All Fours

A new born baby just lies there. Then it gets adveturous and ccurious so tries to move around ir learns to crawl all on its own as no one else around it crawls we adults walk on two legs.

Then it tries to stand but falls, and crawls again.

It tries to copy the adults and eventually learns to walk (amonsgt other things)

But the question is IF there were no adults around OR all the adults pretended to move around by crawling on all fours would the baby ever try to walk on two legs or would it just carry on crawling on all fours as it serves the purpose of moving?

a reply to: rkingpin

Babies pretty much copy what they see their parents do. I think as they got older they might try to get brave and see if they can stand up. But for the most part, if all they ever see is their parents crawling around then they will most likely stick to that. Kind of like eating, after awhile they don't want you feeding them, they want to try it themselves.

It would eventually learn to walk upright, as that's what our physiology is best suited for.

Answer is yes. He did not learn to breath through observation.in his genes to walk on all four. If he attempted to grab something above 2 ft the baby would have the moment of realisation that he could balance on 2 legs. Can't believe I responded to this...lol. I hope this was a genuine thread, although unlikely

a reply to: RealTruthSeeker
They would not stick to it. Please say you genuinely don't believe that.

has it been proven otherwise?

If not then my theory is still valid.

its like riding a bike, its easy anyone can do it, but if you never saw a bike or anyone ride one or no one taught you wouldnt bother. So if you didnt see anyone on two legs you might think that being moving on all fours is easy and best

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: RealTruthSeeker
They would not stick to it. Please say you genuinely don't believe that.

I said "then they will most likely stick to that". And yes, I do believe that. If the baby never see's his parents walk, then what would give them the idea to do so? You have to teach a baby to walk, they don't just magically start doing it themselves.

a reply to: rkingpin

I think the environment may influence. Big hungry animals might make the child try to run away.

But I dont believe genetics would cause the child to walk. I remember watching a docu about a child who had been kept locked up for the first eight years of her life, and though she did walk, she didn't walk very well at all! and she had seen adults walking.
Good question op, must be some research somewhere that would answer this.

I would like to think that if left alone they would eventually learn to walk bipedally. Although, babies raised by quadruped animals have only learned to move on all-fours, but very uncomfortably.

listverse.com...

Here are 10 cases to explore on the topic.

I do think muscular skeletal development would be a factor.

He would figure it out, but would be on all fours most of the time, kind of like feral children
a reply to: rkingpin

a reply to: rkingpin

Thank you for causing me to learn something. I assumed that instinct would suffice to get a child standing and walking. The examples of feral children proved my assumption wrong.

originally posted by: rkingpin
A new born baby just lies there. Then it gets adveturous and ccurious so tries to move around ir learns to crawl all on its own as no one else around it crawls we adults walk on two legs.

Then it tries to stand but falls, and crawls again.

It tries to copy the adults and eventually learns to walk (amonsgt other things)

But the question is IF there were no adults around OR all the adults pretended to move around by crawling on all fours would the baby ever try to walk on two legs or would it just carry on crawling on all fours as it serves the purpose of moving?

The answer is obviously yes. How else would the archiac humans learn to walk upright? There was a first and it had no one to follow.

Edit.

I take that back after re reading your post. If the child was shown to walk on all fours it has the possibility of not learning to walk upright. (the adults on their hands and knees). However, it still has the chance of discovering to do so, like my terrier did to bite a swing in our back yard.

a reply to: rkingpin

Honestly i believe that he/she would continue crawling due to fact that it hasn't been taught any other form of mobility. But as humans we have the capability to descover new way of doing things on our own so there is still the possibility of the child learning to stand and walk.

I guess i would liken it to a baby being raised around an ape. If the only experience the baby has of how to move around is walking on it's knuckles, why would it question any other means?

I do not however believe that the ability or rather intent to stand and walk is in our dna.

originally posted by: rkingpin
has it been proven otherwise?

If not then my theory is still valid.

its like riding a bike, its easy anyone can do it, but if you never saw a bike or anyone ride one or no one taught you wouldnt bother. So if you didnt see anyone on two legs you might think that being moving on all fours is easy and best

Not really. Feet are harder and stronger and good for supporting weight. Hands are not, it's more likely a human will injury himself using hands to walk, it's very inefficient. A human that crawls instead of walks would likely not survive in the wilderness without help. Feral kids are different because they are following the animals example.

What you are saying is really like asking if a fish will learn how to swim fast without being taught, or if a cat will learn to catch birds or mice for food if nobody is there to feed him. Well, if they don't they will die. It's in their physiology . Human infants require more nurture than most other species and likely will not survive without a parent or family member there to take care of the child's needs until they can do it on their own. A baby without a parent or somebody to raise him will likely not survive, so it kind of makes the point moot.

We're learning machines. Our behaviours are largely taught rather than instinctual. The best I know of is

It's fascinating stuff.

That video seems like a hoax. But I only watched the first minute. The fiRst person seems like she's acting. Then the shot of a shadowy dreadlocked person scrounging in a forest... Hmmm
Reminds me of pseudo documentary "reenactments"

a reply to: MarsIsRed

Like this one on John Sesebunya (got the name from the link above, on 10 Cases of Feral Children). This just seems like exaggeration:
Clip of Feral Children from a Reenactment Channel (aka National Geographic, Discovery, etc)
Love the scene where "it began to make the rounds" with businessmen in a smoky bar, all hats and seriousness, like " Whatta we do about this feral kid" "Aw, Gee Rupert, it's an interesting case... Let's study it"