Can we Speak to Animals?

I wonder: can we come into such semiotic contact with the way and being of the animals we observe - have knowledge of their actions i.e. why, in terms of context and history, and how, in terms of biological dynamics, and emergent structures such as sounds, faces, or appearance, which guide the structure of other creatures which keep track of large-scale objects, they do what they do?

What I mean to say is: brain structure and function can serve as a rough-guide for what kind of experience is possible for this creature (in terms of reconstructed biosemiotic history) as well as an examination of it's Umwelt - or the way it cognitively "intersects" with it's world, and what sort of images/signs would be relevant or existent with that creature.

One wonders whether, the closer we get to "knowing" our object, the more biodynamically 'entrained' we become with the object of our observance. In effect, to 'speak the language' of an animal, say, a deer, would be to feel, at a basic regulatory, and deer-related level, the semiotic reality of a deer.

It's hard at this moment to even conceptualize how this can be, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least bit if such power literally does reside within the human imagination.

Attunement, or imaginatively allowing ourselves to assimilate the propositional structure of a sign (physical, or abstract, in origin) - is not something happening in a vacuum - but is literally an electrodynamical 'super-positioning', or quantum entanglement, whereby the observing, tracking system (the human) interacts via the zero point energy field with the dynamical object (the organism), whose own functionality, or regularities of behavior, "speak their meanings", or transmit their signs, via the language of their expressed behavior.

One could, or would, then, experience a phenomenological 'movement into' the language of the animals experience - so at one in your understanding of what they are doing, or involved with, is your mind. At this point, you are merely observing, but at some point, the animal and you would interact, and what matters, here, is how you are in your body with the animal.

The animal, in sum, is an expressed object. But on way to becoming what is expressed, are neural bodies which respond selectively to different parts of the environment, as well as bodily homeostatic needs, and higher, social ontologies, and all of them working together to generate a 'gestalt' center of experience.

By speaking to animals, one does not mean anything other than this: "the ability to effect, or influence, in a positive way, an animals feeling of comfort, interest, or connectedness with you." What is not implied is any "warg" type power, where an animal is taken over by a human.

Communication simply means connection. To be able to interact with an animal - any animal, perhaps - simply by being recognized by that animal as 'non-threatening', itself something present in the electrodynamical waves of your body field, which contains the 'sum' of what you are, "semiotically", as it were, containing the structure of your development, and all that that 'holds' inside of it, would be pretty astonishing, if true.

The reason this is plausible, is that most mammals respond to the physiological, regulatory part of our behavior, which is usually being covered over by emotional baggage streamlined into thinking processes, making most people very bad at understanding their self-experience, and in being unable to differentiate fantasy from reality, or false impressions with true ones, have nothing to hold onto to pull themselves out of the ontological muck.

It is sad, to me, how poorly we recognize the beautiful meaning of the world around us - begging us, provoking in us, the thoughts we think about it.

Yet we deny this chord of connection - the sign - its value as the irreducible property of evolution.

I talk to our cats and they understand everything I say. I am not smart enough to understand half of what they are saying though, it will take me years more to understand their complex language. I do know that when Cat five bends up hit tail and jerks it at us, he is sort of giving us the finger. The other cat has a different sound for every different type of bird outside and a different sound for chipmunks and squirrels too. We can tell if it is a chickadee by the sound she makes when watching it. The morning doves have a different sound and another sound for woodpeckers. But there are a lot of birds out there and we can only recognize those three names and also squirrel or chippy.

Being retired can drive you crazy.

Yes. We can.


But we have to shut up and stop using linear language.

We have to turn on other parts of the brain, which work differently, which group sensation, memory, emotion, together as non-linear associations.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Hell yeah. I talk to animals all the time. I feel they feel me.

Anyway, TL; DR as usual!

a reply to: rickymouse

Interesting what you say about your cats having a sound for different types of birds.

Not sure why but I'm reminded of some verses in The Upanishads that refer to sages being able to have 2 way communication with animals.

Certainly something to do with attuning the proper wavelengths as Bluesma said.

Lol i argue with my 2 year old Labrador everyday and talk to the cat and trust me they understand lol

a reply to: MissCoyote

I believe animals and infants communicate solely through emotion. None of those stupid words and concretions we use.

It's easier to understand emotion than our typical wordy BS.

a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

Then explain to me how all 3 of my dogs learned how to spell..... :')

originally posted by: MissCoyote
a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

Then explain to me how all 3 of my dogs learned how to spell..... :')

yt vid or it didn't happen!

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: rickymouse

Interesting what you say about your cats having a sound for different types of birds.

Not sure why but I'm reminded of some verses in The Upanishads that refer to sages being able to have 2 way communication with animals.

Certainly something to do with attuning the proper wavelengths as Bluesma said.

That cat that has different words for chickadees, she will correct my wife if she says it is the wrong bird, she understands the words we say pretty well. If my wife says it is the wrong bird name, she turns and looks at her and says the right bird name in her language. It is as if she is correcting the wife, informing her that she has the wrong name. but the thing is sometimes the cat is looking at birds the wife can't see, the wife is looking on the branch by the patio door or the railing sometimes the cat's looking on the deck. The cat does look for a chickadee if she says chickadee though.

Something real strange is happening to us, we are realizing animals have very good consciousness and actually can distinguish between different species of other animals, that little female cat knows the difference between a white footed and field mouse.

In the Chan/Zen tradition of Buddhism? You are never alone the dishes talk the floor recites a sutta and animals? Well not as hungry as ghost of past and future not understanding the present moment out of which all arises.

Understanding the language of all of this only takes time and the ear to listen. Attached to the clutter and clanging of the conceptual dialog within one's head as thoughts? Deaf, dumb, and blind to the world surrounding ones form.

Formation does not occur in the mind things and everything else is just here... awareness requires no conceptual thinking to occur; attachment to concepts cover reality in a "group" think "group" speak due to attachment to our our decided and coded ignorance or dogmatic language as a species.

Life being life? It all speaks the only thing that never seems to shut up? Ignorance the constant spin of greed, hate, and delusion from all of the grasping at life... when it is already present.

a reply to: rickymouse

I've noticed the same thing with cats IE they have their own language based on very subtle variations in the sounds they make and seem to understand what humans are saying and maybe even what we're thinking as well. I'm sure they look on people as inferior easily exploited felines with a useful abilities like opening food containers and doors for them

a reply to: Pilgrum

Man seems to think we are the smartest of animals, but the older I get, the more I feel that we may be wrong. It takes a cat about twelve years to get really intelligent, I suppose learning is done at about the same rate as humans. So when a cat is twenty it might have developed the intelligence of a twenty year old. I am talking intelligence, not learned memory. But house cats die off and never get more intelligent at around twenty years old. They finally have full comprehension and start falling apart. We have an advantage there, we get the added comparison intelligence as we get older.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Anyone can speak to animals, will they understand is the big question. Sit and stay usually works well as a start. Giddyup as well.

a reply to: Astrocyte

I saw a far side cartoon about someone inventing a dog bark to English translator.

All they were saying was "hey!"

a reply to: Astrocyte

But more seriously, there are animals that do seem to understand language. I'm not talking about trained responses, I'm talking about species other than human who appear to have syntax and can invent new words and expressions.

Many cetaceans seem to have this ability and the 'signing' apes that can make jokes and lie to us are indications that language is innate in more species than humans.

I wouldn't normally star and flag something I wasn't capable of commenting on at the time, no matter how flag and star worthy I thought it was. This is an exception, probably because I love animals, and un apologetically so

I'll watch this thread with care. This far though, I may contribute:

My dogs know very specific words, such as "secret way out" so I believe we can communicate with them.

Now, there are many words they respond to, but this set of words is different.

Anyway, very interesting topic Astro.

You have to be careful. We like to throw our own assumptions and feelings into other things so we get that sense of belonging.

Animals understand emotion. Raw, basic, simple emotion that within itself is a language that you nor I couldn't possibly understand to have what could be a conversation with that animal.

Talking or having a conversation requires the transfer of information of a specific fact. To better describe said fact we use nouns, verbs and adjectives. Useless to an animal that relies on the environment at the time of the interaction. Anything after that interaction will have different environmental influence.

I know. I'm trying to wrap my head around this. It's difficult. Good job on the op. Asking questions that pushes the bounds of thought where it has never gone before. S&F

a reply to: Astrocyte

What I wonder:
If dogs can't solve a problem they look if they got the attention and start barking, either looking at their owner or the problem.

Did they copy that from us?
Try it yourself, if you use tesafilm on a very smooth plastic surface the thin one, the look through plastic and try to take it off...
What is your strongest urge?
Barking, right? Like a monkey.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Wasnt that the whole prescedent of Dr.Doolitle? on a higher note, I believe anyone can communicate with animals if they want to. It's not as hard or as mystical as you might think.