Seyfarth & Cheney suggest in Meaning and Mind in Monkeys, that vervets cannot modify the mental states of others as humans do.

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Question restatement: The claim asks whether Seyfarth & Cheney, in Meaning and Mind in Monkeys, contend that vervets cannot modify the mental states of others in the same way humans do.
Option 1: True. The statement asserts that vervets cannot modify others' mental states as humans can. While some researchers argue that nonhuman primates show limited perspective-taking or understanding of others' perspectives, the specific position attributed to Seyfarth & Cheney in the title suggests a nuanced view rather than a blanket rejection of any mental-state modification. If the authors did argue that vervets cannot modify mental states in the human-like sense, this would imply a strong limitation on social cognition that many ethologists note as not fully supported by all evidence. The claim, taken at face value, seems overly definitive about a complex topic and would require close textual support from the work to be accurate. As presented, this option risks misrepresenting the authors’ stance by overgeneralizing their position on animal cognition. 
Option 2: False. This option counters the idea that vervets cannot modify others’ mental states as humans do. In primatology, researchers often argue that nonhuman primates display some degree of social awareness, understanding, or manipulation of others’ attention, intentions, or knowledge, even if not as sophisticated as humans. Seyfarth & Cheney’s work typically emphasizes comparative cognition and social knowledge in monkeys, and while they may acknowledge limits relative to human theory of mind, stating that vervets cannot modify mental states at all would be an overstatement. Thus, a more accurate reading would allow for some forms of social-cognitive influence, even if imperfect compared to humans. 
Additional considerations: Always be mindful that specific phrasing in scholarly titles or summaries can be nuanced. If the source uses a precise phrase like “cannot modify”, verify whether it refers to a particular type of mental state or a specific experimental context. If the text discusses alarm calls, alliance formation, or intentional communication, these are forms of social signaling that influence others, which challenges a blanket claim of impossibility. 
In sum, option 1 asserts an absolute lack of mental-state modification, which seems inconsistent with common interpretations of primate social cognition. Option 2 aligns better with the idea that vervets exhibit some social-influencing cognition, even if not equivalent to humans. However, without quoting the exact passage, one should treat the statement as potentially contestable and verify from the authors. Remember, the accurate understanding depends on the precise wording in Meaning and Mind in Monkeys and the authors’ framing of vervet cognition relative to human theory of mind.

ANTH 1050-090 Fall 2025 Exam 2

Seyfarth & Cheney suggest in Meaning and Mind in Monkeys, that vervets cannot modify the mental states of others as humans do.

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

Which of the following scenarios best demonstrates a concept related to Theory of Mind?

At what age do children come to realize that other individuals have their own thoughts and emotions?

Modularity theorists studying children with autism have recently suggested which of the following?

Britney understands that her father is crying because his best friend died. This shows that Britney has developed _____.

The Sally-Anne test is considered a decisive (“litmus”) measure of theory of mind because it assesses children’s grasp that:

Which scenario most clearly shows how early mirror self-recognition can lay groundwork for later theory-of-mind achievements?

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单