactic rules to be put in context of familiar ones. If you were to invent an entirely new language and start speaking it, nobody around you would be able to understand it, so any modifications made to a language need to be introduced one at a time. A common example is slang, which simply adds new words and phrases to the lexicon, one by one, without (generally) changing any syntactic rules.
Art, on the other hand (including music, writing, film, you name it) evolves very quickly, because it can be understood as-is. With few exceptions, you generally do not need to have seen a given art form's inspirations to appreciate the art for itself. In some cases, art builds on language, but in that case the language is still more or less the commonly used form, and it's only the ideas expressed that change rapidly.
Whale songs change dramatically from year to year, to the extent that if their sole purpose was in fact communication, it would be evidence of whales being far better with verbal communication than we are, able to completely redefine and relearn their entire language effortlessly. Certain songbirds also change their songs very quickly over time. The simplest explanation seems to be that their music is in large part artistic rather than purely communicative, and hence far more mutable, while still conforming to fairly rigid standards that make it "melodious".