Why human translation still matters
For all the progress made in machine translation, some things are perhaps still best done by humans:
The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis and the 'Wet Look'
An Aquatic Ape I think the strongest 'circumstantial evidence' supporting a partial form of the (controversial) aquatic ape hypothesis * is something I don't think I've seen mentioned before: The simple fact that we find wet Homo sapiens sexually attractive. If you think about it, doesn't it seem a bit arbitrary? E.g. would gorillas find other wet gorillas sexy, or would rats find other wet rats sexy? How universal is this? If we consider the concept of sexual choice ** in evolution, then if our ancestors were once partially evolving "in that direction", then we might expect that they may have felt a mate choice preference for the entailed characteristics of a hypothetical "aquatic ape" (such as the 'wet look', as well as finding smooth, hairless skin comparatively more attractive, as we do). To consider this argument, look at a picture like the one above (or this , this , this , this , or this ) ... then (for...
Comments
Post a Comment