Discussion Questions on Chapter 5: Animal Communication Due on Wednesday November 9th by 1:00 pm. Please submit by Dropbox. 1. Andrews begins Chapter 5 with an example of apparent communication between Cacep the orangutan and Anne, his human caregiver. She notes that some researchers are skeptical about whether Cacep’s actions were a genuine attempt to communicate a request. Andrews maintains that since Cacep expressed frustration when his gestures failed to bring about the desired result, that he was in fact communicating an intention to Anne. a) Section 5.1.1 describes the “biological” theory of communication. Andrews claims that, “On this account of communication, Cacep and Anne were clearly communicating.” But one could easily object to this claim. In fact, if you look closely at the biological definition of communication stated on page 112, it should be clear that Cacep and Anne’s interaction does not satisfy the biological definition. Briefly explain why their interaction would not qualify as communication. b) In Section 5.1.3.1, Andrews outlines the Gricean theory of communication. Why does Andrews claim that the interaction between Cacep and Anne fail to satisfy Grice’s requirement. c) At the bottom of page 119, Andrews presents Machael Tomasello’s proposal that a signal is intentional only if it is used flexibly and strategically for certain goals. Does the interaction between Cacep and Andrews satisfy this requirement? Explain why, or, if not, explain what else is required to satisfy Tomasello’s requirement. 2. Vervet monkeys have distinctive calls for three types of predator. Each call is associated with a specific type of behaviour. Here is a video describing this behaviour https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lsF83rHKFc Notice that the person in this video (Robert Seyfarth) is considering two hypotheses to explain their behaviour. One possibility is that the vervet calls are merely expressive (note that Andrews discusses Expressivism in Section 5.2.2). The other possibility is that the Vervet calls were referential (see Section 5.2.1). a) What argument does Seyfarth present in the video for thinking that the vervet calls are referential? Try to reconstruct the argument in premise/conclusion form. b) Which step in his argument do you consider to be the most questionable, and why? 3. One of the most famous examples of “teaching language” to an animal is the case of Alex, the African Grey parrot. Here is a video of Alex interacting with his caregiver, Irene Pepperberg. When you watch the video, look for the reason that Pepperberg gives for thinking that Alex is not merely responding automatically to stimuli. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yGOgs_UlEc a) What criterion is Pepperberg using to determine whether Alex understands the concepts that he is using? b) In Section 5.1.3.2, Andrews considers the proposal that coordination is necessary for intentional communication. Does Alex satisfy this requirement? Briefly explain why or why not. .