A Strange Question... I Know... But..
By Darkwing
@Darkwing (21583)
August 30, 2007 5:00pm CST
A couple of things that have happened since last night, prompted me to think about life and its stages, and I came to thinking about when we are very young.
Don't ask me why... I told you this was a strange question, but it dawned on me that human babies are the only ones who take such a long time to learn to find their feet, and walk. Every species of animal I can think of, apart from birds, learn to walk at a very young age, many of them, moments after birth. I've seen lambs being born and standing on their feet within seconds, albeit a bit shakily, but they're walking moments afterwards. It seems the way of all animals and yet human babies take a minimum of nine months to find their feet. Even then, it takes a while from first standing to walking.
Why do you think this is... or do you know? Is it because we have to balance on two legs rather than four, or is there some other reason. I would be very interested to know the answer to my strange thoughts.:)
I'm sure somebody out there has the answer.
7 people like this
18 responses
@webeishere (36313)
• United States
30 Aug 07
But yet an animal like a horse 3 times our birth weight can
stand instantly. Strange isin't it? Life is such a mystery at
times as far as the human infant and growth.
HAPPY POSTINGS FROM GRANDPA BOB !!~
@SViswan (12051)
• India
7 Sep 07
hmmm...interesting!
You know what I think? We are probably still evolving as a species. The rest of the animals and birds have been around for ages. Maybe...200 years from now....our babies would be able to walk sooner.
My theory has no scientific backing...but this is my strange theory to your strange thought:)
Human babies balance on fours before they progress to 2 legs...so that theory isn't right.
Anyways...I liked your question and I will be doing some thinking on that now.
Maybe I might come up with a brighter theory.
@SViswan (12051)
• India
7 Sep 07
Your question has made me do a bit of reading (I'm sure I'll be doing more of it).
One theory is that human brains has associative memory. We make an association with an event to locate the facts or process in memory. In some organisms, almost all that they need for survival is passed on genetaically and present in them during birth. They know instinctively what to do. They need very little nurturing by a parent. When an animal develops a cerebral cortex,they require external stimulus for learning..which is provided by a parent. Human beings mature over a longer period of time than animals and they learn certain survival skills during this period.
This theory is similar to what certain myLot users have posted. If I find anything new, I will let you know.
1 person likes this
@Darkwing (21583)
•
8 Feb 08
I came back to resolve this discussion and find a best response, and I only just saw your input. Thank you very much for that, and I'm sorry it's been so long, but I feel that I didn't receive notification of this.
I really value the research you've done into the topic of babies walking. Brightest Blessings my friend, and a rap on the hand, for me! :)
@Lakota12 (42600)
• United States
31 Aug 07
I could be that animals were and are around longer than us humans and for some strage reason we have to learn the hard way to walk then run. After that ya cant stop us.
also I think we have a brain to think with and that dont develope like and animal they have the insintct to get up and get get going or they might get ate by a preditor.
Thats just how nature work and how would ya feel if your kid camr out talking and walking ya wouldnt have the time to adjust yourself to this new person that has took over your life like they do.
1 person likes this
@Darkwing (21583)
•
1 Sep 07
Lol... I love that last bit, Lakota... very amusing. I just wondered why that is, that's all. If we didn't know any other way then it wouldn't be such a mystery, would it.
You're possibly right though. Thank you for your input +.
Brightest Blessings, my friend. xx
@webeishere (36313)
• United States
30 Aug 07
I think it has to do with the development of our brain as an infant. It is just a complex machine that it takes awhile before we can decipher what things are and how to use them. kind of like buying a new computer, we need to learn some things all over. I dunno if this makes sense to you or not. Just my ideas is all. HAHAHA! Thanks also.
HAPPY POSTINGS FROM GRANDPA BOB !!~
@webeishere (36313)
• United States
30 Aug 07
Maybe their brains develop more wuickly due to the fact theirs is not as complicated or as intricate as the humans brain? I dunno. HAHAHA! Sounds good though doesn't it?
HAPPY POSTINGS FROM GRANDPA BOB !!~
1 person likes this
@whyaskq (7523)
• Singapore
31 Aug 07
The discussion reminds me of George Orwell's Animal Farm :P
I have a more strange question which no one can answer me. How does a baby knows how to breath and eat and cry when he is hungry?
Babies "walk" on fours too (2 legs and 2 hands). We call it crawling, not walking. lol.
It takes months before the baby starts to crawl. Some walk bypass the crawling stage. When they crawl, they balance on fours (legs and hands).
I would think it is because they mimic the adults and try to go on twos, or at least it is the adults who teach them to go on twos. Only when their legs are strong enough, do they really walk as they want to make their hands useful too.
1 person likes this
@Darkwing (21583)
•
31 Aug 07
Lol @ George Orwell's Animal Farm. Yes, babies do walk on all fours to start with but not for a few months, usually between four and six months.
I think the answer to your question is simply, the brain. When a baby is born, the doctor slaps their bottom, and they gasp and cry, thus taking their first breath. So, the brain tells them that they cry when they're hurting. When they're hungry, they hurt, so they cry. Breathing is a natural mechanism, triggered by the brain, as is eating. As for walking, I think the brain says "No, you can't walk until your spine can hold you up straight". If you notice, a baby has a weak spinal cord, in that he can't hold his head up straight away... it takes time. Once he's mastered holding his head up, he begins to roll over and gradually get up on all fours, and once he's master that, he in turn, starts pulling himself up to stand, and eventually, to walk once he has his balance.
Thank you for your input, Why, and for matching my question with another. +
Brightest Blessings, my friend.
1 person likes this
@Perspectives (7131)
• Canada
3 Sep 07
I am not sure from a biological standpoint...but I would think that humans have more complicated nueral-nets to develop. The brain and nervous systems have many more links attached to our cognitive development...and I cannot help wondering if that has something to do with it. The more highly developed capacity to reason...the right of free will is not only connected to our soul and inner consciousness...it has to be developed through our biological growth process. The process of walking, using our hands and feet have a lot to do with the 'wiring' through our brain and nervous system...we seem to need time to 'orient' ourselves after being in spirit form...you think?
So that is my short answer...to a very interesting and complex observation. Great topic though...I love to have my thinker off the subject of our friend's passing and onto something else. I knew I could rely on you to do that...because you do it so well.
Thanks for you support and standing up for me when I shared Tam's passing. I am joining with you for Lakota..and my candles are burning every day. Many beautiful blessings, hugs and well wishes coming your way.
Raia
@Darkwing (21583)
•
5 Sep 07
Yes, Perspectives, a very good response. I too would have thought that were the answer, together with the development of the spinal cord. It did seem the most feasible explanation but Balasri apparently looked the answer out, so if I might point you in the direction of his response, I think you might be a little amazed at how simple the answer is. lol.
You're welcome to my support at all times, Sister. I know that Tam's passing hit you and your hubby very hard. It took me a few days to adjust and fathom the reason why, but I spoke with a very dear friend, who knows nothing of them, and he said a few words to me, which made me feel a lot better. I'll pass them on to you, so that you can perhaps get your head around this a little more easily and with greater comfort. Here's what he said, word for word:
"I'm sure they said their own goodbyes, and, if they were that close to each other, then they will be together in spirit for eternity..what could be better than spending forever with the one you love...and they may have decided that each couldn't face life without the other...that is a real demonstration of loving. It was their choice, and a very brave one to make. I think it is better to remember them as a couple, which they obviously were, who chose to show their love for each other in the most personal way... even if I didn't know them, I admire their closeness and faith in each other."
That from the guy whom we prayed for in our first circle. If he isn't my soulmate, I'll eat my hat. He always seems to find such logical and comforting words when I need them. I'm sure you'll agree that thought about in that context, the whole situation seems much calmer and beautiful.
Brightest Blessings, my dear, dear friend. xx
1 person likes this
@Darkwing (21583)
•
9 Sep 07
You're most welcome to everything I can offer, my dear friend. As for the e-mail, I will look out for it, and am more than happy to discuss things further. That's what friends and soulmates are for, huh, as my friend was there for me at a difficult time when I needed to talk. Many times an individual who is detached from the situation is far better equipped to help one understand that which they can't conceive alone.
Brightest Blessings my Soul Sister. x
@gabs8513 (48686)
• United Kingdom
31 Aug 07
Well I have to admit that I have never thought of that or should I say about it and yes it does seem Strange I guess I do not have an answer for you but I will keep my Eye on this Discussion as I would be Interested to know this to
Love and a Big Hug xxx
@cloudwatcher (6861)
• Australia
31 Aug 07
Hi Darkwing. Just a thought - when we look at the lifespans of humans and animals, it is as though we are in time-lapse photography, and so everything takes longer in humans, but as a percentage of a lifespan it may not be so much of a difference. I'll leave you to work out the maths there.
1 person likes this
@Darkwing (21583)
•
1 Sep 07
Hi Cloud... good to see you, as always! Yes, that's an interesting theory, and one which I might myself have adopted, by Balasri looked it up, and it's a little different according to scientists. Not a lot, I might add, but I think you might find it quite interesting.
Thank you for your input and Brightest Blessings. +
@noeltotherescue (261)
• India
31 Aug 07
wow!! thats indeed a very stranger question... you know, i would never have thought of such a question!!
i guess that we are not born with that much strength in the beginning,.... besides we walk on 2 legs instead of the animals' 4 feel...a ll babies do begin to crawl on all four limbs in the beginning right? its just the 2 legs-walking that we take some time to learn... so i guess we can say that we are as fast as other animals in learning in walking.... after all we are the only species(besides apes) who have learnt to walk upright!
@aissha (2036)
• India
31 Aug 07
right this question i asked to my mum when i was 10-11 something like that and i saw birth of a cow in front of my eyes and at that age it was soooooo much for me.i'll tell u what mu mum told and it still sound logical to me humans are also animals but they are most advanced specially the nervous system thats brain which need proper 'wiring' which is done automatically but it takes time as it is complex and in case of my daughter i never taught her to sit or walk and she developed on her own ,so time is neede for the perfect wiring in the brain as it does lots of other things which other animals don't.
anyways nice discussion
1 person likes this
@kayrod2 (1304)
• Australia
1 Sep 07
This is a great question to ponder. It makes you think though. I have no idea why this is. It will be good to see others thoughts on it. Maybe we are just a bit lazy when we are little. But we learn a lot, but it takes a long time really to get to know it. And we spend all our life learning. I wonder if the other animals do.
Best wishes to you, darkwing
@andrejuly84 (1047)
• Romania
31 Aug 07
that's a very interesting question.you know,in each one of us lies a phylosopher,that's why you thought at this question.i knew a legend about this,or better sais a short story telling something like that:atthe begining,God let all the babies(human,animals etc) to fall.and the human baby's mom catch him in her hands while the animals didn't catch their babies.that's why human needs so much to learn to walk.of course this is not an exactly sciencifical explanation,just one said of the olders.this is a proof that those kind of thoughts were in our ancients' minds long long time ago even they didn't have so many information as we have nowadays
1 person likes this
@barehugs (8973)
• Canada
31 Aug 07
yep! Its really very simple. An animal has 4 legs and many enemies. Over hundreds of million years the young animals who couldn't get up and run soon after birth were caught and eaten by their enemies. Only those who run away quickly soon after birth survived. THis is called "Evolution" Human Babies were carried by their Mothers when they needed to get away from natural predators soon after birth.They had no reason to get up and run. This is the way Human Babies Evolved. Does this answer your Question?
@Darkwing (21583)
•
31 Aug 07
True in most senses, Bearhugs, but there are some species of animals who do the exact same thing. They pick their babies up by the scruff of their necks, in their mouths, such as the bear, wolf, and cats. So although I agree to an extent, I don't feel that's the sole answer. However, I like your response so you too may have a + rating.
Brightest Blessings and thank you for your input.
@pendragon (3350)
• United States
31 Aug 07
It seems those creatures that stand and run the fastest and that are first to do so, know ollectively that their species is in danger, like deer, they're hunted, cows, get eaten, etc.Man has learned that he is supposed to last a while, we are supposedly the closest to being divine, and as weird as it sounds I think we need longer to adjust to being in the flesh,that our understanding of life needs to be a lot more careful, that as humans we need to be soft and delicate and need to learn to need others,or else it'd be everyman for himself all the time.We need adjusting and I think the fontanel, the soft spot in our heads where our skulls meld together lets us know that right off,lol.Great question!
1 person likes this
@elshaddai123 (3981)
• Kottayam, India
31 Aug 07
it is the lookout of the creator, we cannot find an answer He is sovereign.
@pyewacket (43903)
• United States
31 Aug 07
First of all it's not a strange question, as I've wondered that myself many a time LOL--maybe that just goes to show you how dumb the human species actually is...heehee. I really don't think it has to do with our walking on two legs..animals in the primate species..like gorillas, chimpanzees and orangutans, and so forth walk on two legs also, and yet even they don't take as long as we humans do to learn to walk. It could be that the human species just isn't developed enough when it is born..Most animals are born with full capabilities, just smaller versions of their adults...Look at baby birds..It only takes them about a month or so to full development and then they fly the coop and are on their own, while we humans take about sixteen to eighteen years to leave the nest--like I said..maybe we're just dumber..LOL
1 person likes this
@Darkwing (21583)
•
31 Aug 07
Lol... I don't think it's that we're dumb my friend. Just the fact that we can think about such a thing and possibly work out the answer shows that, huh? It's true what you say about primates and since we are supposed to evolve from them, I don't know why we don't walk as quickly.
The only reason I can think of is that our spinal cord needs time to strengthen, given the fact that a new-born can't lift its head, and has to be supported at the neck. Therefore, we don't have the strength in our spine to straighten our backs and balance, nor can the spine take the weight we put on it.
Brightest Blessings, my friend. +
@alamode (3071)
• United States
5 Sep 07
Humans are born 'young', while animals grow to a more mature stage before birth. They must be able to run with the herd, pack, pod, etc at short notice.
If humans did that, they would be in the womb for three years!! (estimate!)There would probably be fewer humans born if this was so!!
@Darkwing (21583)
•
9 Sep 07
That sounds to be a very feasible and thoughtful solution to my question, Alamode. Animal years are only a fraction of human ones, so yes, that could be part of the reason.
However, Balasri took the trouble to search out the answer here, and whilst there have been some brilliant responses from many people, our theories don't match the one he found, entirely. It might interest you to check his response out.
Brightest Blessings and thank you for taking so much trouble with your response.
