I don't disagree with the title of the article but I also don't think you can prove anything about consciousness with language. How consciousness can arise from matter is still a very much a mystery.
How is it that sign language association learning is different from spoken language learning? What about humans using simple sign language in their early life?
Is it not possible that we try to detract too much here?
I don't disagree with the title of the article but I also don't think you can prove anything about consciousness with language. How consciousness can arise from matter is still a very much a mystery.
How is it that sign language association learning is different from spoken language learning? What about humans using simple sign language in their early life?
Is it not possible that we try to detract too much here?
> How is it that sign language association learning is different from spoken language learning?
Huh? The article doesn't claim anything like this.
Yeah, sign-language versus spoken-language is just an implementation-detail for which signals Koko was reproducing.
In some parallel-universe where Koko was a parrot "speaking" English, we'd have the same set of philosophical issues and concerns.