In response to my last post, I received a couple of thought-provoking comments from DJ. I will deal with each in turn.
Genes may load the gun and environment, may pull the trigger, but for mankind not necessarily. In the animal kingdom genes establish a predetermined predisposition. A lion act differently than a monkey by reason of instinct. Both however are driven by a need to survive in their environment and their level of intelligence is no greater than what is needed to survive. Mankind with a much greater level of emotions is intelligent way beyond what is needed for survival and in addition expresses behavior unknown in the animal kingdom. You cannot compare the species.
I agree with you, DJ, that human beings are distinct enough from other animals to deserve their own category. In this, we are siding with Aristotle. But the difference is not nearly as great as you suppose. In fact many animals are quite capable of flexible responses to their environments. In an experiment I saw when I was in grade school, a couple of worms were placed in a t-shaped maze, with sandpaper on one side and food on the other. They learned after a few trips down the maze to turn right every time. Heck, I expect they voted for McCain.
More advanced animals can rapidly respond to very sophisticated problems with astonishing flexibility. Chimpanzee cultures have been observed, which include simple technologies for finding food that have to be taught. So I think you are wrong to say that you cannot compare the species. You can, and it's very illuminating.
Looking to the animal world for explanation for human behavior is a dead end street. Genes may load the gun and environment may pull the trigger but it fails to explain greed, avarice, deceit, hate, love, sacrifice, Hitler and Stalin. The animals are driven by a need to meet their survival needs only. Even their play is designed towards that end. A favored pet will follow anyone who provides its needs. Genes can be overcome but no animal in the wild can deny its preprogrammed nature. An eagle will always arrange the sticks to form a nest and not a cottage. Mankind with its enormous intelligence way beyond its need to survive cannot be compared to those creatures whose intelligence is limited to its survival needs.
Again, I cannot agree. Far from being a dead end street, there is a veritable metropolis of research results and research programs at the end of that road. Why are human males so much more likely to end up in prison? Over 90% of the prison population in every country is male. Well, males across a vast range of species are larger, better armed, and more aggressive. The simple reason is that they have to compete with other males for reproductive opportunities. Bigger males get the doe; the doe gives birth to bigger males. Or consider the testes to body-mass ratio. In primate species where the large male enjoys exclusive access to a harem, the ratio is low. Small balls. In a species where the males male promiscuously with all the females, the ratio is very high. The males have to produce enough semen to wash out the previous suitor. Super-soaker two thousand. What about human beings? Being in the middle with regard to behavior (mostly monogamous, but with cheating), our t/bm ratio is also in the middle.
I do not agree that all the things you mention cannot be explained, in part, by genetics. "Greed, avarice, deceit, hate, love, sacrifice," are all observed among animals. Hitler and Stalin are possible only in large, advanced societies, but the desire for dominion is present in the simplest societies.
The human mind is the result of what evolutionary theorists call "runaway selection." Sometimes a species trait becomes part of an adaptational dynamic where more keeps resulting in a net reproductive success. The peacock's tail, or the extraordinary antlers on the extinct Irish elk are examples. At some point in the history of our species, more intelligence and reproductive success became bound up in a feedback loop.
Human beings may be more than animals. They are at least animals. Evolution doesn't start from scratch with each speciation; it lays innovations on top of well established systems. Only we can write poetry. But just like the newt, we are composed of cells.
Recent Comments