28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

Ape and criture: The Chimpanzee as PostStructuralist

WilliamPlank
ForeignLanguagesandLiterature
EasternMontanaCollege
[PresentedattheConferenceoftheSocietyforLiteratureandScienceUniversityof
MichiganAnnArbor,1989]

OnedaywhilereadingJacquesLacan,Isetupalargemirrorintheliving
roomandcalledinmyGermanShorthairPointer.Iurgedhimtolookat
himself.Helookedatmewithuncertainty,tryingasalwaystodowhatI
wantedofhim.Finallyhegaveuptryingtounderstand,lookedatme
suspiciouslyandsniedthevarnishedframeofthemirror.Apparentlyhis
nosewasmoreimportanttohimthanhisimage.Ithoughtthatifhecould
beanindividualwithoutthetheoriesofLacan,thenperhapsIcould,too.
1.Thesubjectofthisessayisthecontinuityofbiologicalevolutionand
theextenttowhichwemayapplyprinciplesofanimalperceptions,values,
andcommunicationstounderstandinghumanperceptions,values,and
communications.Inversely,itisadiscussionofthevalidityofapplying
humanperceptions,values,andprinciplesofcommunication,allofwhich
havemetaphysicalassumptions,tounderstandingandtheorizingabout
animalperceptions,values,andcommunications.Generally,thesubjectof
thisessayistheproblematic(methodology)oftryingtounderstand
dierentspecieswithintheoverallscopeofbiologicalcontinuityandto
determinehowfarwemayinsistonthatevolutionarycontinuitytocast
lightonthedierentspecies.Thisdiscussionwilldevelopwithinthe
greaterframeworkofstructuralandpoststructuraltheoriesofsigns,
semiotics,language,andmeaning,andwillexploitthesometimes
intimidatingjargonoftheFrenchman,whichIwilltrytodeneasIgo
alongandforwhichIapologizeinadvance.Ihopethatwhateverlevity
mayappearwilladdtothefermentandwillnotdetractfromthe
seriousnessoftheproject.Ifprimateshaveasenseofhumor,thereisno
reasonwhyintellectualsmaynotshareit.
2.Extendingevolutionarycontinuity.Comparativeanatomists,
physiologistsandbiochemistscomparethestructure,theDNA,the
proteins,andthemetabolitesofvariousordersandspeciesinaneortto
learnaboutthemfromthepointofviewofbiologicalandevolutionary
continuity.Canweextendthesameimplicitbeliefinevolutionary
continuitytononbiologicalelementsordoesmansuseoflanguageleave
anunbridgeablegapbetweenhimandapes,monkeys,dogs,etc.?
Certainlyweacceptevolutionaryandbiologicalcontinuitytoagreat
extentinmedicalexperimentationsbuttraditionallyspecieschauvinists
havebalkedataributinglanguagetochimpanzeesbecausesomewherein
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

1/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

theirheartofheartstheymusthaverealizedthattheywouldhavetolay
mostofwesternmetaphysicsonthesimplepongid,ametaphysicstheyin
somecaseswerenotawareofthemselvesandcertainlypreferredto
maintainastheirownuniquelyhumanproperty.Evenifchimpshave
failedtodiscussKant,theyhavesucceededinexchangingbananas.Seen
fromthispointofview,aworksuchasSebeoksSpeakingofApesislessa
studyoflinguistictheoryandanimalcommunicationsthanitisanimplicit
eorttojustifyawesternlogosanditsaccompanyingmetaphysicsof
presence.Wemustfurtherdealwiththeproblemofwhethertheneo
corticaldevelopmentwhichmakesspeechpossiblejustiesacertain
biologismwhichwouldcauseustoincludenotmerelylanguageasa
branchofbiology,buttheapplicationoflanguageaswell.Sucha
procedurewouldleadtowardbiologizingcommunicationsandthought
andphilosophy.Biologism,likesociologismandanthropologism,has
frequentlyelicitedcontemptandindignationfromliberalandhumanistic
intellectuals,butifbiologismoersusinsightsintocommunicationsand
humanthoughtprocesses,thenitsheuristicvalueoughtnottobe
neglected.Forifthehumanselfisalinguisticphenomenon,thentheself
andlanguagemaybeunderstoodwithinabiologicalcontext.Teilhards
vision,expungedofitstheologicalandunnecessarybaggage,isabeautiful
vision.
3.Existenceoftheindividual.Giventheimpossibilityofanabsolute
denitionofspecies,theindividualisageneticfactandaccountsforthe
variabilityofaspecieswhichotherwisewouldbedeprivedofthe
adaptabilitynecessaryforevolution.Itsextinctionwouldbeguaranteed.
Althoughtheexistenceoftheindividualisageneticfact,theseindividuals
arehighlyalthoughnotcompletelystandardizedbysociety,culture,and
language.Thisstandardizationmakespossiblethehumansciences
(psychology,sociology,anthropology,linguistics,thetheoryandcriticism
ofliterature),butatthesametimeitguaranteesthatthesesciencesare
inexactandstatisticalbytheverynatureofthecollectionofpartly
standardizedindividualstheytreat.Onlyatotallydenablespeciescould
besubjectedtoanexactsociology.Sincetheabsolutelydenablespecies
cannotexist(oratleastsurvive),anexactsociologycannotexisteitherand
noneofthehumanscienceswillthereforeeverbeexact.Anexact
sociologycanexistonlyforextinctcultures,inwhichcasesociologyis
calledarchaeology.
Humansarechemicallystandardizedbythelawsofchemistryand
physics,thereforemakingmedicine,biochemistry,andbiophysicsexact
sciences.DNAandproteinsvaryinindividualsbutpharmacology
becomesanexactsciencebecauseofthatchemistry,eventhough
medicinesvaryintheireectonindividuals.Insummary,genetic
individualsarestandardizedbytheirchemistrybutonlymostly
standardizedbycultureandlanguage.

http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

2/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

4.Originoftheindividual.Giventhegeneticrealityoftheindividual,
thatgeneticrealityhasastandardizedyetindividualbehaviorwhichwe
havecometocallsubjectivity.Subjectivityisatermtodescribethe
exaltationthehumanindividualhasconferredonhimself,onwhichhehas
builttheentirephilosophyofexistentialismandtheBillofRights.Inall
fairness,thiswecallsubjectivityisprobablynotwithoutjusticationeven
thoughinitsextremeformsandinignoranceofthestandardizing
inuenceofcultureandlanguage,thatphilosophyofindividualismcanbe
deadlytotheveryindividualitexalts(Plank19.).
5.Theindividualandthedominantsense.Theindividualinthehigher
mammalianordersandevenlowerinthephylogeneticscaleprey
obviouslydeterminesitsidentitybasedonthedevelopmentofadominant
sense.Thusdogs,wolves,etc.maintainindividualityandterritorialityand
developsocialbehaviorlargelybasedontheolfactorysense.Individuality
andterritorialityarecloselyrelatedconceptsanditisprobably
intellectuallyunrewardingtotreatthemseparately.Ifweacceptthe
intuitionofDerrida,thatphonocentrismdoesnotdeterminelanguage,
thatecriture(writing)isaconceptwhichassimilatesallsigniers,whether
phonicorgraphic(orgrammic),thenifwedonotadmittheexistenceof
anolfactorysignierwebecomeguiltyofaspecieschauvinismbasedon
ourlackofagoodnose.Theolfactorysignierbringsupthepossibilityor
thepositingofanolfactorysignied(returningtoamoreSausurrian
terminology)andthereforetotheproblemofauniversalolfactory
signier,anasalPlatonism.Ifthisproposalsoundsridiculousitisbecause:
a.thesigniersigniedwayofdealingwiththingsisinvalidandhas
beendemonstratedtobesobyapplyingittoanimalperceptions,so
thatapplyingsuchthingstoanimalperceptionsisanapparent
reductioadabsurdumwhichrevealstheabsurdityofaproposition
evenwhenappliedtohumanperceptions,or
b.itislogicalthatabeing(thereader)whosesenseofidentityisvisual
ratherthanolfactorywouldfailtonditvalid.
c.Derridasgrammatology,reducingeverythingtocriture,isavision
basedtheoryandthereforeiseitherwrong,unproductive,orinaptto
describethebasesofanimalcommunicationsandthereforeisspecies
chauvinistic.Ifitfailstodescribeolfactorysigniersinanimalsitis
anexampleofhowtheappealtotheoriesregardinghuman
perceptionsmaybecheckedagainstanimalperceptionstosee
whethertheymayremainvalidforeitherspecieswhichwasthe
statedsubjectofthisessayinsection1.Suchspecieschauvinism
woulddamageouroriginalprojectoftryingtogainnewintuitions
withintheideaofevolutionaryandbiologicalcontinuity.
6.Visualidentity:Goman,Sartre,Derrida,Lacan.Higherprimates,
however,especiallyman,determineidentityvisually.Thisisnotavery
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

3/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

surprisingideauntilwerealizethatmanymoderntheoriesofselfand
identityarebasedonthevisual.Visualidentityseemssonormaltousthat
wehootatanolfactorysignierwhichwecannotdetectanddonotthink
toaachirrefragablyanevolutionarydevelopmentoftheeyeand
bipedalismtovisualoriginsofidentity.Evolutionarydevelopmentofthe
eyeandbipedalismthushaveproducedsuchtheoriesasthedramaturgical
sociologyofErvingGomaninwhichidentityispreparedinthe
backstagedressingroomareaoflifeandthenbroughtforthonthestageof
dailyexistenceinaneorttocontroltheimagethusprepared.Sartres
theoriesofidentityareheavilybasedonvisualstimuli:TheLookofthe
Other(leregard)isthebasisofthenatureofbeingperceivedbyother
peopleandsetsupawholevisionoftheselfasametastableentity
oscillatingbetweenonesviewofonesselfandthevisualopinionofthe
Other.NumerousSartreancharactersderivefeelingsofpersonal
superioritybyseeingwithoutbeingseen.Entiremonographshavebeen
successfullydevotedtostudyingtheidentifyingfunctionofmirrorsinthe
worksofSartre,demonstratingamongotherthingstheunexpected
usefulnessofreconditeliterarystudiestosuspiciousgraduatestudents
anddubiouseditors.Derridasrejectionofphonocentrismasatestfor
languageandhisassimilatingoflanguagetothemanipulationofthe
signierascritureislikewisethedisconcertingmaneuverofavisually
orientedanimal(asIsuggestedinsection5).Ibelievethatcritureis
basicallyavisuallyinspiredconceptevenifitsgeneralintuitionisthatof
theinstitutedtraceengravedintoachaoticarchcriture(archewriting).
ThespecularstageinthetheoriesofpsychogenesisofJacquesLacanisa
majoruseofthevisualinidentifyingtheselfandbecauseitcanprovide
somecuriousideaswhenappliedtoanimalselvesdeservestobetreated
atslightlygreaterlength.ReadersfamiliarwithLacanmayreasonably
skipthissection.HiswellhiddenideasarefairlylucidlyrevealedbyJ.B.
Fages.Thespecular(mirrorstage),however,iscomplicatedbyanother
stage,thesymbolic,whichsupercedesandcompletesthespecularfor
humanpsychicmaturityandnormalcy,astageaainedthroughthe
narrowdeleoflanguageandmetaphor.Thespecular(mirrorstage)isnot
anoriginalideawithLacan,butisusedandresearchedbyother
psychologistsandgiveseveryappearanceofbeinganauthenticeventin
generalhumanpsychogenesis,emphasizingthustheimportanceof
bipedalismandthemammalianeyeinthedevelopmentofindividual
identity.
7.SummaryofLacan.Therearethreestagesinthedevelopmentofthe
childbetweentheagesofsixandeighteenmonthsinthemirror(specular,
imaginaire)stage:(a)theimageinthemirrorisarealitylikeanyother,and
thechild(orsimian)maylookbehindthemirrorforthereality,(b)the
childstopstreatingitasarealobjectandwillnotlookbehindthemirror
foranother;tothispointhisreactionislikethatofamonkey,(c)he
recognizesitashisownimage.Thisisthestageoftheimaginaire,aterm
nottranslatableverywellasimaginary,butmoreasimagic.Thisisa
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

4/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

progressiveprocessinhisevolutiontowardsbeingasubject.Identifying
himselfwithanimagewhichisnothimselfpermitshimtorecognize
himself,contributestorecognizinghimselfasaseparatephysicalbody.
Helikewiseidentieshimselfwithanother.Thereisaconfusionbetween
himselfandtheother,evenidentifyinghisbodywiththatofothers.An
otheristreatedashisdouble.Suchisthenatureofhisoriginalrelationto
hismother,inwhichthechilddoesnotreallydistinguishhisbodyfrom
hissurroundings.(Sartrecalledthedierentiatingprocessnihilationand
madeitaconsciousprocessinanexistentialphilosophyorpsychology
basedonreectiveconsciousness.)Butbetweensixteenandeighteen
months,byidentifyinghimselfwithanimagewhichisnothimself,he
endsuprecognizinghimself.Itistherstdramedelexistence(Fages15),
andanticipateshismaturation.
Psychoticchildrenmayshowanguishattheirmirrorimage,as
chimpanzeesrearedinisolationseemalsotoshow(Desmond188),and
seemfrozen,turnedtostone.Nowthechildmustmoveoutofthismirror,
specular,imaginarystageintothestadedusymbolique,thestageofthe
symbolic.Otherwise,heremainsintheimaginaireasanexpressionofhis
mother.Hemovesintothissymbolicstagethroughthearrivalofan
elementwhichdepriveshimoftheabilitytoidentifyhimselfwiththe
mother,i.e.,thefather,theLacanianphallus(nameofthefather).The
accesstothesymbolicandsubjectstatusisthroughtheOedipusstructure
ortriad(child,mother,fatherphallus).
TheOedipusstructurehasthreestagesalso:(a)Thisisthesamestageas
thethirdstageofthemirror,specularstage,i.e.,theimaginary,inwhich
thechildidentieswiththemother.TheOedipusthusoverlapswiththe
specular.(b)Thefatherarrives,deprivesthechildofmothersbed,andof
thepossibilityoftheidenticationwiththemother.(c)Thechild,forcedto
namethefatherastheoriginoftheabsenceofthemother,performsa
metaphorical,linguisticsubstitution,enteringthustotrueseloodbythe
metaphorical,symbolicevent,throughthepathwayoflanguage.The
phallusisthenameofthefatherinLacansexplanationofthesymbolic
natureoftheOedipusstructure.Thephallusisthesymbolicentitywhich
arrivestointroducethestructureofdierenceintothespecular
imaginarynondierentiationofchildandmother.Assuch,thechild
aainsseloodasmetaphor,whereasthenameofthefather(phallus)
substitutesforthespecularidenticationwiththemother.Itcouldbe
demonstratedthatSartreandierentiationisalsoheavilybasedonthe
denominatingpoweroflanguage(v.Plank,1981).
Thehumanselfisrealizedthroughasubstitution(i.e.,metaphor),
otherwisethechildwouldremainidentiedwiththemother.Thereality
ofthehumanselfisasubstitution,madepossiblebytheexistenceofthe
symbolic.LacansOedipusexplainsthedierentiationofthechildfrom
hismotherasarealityofmetaphoricsubstitutioninthestructureof
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

5/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

dierenceofthefamilytriad,therealityofwhichismetaphoric
substitution.Realityissymbolandtheselfisactualized(constituted)by
languageinthesigniersigniedstructure(where,however,forLacan,
theroleofthesignierisdominantoverthesignied,whichisactualized
bythesignier).Neurosisisthefailuretoaccedetothesymbolicandto
remainintheimaginaire.TheLacanianphallusactsasadierentiation
factortogivethechildtheaptitudetogivethenameofthefatherasthe
causeoftheabsenceofthemother.Thisaccesstothesymbolicorderis
accesstolanguage,culture,andcivilization.Throughlinguisticelements
andsymbolthechildcanthenexercise,repeat,prolong,andplayoutthe
expressionofhisdesireordesiresforthatwhichisabsent.
AccordingtoLacan,hisdoctrineisfoundedonthefactthatthe
subconscioushastheradicalstructureoflanguage,thatamaterialisin
playtherewhichoperatesaccordingtolawswhicharethosediscoverable
inthestudyofreallanguages(languespositives),oflanguageswhichareor
werespoken(mytranslation,Fages20).Thesubjectisthusconstitutedby
thesymbolicorder,forlanguagemeanstherelationofsigniedto
signier.Itwouldappearthatanythingwhichremovesthevisualmother
forcesthearrivalofthesymbolicandthatdeprivationofthevisualtriggers
thesymbolicoratleasttrueselood,theauthenticfunctioningindividual.
Wewillnowhavetodealwithsuchquestionsaswhetherthechimp,ifhe
hasnolanguage,canhave(inLacanianterms)aself,orasubconscious,
andwhetherLacansideasforceustotheconclusion,withDescartes,that
heisanautomatonorwhetherwehavetorejectLacansideasbasedonthe
apparentabsurdityoftheirapplicationtochimps,orwhetherImay
simplybewronginaemptingtojudgeLacanbasedonapplyinghisideas
tochimpanzees.Obviously,Iprefernottoconsiderthelaerpossibility
sinceitwouldmeantheendofthediscussion.
8.Apelanguageandmetaphysics.Thinkerswhoseektodetermine
whetherthechimpanzeereallyuseslanguage(ormoreextremeyet,
humanlanguage)havetoaskthemselveswhetherthechimpreally
knowswhatheistalkingabout.Desmondphrasesthequestionthus:
Ifapescanuseourwords,thentheymightinvestthemwithdifferent
meanings.Surelyacatisa"cat"forbothchimpandman,butis
"sorry"(awordinallapevocabularies)?Eventhoughour"cat"might
describethesameobject,itisequallypossiblethatourtwospecies
conceptualizetheanimaldifferently.Itis,however,inethicallyloaded
wordslike"sorry"thattherealcrunchcomes,sincetheirhuman
meaningpresupposesahumansocialstructure.Andfinally,justto
introduceapieceofinterpretivepandemonium,whatabout"think"a
wordusedbythefirstsymbolizinggorilla?Howcantwospecies
whosebrainsdiffercometothesameunderstandingofawordwhich
describesbrainstates?(Desmond22)
Theabovecitationrequiresmanymetaphysicalpreassumptionsaboutthe
natureoflanguage,meaning,andreality.Whoistosay,afterall,whether
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

6/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

thehumanspeakerknowsthetruemeaningofthewordheuses.Inthis
case,thequestionaboutthenatureofhumanlanguageisincludedinthe
denitionofapelanguage.Canthechimpunderstandthesymbolic
natureofthelexigram?(Desmond,plate15).Doesthechimpanzeeknow
therealmeaningofthewordinAmericanSignLanguageorofthe
lexigramonthemachinekeyboard?Thesequestionspresupposethatthe
symbolhasameaningwhichisconnectedtoastablereferent,and/orthat
stablereferentsexist.
Letusrephrasethequestionintermsofstructuralandpoststructural
linguistictheories.Thebasisbehindsuchquestionsisthebeliefthat
signiershavesigniedswhicharestable(eventranscendental)and
assumesthetheologicalandmetaphysicalexistenceofPlatonicideals,or
Universals,orattheveryleastofAristotelianconcepts,i.e.,theexistenceof
theapparentinwhichiscontainedthereal(ideal),thatUniversalsexistas
theyaregivenformintheworldoftheapparent,butthattheyexist
nevertheless.Inthissense,languageandmeaningcanexistbecausethe
signierispresenttothetruly,reallyexistingtruthoftheideal.Witha
realitytocorrespondto,thechimpanzeemaythenbejudgedonwhether
hehasknowledgeoftheidealsothathissigniercanbepresenttoit.The
hiddenquestioninallsuchquestionsaboutthenatureofapelanguageis
IstheapeaPlatonist?Doestheapeacceptthewesternlogos?Doesthe
apeoperateaccordingtothemetaphysicsofpresence?Andthenal
implicitquestion,Doestheapehaveasoul?Forinordertofunction
accordingtothemetaphysicsofpresenceandthewesternlogos,itwould
gowithoutsayingthatWashoehastohaveasoul!Itbehoovesustodeny
thechimpaccesstohumanlanguagebecauseoftheimplicationsaboutthe
natureofhissoul,forinPlatonismthatsoulcommunicateswiththeIdeal
inthemindofGodinorderforthatsignierandtheworldoftheapparent
tohaverealmeaningbytheexistenceoftheUniversalandIdeal.Itisnot
only,therefore,thatwemustwonderabouttheapesuseofthewords
sorryandthink,butespeciallyiftheapecancommunicatewithouta
soul,ifhecanusehumanlanguagewithoutasoulandaknowledgeofthe
Universal,thenperhapsmanlikewisecan,andtheUniversalasbasisfor
knowledgeandmoralityisnotevenausefulandvalidconceptforman.If
theapecanbedemonstratedtousehumanlanguage,thenhebecomesa
subversiveinwesternmetaphysics,ayinthetheologicalointmentas
distastefulaswastheCopernicantheoryoftheuniverse.Evolutionary
continuityextendedtoideasisalileshocking!Wehavejustgotusedto
theideathatwearealmostidenticaltoupperprimatesintheconguration
ofDNA.
Thepossibilityofthesoulorthesubjectivitywemayndshocking.But
suchtermsmayverywellbeoutmodedunlesswearewillingtodeclare
thatsubjectivityisinterspecic,orthatanimalshavenontheological
souls,whichbeginstosoundalilesilly.Wendourselvesreluctantto
talkaboutsoulandsubjectivityinapesordogsorcatsandratsbecause
suchtermsareboundtightlytoatheologicalexistencefromwhichanimals
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

7/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

mustbeexcluded,andthenatureoftheirconsciousnessposesgreat
problems.Ourmetaphysicalinabilitytoaributesubjectivitytoanimals
becauseofourtheologicalbackground(ortheunconscioustheological
nostalgiaofmanyatheists)beginstogetinthewayofunderstanding
animalconsciousnessandeventheconsciousnessofman.
WesternphilosophymighthavebeenchangedifDescarteshadhadagood
dog,ifhehadbeenemotionallyunabletodepriveRoverofasoulbecause
ofthewayhebeggedatthedinnertableorthewayhewaggedhistail,
lickedhismastershand,andsatonhisfootinfrontoftheeveningre.But
deprivingtheanimalofasoul,turninghimintoaninsensitiveautomaton
goodforthetableofthevivisectionist,keepinghiminhisplaceisstillan
importantployinthearistocracyofhomosapiens.Linguistswhodeny
languagetothechimpanzeeonthegroundsthathedoesnotreallyknow
whatheissaying,(a)areapplyingtheirbeliefinthesigniersignied
dualityfortheoriginoflanguageandmeaning,(b)operatingonthe
Platonisticmetaphysicsofpresenceandthelogos,implicitlyinsistingthat
thechimpanzeeshouldbeaChristianinordertohavedroitdecit,(c)as
scientistswhowouldnotknowinglyallowreligiontoinuencetheir
analysesoflanguageorbiology,whowouldnotinsistthattheanimalhas
nofeelingsbecausefortheologicalreasonsDescartesdeprivedhimofa
soul,thesethinkersgoaheadandapplyaCartesianmodeltoanimal
psychismbyreplacingtheconceptofasoulwiththeconceptoftrue
language,therebygeingthesameresultDescartesgot.Itisnolongerthe
soulorlackthereofwhichisthetruemeasureofanimality,itislanguage
whichkeepstheanimalinhisplaceandhomosapiensinhis.Butasweshall
soonsee,allwehavetodoischangethedenitionoflanguageandPongo
andHomobecomebrothers.
Ifmodernlinguistsdeprivetheanimaloftruelanguage,theytherefore
denyhimselood,denysubjectivitytoageneticindividual,andeven
hootattheideathattheconceptofsubjectivitymaybeusedinspeakingof
animals.BythinkingbacktooursummaryofJacquesLacaninsection7
andtheroleoflanguageandmetaphorinthedevelopmentofthesubject,
wehavetowonderwhathappensinthementalevolutionfrompuppyto
dog,orintheseparationoftheyoungchimpfromhismotherandhowhe
takesonhisroleasotherthanhismotherinchimpsociety.Eitherthe
chimpdoeshavelanguage(seenfromthisproblematic)orhewouldhave
toachieveothernesswithouttheLacanianOedipus,whichisbasedon
languageandmetaphor,onthesigniersigniedduality,onmetaphorical
replacement,andontheroleofthefatherphallus.
Butifthebabychimpcanseparatefromhismotherwithoutlanguageand
theOedipusandbecomeanindividualinthefamilytribe,asitisperfectly
obviousthathecando,thenwhycantwe?Ontheotherhand,the
chimpanzeedoeshaveamommyandadaddyandhavingtheseparents,
whymayhenothaveametaphor,too?Thepossibilityarisesthathemany
nothavetobeawareofthemetaphoricalreplacementfortheOedipusto
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

8/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

functionforananimal,thatthemetaphorofthefamilytriad(orwhatever
structureofdierenceisinplayinchimpanzeesociety)operatesto
providehisindividualitywithouthisawarenessorintention.
AnothermajorpossibilityisthatthechimpanzeeisaDeleuzian,that
consideringthechimpanzeeinrelationtotheoriesofhumanlanguage
makeshimademonforthehumanchauvinistforitmakeshimthe
functionalequivalentoftheDeleuzianantiOedipus,theanticapitalist
schizoanalytic,thedemonstrationofthetruthoftheautoproductive
unconscious.MyGermanshorthair,Nimrod,hasaDeleuzian
autoproductiveunconsciouswhichallowshimasubjectivitywithoutthe
Oedipus,withoutlanguage,withoutmetaphor,withoutknowingreally
whatthenatureoftherealityistowhichasymbolsigniercorresponds.
Theconclusionisthataccesstoindividuality(subjectivity)isaninexorable
biological,physiological,evolutionaryeventwhichdoesnotneedthe
beautifulbutsuperuoussystemofJacquesLacantobeunderstoodorto
comeintoexistence.Thus,ifweareunabletoacceptDeleuzesaccusations
thatLacanssystemisabourgeoiscapitalistdaddymommystructure
forcedontheautoproductiveunconscious,Iwouldrecommendthatwe
canatleastseeitasaspecieschauviniststructureforcedonthecontinuity
ofbiologicalevolutionandthatitmayinalllikelihoodpreventusfrom
understandinghumanconsciousnessintermsofthetotalityoflife,ona
Niescheanwilltopower.
Itisnotdicultontheotherhandtoreachthegeneralconclusionthatthe
nameofthephallusasmetaphorwhichgivescompleteseloodtothe
humanisprobablyinaccessibletothechimpanzeeandthegorilla.The
conclusions:
a.thechimpanzeeselfisradicallydierentfromthehumanselfand
consequentlysoishiswholesociety.Ifsuchisthecase,thenacertain
humanchauvinismisjustiedandintuitionsaboutthehumanfrom
thinkingaboutanimalsaredeniedus,or
b.Lacanissimplywrong.Hehascontrivedaveryclever,beautiful,and
esotericsystemtoexplainhowhumansbecomematureselves,but
thefactthatthechimpanzeedoesbecomeanadultchimpanzee
withoutitprovesitcanbedoneandthatthereforethewholeidea
thatthenameofthephalluswithinthebosomoftheOedipaltriad
producesacompleteindividualissimplyunnecessary,that
becomingatrueadultselfisabiological,endocrinological,
sociologicalevent.Otherwisethechimpandthehounddogare
perpetualneuroticsoradolescents.Infact,dogsdoexhibitsignsof
adolescentdogbehaviorinthehomefromwhichtheyhavenever
beenexpelledbytheirhumanmothers,neverbeingforcedto
becomeadults.

http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

9/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

c.Deafpeoplearedierentselvesfromhearingpeople,sincethename
ofthephallusmustbeofadierentnature.Derridascriture,
denyingthedenitionoflanguageasphonocentrism,seemstobe
supportedbywelladjusteddeafpeople.HansFurthconcludedthat
phonicstructureinthedeafisreplacedbysomeotherkindof
structure.Thus,languagehasamuchwiderdenitionthan
phonocentrism.Becomingaselfmaybeamuchsimpler
biologicalendocrinologicaleventthanthespecularmetaphorical
psychogenesisofLacanwouldallowustobelieve./*/
9.Crossmodalmatching,thesigniedassensorialconsensus,the
angulargyrusasoriginofIdealism.Desmond(109)denescrossmodal
matchingbyillustration:eachsensefeedsrawdataintoaspecicareaof
thecerebralcortexconcernedwithitsinterpretation;hereaunique
representationofrealityasscannedbythatonesensecanbefashioned.An
orangecanbefelt,seen,smelled,tastedandsoon;eachofthesesense
organsthenrelaystheinformationtoitsowncorticalassociationarea
whererespectivesensedimensionsoftheorangeareanalyzed.Realityas
interpretedbyindividualsensesthusemergesinremarkable,diverse
guises.Indeed,asensuousinnityseparatesthefeelandsightof
apparentlythesameobject(110).Thevarioussensesreporttheir
informationtoacentralareaforcorrelationandthecreationofacentral
imageoftheparticularobjectinquestion.Thelocationofthisneocortical
crossroadswassuggestedbyHarvardsGeschwind:
Inman,thecorticalassociationareasofthebrain,eachresponsible
forinterpretingthesensesofvision,touchandhearing,areclustered
roundandpluggedintoastructureknownastheangulargyrus.
(Desmond111)
Tactileinformationisnotautomaticallyvisualinformation,visual
informationisnotautomaticallygustatoryinformation.Eachmustbe
processedinthehumaninferiorparietallobule,wherearetheangularand
supramarginalgyri.Theangulargyrus,asthereadermaysee,makesa
messoutofnominalismbecausethewordisnolongernecessaryasthe
originandsupportoftheuniversal.Bythesametoken,itembarrassesthe
PlatonicIdealandtheAristotelianconceptbymakingthemunnecessary
forintellectualfunctioning,senseperception,andjudgment.Ontheother
hand,byprovidingananatomicalphysiologicaloriginofgeneralideas,it
stronglysuggeststhatasigniedmaydevelopearlyinthelifeofthe
organismasaneurologicalconsensus.Andifthereisthebasisfora
neurologicallyexistingsignied,thenallthesemiotictheorieswhichare
basedonthesigniersigniedmodelsarestrengthenedandDerridas
signierchainsarereducedalmosttonaught.Theclaimthatspeechisan
essentialrequirementforsenseassociationcannolongerbemaintained.
Now,ithasbeendemonstratedbyDavenportandRogersthatapeshave
crossmodalmatchingabilities(Desmond113).Ithasbeendetectedin
rhesusandcapuchinmonkeys(115).IwouldsuggestthatPavlovsdog
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

10/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

couldnothavesalivatedatthebellwithoutcrossmodalabilityofsome
kind.Geschwindwasadamant:
...itcannotbearguedthattheabilitytoformcrossmodalassociations
dependsonalreadyhavingspeech...theabilitytoacquirespeechhas
asaprerequisitetheabilitytoformcrossmodalassociations.(quoted
byDesmond113)
Itappearspossibleandprobablethatoneneedssomesortoffreeoating
supramodalimage,divorcedfromanyonesense,beforeanametagcan
behungonit,andthereisaneuralcentertodojustthat.Itseemsthatthe
angulargyruscreatesanembarrassmentforpoststructuralism.The
angulargyrusisthecyberneticorganforthecreationofsignieds,
signiedswhichPlatomadedivineastheIdeal...signiedswhichsupply
thebasisforametaphoricalreplacementwhichmakesLacanstheories
moreprobablebutwhichalsomakesitembarrassinglypossiblethatthe
chimpanzeeisaLacaniansubjectivity,andsoisthemonkeyandthedog,
andweareallbrothersundertheskin.Allowmetoremindthereaderthat
thesubjectofthisessayisnotprovingoneortheother,buttheaemptto
demonstratethevalidityofcomparinganimalandhuman
communicationsandideaswithinthepreconceptionofevolutionary
continuity.
ThereisthusaneuralbasisforPlatonism,nominalism,Aristotelian
conceptualism,Saussurianlinguistics,Lacanianpsychiatry,andthe
enthusiasticwritingsofLviStraussonthearts,etc.,whichusethe
signiersigniedmodel.ItwouldseemtoweakenDerridasideathat
thereareonlysigniersofsigniers(signierchains)butontheother
handitstrengthenstheideaofDerrideancriture,whichdoesawaywith
themerephonicsignier(asthetestforlanguage);andbyextendingthe
denitiontoincludetheinstitutedtraceinitsvisualform,allowsus
likewisetousetheangulargyrusandcrossmodalassociationtoreinforce
theideaoftheolfactorysignierofwhichwespokeatthebeginningofthe
essayinrelationtoadominantsensewhichprovidesthebasisforidentity.
Byteachingapestheuseofsymbols,wecangaugethetypeofpre
existentconceptsandlogicalrelationsembeddeddeepwithinthepongid
mind.Thepointistomapthesewordsontoapemindstouncover
equivalentlogicaloperations(Desmond119).Washoewasanenthusiastic
skimmerofglossymagazines.But
Merestmentionofapespicture"reading"forpleasureisgreetedby
rankincredulityfollowedbyflirtatiousexcitement,thekindof
confusedresponseLyellfeltforDarwin.Yetalltheingredientsare
housedintheapecranium:symbolicrepresentationissecondnature
tofluentchimps,theirmind'seye"imagery"isprobablypropositional
instructure,allowingthemmentallytooperateontheworldandplay
outtheirstrategiesforsuccess(reasonbyanyothername)....
(Desmond125)

http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

11/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

Nowwearereadytoanswerthequestion:Whyhaveapesnotused
languagebefore?Iproposeasimplemindedandsimplisticanswer:
becausenooneevertriedtotalktothembefore.Sincetheapehasan
angulargyrusfortheformationofsignieds,wemightaswellsuggest
thathisbrainisanexampleofpreadaption(arespectableconceptin
biologicalevolution)tospeech,oratleasttotheuseofsymbols,atthevery
leastofaccesstoDerrideancriture.
Thecrucialpointisthatapestakereadilytowords,gestures,ortype:
symbolswhichmaytakeonidiosyncraticapemeaningsandmayeven
bemanipulatedaccordingtoauniquesyntaxwestilldonotknow.
Thesesymbolsformasurfacetopography,allowingustomapoutthe
subterraneanrepresentationalprocessesofthemind.(Desmond127)
Itisthelastsentenceofthisquotationwhichinterestsmemost:itsupports
Lacansthesisthatthemind,andthesubconsciousmind,havethe
structureoflanguageanditsuggests,basedonastudyofchimpanzee
communicationandmentality,thatthereisaLacanianconnectionbetween
mind,subjectivity,andlanguage(symbol).InDeleuzianterms,theapehas
thecapacitytobebourgeoisied.Butmanyhumanshavebeen
embourgeoisiandthereisnoreasonwhyapoliticaleventmaynothave
scienticreality,whyorganismsotherthanmanmaynothavethecapacity
tobestandardizedbycapitalismandpower.Suchanassumptionmakes
Deleuzeamoralistratherthanascientist.
10.Theoriginofvalue.Therecanbenodoubtwhatsoeverthatthe
chimpanzeewieldssigniers,whetherintheSaussurian,Lacanian,or
Derrideansigniedlesssense.Wehavejustseenwhatmetaphysical
baggagewecanlayontoPongowhenweaributelanguagetohim,but
whataboutquestionsofvalueastheyarerelatedtoconceptsofwork,
appetitepreference,andthemanipulationofsigniers?Abriefremarkin
referencetoMarxandBaudrillardisinorder.Isnotmereappetite
preferenceenoughtoestablishthenatureofthevalueofaproductordo
wehavetogetinvolvedinsigniersagain?Ithasbeensaidthat
Newtonianphysicsisgoodenoughtogetyoutothesupermarketand
backbutnotgoodenoughtoprovideadeepunderstandingofthe
behaviorofmaerandenergy.Chimpanzeespreferchocolatetobananas,
andbananastobeancake.Icannotwithoutspecieschauvinismdenythe
apeabasicvaluesystembasedonappetite,sinceIhavegrantedhimthe
manipulationofsigniers.Thechimpanzeecarefullychoosesandprepares
atwigforthecollectionoftermites,spendinghoursattheoccupation.Is
thislaborforthechimp,orishisfoodcollectiononlyfun?Arethese
termitesnottheequivalentofLockesacorns?Bylaborincollectingthese
termitesdoeshenotcreatevalueassuchinuentialthinkersineconomic
historyasAdamSmith,DavidRicardo,andKarlMarx(usevalue)have
proclaimed?Iwouldhavetodrawtheline(forthepresent)at
Baudrillardianhyperreality.Baudrillardsvisionofthemanipulationofthe
signiereectivelyassimilatesallofmodernhumanculturetohisspecial
denitionofconsumption,inwhichconsumptiongoesfarbeyondbut
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

12/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

withouttotallyrejectingtheroleofapracticalusevalue.Modernhuman
consumersocietyvaluesareafunctionoftheuseofthesignierina
conditionofhyperreality,whereitisbasicallytheproductassignier
whichistheentityconsumedandtowhichvalueandrealityareassigned.
ButIcanimagineachimpanzee,withouttoomuchsciencection,before
theconsoleofhismachinereplacingthebanana,intheabsenceofa
banana,bythelexigramandstrugglingwithhiscolleagueovermasteryof
themachinewhichdisplaysthelexigrams.Atleast,Marxsideasofthe
originofvalueinusevaluepreserveacertainbiologicalcontinuity
betweenusandtheanimals.
11.Conclusion.Consideringtheapescommunicationaslanguageallows
ustointroducehimtoalmosteverythingelsethatishumanandto
evaluateitsvalidityforhumansaswell.Sinceourtheoriesaboutlanguage
areinextricablyboundupwiththought,value,meaning,morality,etc.,the
chimpwhichuseslanguagehasgothimselfinhumanhotwater.The
absurdityofsomehumanideaswhenappliedtopongids,dogs,etc.,
revealstheirabsurditywhenappliedtohumansaswell.Suchaprocedure
isthatofthecartoonistLarson,asStephenJayGouldpointedoutinthe
forewordtoTheFarSide,Gallery3.Ithas,moreover,anancientlineage,
goingbackatleasttoAesopandfolkliterature.
Wehaveseenseveralparadoxicalconclusions:
a.Thereisreasontodoubtthenecessityforthecomplexityofthe
theoriesofJacquesLacanspsychogenesis.
b.ThetheoriesofJacquesDerrida,whichdenyphonocentrismasatest
forlanguagebyusingtheconceptofcriture,enlargethescopeofthe
denitionoflanguagesomuchastoallowustopositanolfactory
signierandtouseDerrideanterminologytoavoidthewestern
metaphysicalbaggage(logosandthemetaphysicsofpresence)when
seekingtounderstandchimpandhumanwithintheframeworkof
evolutionarycontinuity;
c.Derridassigniermanipulationprovidesavocabularyinwhichto
considerhumanandapecommunication,eventhesigniersusedby
muchmorephylogeneticallydistantorganisms;
d.Animalsmayuseunconsciousmetaphoricalsystemsofdierenceto
achieveindividuation,suggestingthattheymaybeunconsciousin
humans,too,allowingustoseethesimilarityofhumansand
animalswithintheconceptofGillesDeleuzesautoproductive
unconscious;
e.Theangulargyrussuggestssomevaliditytotheideaofageneral
imageandwouldlendstrengthtoamoretraditionalsemioticof
signreferentandsigniersignied,eveniftheDerrideansignier
http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

13/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

chainsimpliestalkingabouthumanandanimalcommunication
andthinking.
Wehaveseenthat,dependingonourdenitionoflanguageandthe
ramicationsofthatdenitionfortheoriesofthoughtandmeaning,the
pongidmaybeaPlatonist,anAristotelianconceptualist,aMarxist,a
phenomenologist,astructuralist,apoststructuralist,anincipientpost
modernist,aDeleuzianschizoanalystwithanautoproductive
unconscious,oranautomaton.Itoughttomakeusthinkbeforewejoin
anyofthoseclubsourselves.Ifthechimpmanipulatessigniers,thenhe
maymanipulatesignierchains,evenifhissyntaxisnotmuchmorethan
asurrealisticwordassociation.Thusheachievesmeaninginthesameway
aDerrideandoesinthescandalousmanipulationofthesignier.The
chimpanzeemayevencometoknowthepleasureofthesignieras
RolandBarthesdescribedthebasisforliteraryenjoymentinLePlaisirdu
texte.
Ifthephrasemeaningoflifemeansanythingandisnottoocornytouse
anymore,Iwouldsuggestthatthismeaninggainstextureanddepthof
intuitionwhenweputitinthecontextofbiologicalevolution,whenwego
beyondhumanphilosophicalconcepts,whenwecheckourhumanideas
andbehavioragainstanimalbehavior,andwhenweputthatmeaningin
thecontextofevolutionarycontinuityratherthanwithinthefrequently
parochialhumanmoralitiesandtheologies.Theconceptofcommunication
intheanimalkingdomgivesusagroundofcomparisonandsuggeststhe
extensionofbiologyintotherealmofideas.Sincebiologyitselfisa
philosophywhichprobablydoesnotescapemetaphysics,weoughtnotto
inchattheintrusionofbiologyintophilosophy.
Note
*H.R.Furthinhisextensiveresearchintotheintelligenceofthedeafrana
seriesoftestsonconceptdiscovery,memory,perception,andlogical
classicationandcametothefollowingconclusion:
...themajorsignificanceofthereportedfindingsforthetheoriesof
thinkingisthedemonstrationthatlogical,intelligentthinkingdoes
notneedthesupportofasymbolicsystem,asitexistsintheliving
languageofasociety.Thinkingisundoubtedlyaninternalsystem,a
hierarchicalorderingwithinthepersonofhisinteractionwiththe
world.Thesymbolsystemoflanguagemirrorsandinacertainway
expressesthatinternalorganization.However,theinternal
organizationofintelligenceisnotdependentonthelanguagesystem
onthecontrary,comprehensionanduseofthereadymadelanguage
isdependentonthestructureoftheintelligence.(228)[Back]
Bibliography

http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

14/15

28/11/2016

ChimpanzeeasPostStructuralist

Barthes,Roland.ThePleasureoftheText.NewYork:HillandWang,1975.
(Tr.byMillerofLePlaisirdutexte.Paris:EditionsduSeuil,1973.)
Baudrillard,Jean.SelectedWritings.Ed.MarkPoster.Stanford:Stanford
UniversityPress,1988.
Deleuze,Gilles,andFelixGuaari.AntiOedipus:Capitalismand
Schizophrenia.NewYork:VikingPenguin,1977.(Tr.ofLAntiOedipe.
Paris:EditionsdeMinuit,1972.)
Derrida,Jacques.OfGrammatology.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversity
Press,1974.(Tr.byG.SpivakofDeLaGrammatologie.)
Desmond,A.TheApesReexion.NewYork:DialPress,1979.
Fages,J.B.ComprendreJacquesLacan.Toulouse:EdouardPrivat,1971.
Furth,HansG.ThinkingWithoutLanguage,PsychologicalImplicationsof
Deafness.NewYork:FreePress,1966.
Goman,Erving.ThePresentationofSelfinEverydayLife.GardenCity,NJ:
Doubleday,1959.
Gould,StephenJay.Introduction.GaryLarson,TheFarSide:Gallery3.
KansasCity:AndrewsandMcMeel,1984.
Plank,William.Gulag65.AHumanistLooksatAging.NewYorkandBern:
PeterLang,1989.
.SartreandSurrealism.AnnArbor:UMIResearchPress,1981.
Sebeok,Thomas.SpeakingofApes.NewYorkandLondon:PlenumPress,
1980.
Contents|Home

http://mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1992/Plank.html

15/15