clue: koko wouldn’t do this in a natural (wild) environment. It is humans that conditioned (taught) him to do this. Therefore it doesn’t prove anything.
Communication is not an exclusively human trait. Birds, for instance, communicate specific feature of threats (Birds could warn each other of a red headed man, for instance). Such specific details are communicated without human training or intervention.
All social species have some innate ability to communicate. That humans can train them to understand human language does not means this is not part of their nature. Dogs for instance, can understand basic English sentences. They can interpret novel sentences, not just rote commands. You could teach a dog that an object is call “shoe”, and if the dog was already taught the verbs “bring” or “take”, you could later ask the dog to “bring me the shoe” or to “take the shoe to Abby”.
Given a capacity for learning language, it is not surprising that a higher order animal such as an ape could express “I love kitty”. Parrots, too, have even also been shown to produce similar semantically valid sentences in
spoken human language!
What this proves, however, is only that many so-called human traits are properties we share with animals. Christ actually addresses this, when he tells us it is not enough to “love thy neighbor and to hate thy enemy” but rather to “love thy enemy”.
It is merely an extension of our base instincts to love those who are friendly. It is the mark of a rational soul to love all that is worthy of being loved, even when that love is against our short term interest. The rational soul understands that has an immortal character, and must treat others in a manner consistent with eternal coexistence.
