who asked the first question? - International Research Center For ...

384origin models therefore present the possibility that some human groups might haveexisted without language (or at least without spoken language) for a longer time thanothers. Such theories are hardly in keeping with egalitarian principles” (Hewes, 1977:49).Moral and ethics issue addressed here directly. According to our model, human dialogicallanguage, self-developing cognition and mental cooperation originated among ourcommon ancestors in Africa. It was the shift to speech, medium of language that wentthrough different scenario and time range in different regions of the world.As I have already mentioned, and I would like to repeat again, that facts of natureor evolution cannot be immoral or unethical themselves. It is us, our interpretationsthrough the moral models and ethical norms of our changing societies, that make thesefact “moral” or “immoral”.Let us now have a look at our model of evolution of choral singing, intelligence,language and speech from the point of view of moral model and ethics of our society.• Our model suggests that ancestors of the populations of East Asia, NativeAmericans and Australian aborigines shifted to the articulated speech earlier thanancestors of European and African populations. I do not think this difference can beinterpreted as the factor of the advantage for East Asian, Native American and AustralianAboriginal populations, who supposedly shifted to articulated speech earlier, or as afactor of disadvantage for European and African populations that supposedly shifted toarticulated speech later.• Our model suggests that lower rate of stuttering prevalence among East Asian,some Native American and Australian Aboriginal populations must be connected to theirearlier shift to the articulated speech, in comparison with the European and Africanpopulations. Unlike the first point, where it is just a suggestion, the difference instuttering and dyslexia rates is a fact (or at least, can be tested relatively easily). Howshould we interpret the existing differences in prevalence? Does this suggestion point tosome inferiority of the individuals with speech disorders and populations with higherprevalence of speech pathologies? I do not think so. All the known facts strongly suggest,that individuals with stuttering and dyslexia are among the humanities best knownscholars and highest achievers: from Virgil, Erasmus, Demosthenes and Moses from theancient world to Albert Einstein, Charles Darwin, Thomas Edison, Winston Churchill,Lewis Caroll, Nelson Rockefeller, Rodin, and many more, they all suffered fromstuttering or dyslexia (or even from both of them, like Winston Churchill). Even inChina, where stuttering seems to be relatively rare, the most famous writer in modernChinese history, Zhou Shu Ren (better known as Lu Xun, 1881-1936) is known to sufferfrom stuttering.Therefore, I believe there is nothing in the fact of higher or lower stuttering ordyslexia rate, or in the suggestion of earlier or later shift to the articulated speech, tocause ethnic or racial tensions. Unless we make our own interpretations of the facts andthe model presented in this book in order to seek some historical or biological advantagesof some populations over the others. If my suggestions are proved (fortunately, many ofthem can be tested), we should accept it as a fact of our history. If we use thesedifferences wisely, without turning blind eye on human differences on one hand, and