Robert Wright, The Moral Animal: discussion points
Chapter 1: Darwin Comes of Age
Chapter 2: Male and Female
Chapter 3: Men and Women
Chapter 4: The Marriage Market
Chapter 5: Darwin's Marriage
Chapter 6: The Darwin Plan for Marital Bliss
Chapter 7: Families
Chapter 8: Darwin and the Savages
Chapter 9: Friends
Chapter 10: Darwin’s Conscience 210
Chapter 11: Darwin’s Delay 229
Chapter 12: Social Status 236
Chapter 13: Deception and Self-Deception 263
Chapter 14: Darwin’s Triumph 287
What do think is the relevance of the Grahame Greene quote Wright adopts as his front page: “This was the love he should have felt for every soul in the world: all the fear the wish to save concentrated unjustly on the one child…”
Answer for yourself the questions about human nature posed on p. 5
Consider the validity and limitations of Wright’s metaphor distinguishing “knobs” made available by genes, and mechanisms allowing culture to set or tune those knobs…
If most scholars during the Darwinian era felt Darwin lacked intelligence, how come others weren't quick enough or had the knowledge to come to Darwin's understanding of natural selection first (pg. 22-24)? –Bryce
Recommendable Darwin Biopic: “Creation”: http://vimeo.com/8921583
Double Standard, Madonna/Whore dichotomy
In Chapter 1, page 1 William Acton claims that men should avoid all sexual indulgences at any cost and on page 30, that "love of home, children, and domestic duty" are the only things that interest women. Based off of these observations, did it improve the fitness and survival of Victorians to have strict morals? I can see strictness both helping and hurting fitness. Strict morals would mean fewer children but they would have more resources dedicated to them, improving their health and overall chance of survival. –Ana
Naturalistic Fallacy (p10, 31,40) africanqueen.gif
Social Darwinism:
Don: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s56Z5l0fYV0
Why is survival desirable for animals? Why do organisms strive to survive and reproduce? Is it simply because that desire was passed on to the offspring, while the organisms that did not have that desire to reproduce did not, and so their genes were lost? (pages 23-26) –Tom
Gene/culture interaction
Chapters 1-2: "The basic ways we feel about each other, the basic kinds of things we think about each other, the basic kinds of things we think about each other and say to each other, are with us today by virtue of their past contribution to genetic fitness." (chapter 1) How does the theory of natural selection and the idea of "certain qualities/genes being present today by virtue of their past contribution to genetic fitness" attempt to explain the split of people with very different values, such as conservatism and liberalism, who think very different things about certain topics. Values and morals can be taught and the idea that it is something in a gene is hard to think about. -Chloe
P33 Sexual selection
P35 Asymmetry of costs of reproduction (parental investment) as the cause of asymmetry in mating choice
P36 Conscious control vs uncalculated attraction; can we be victims of our genes?
P39 Trivers’ elaboration of parental investment concept
P48 Exceptional cases of male parental investment support the Darwinian theoretical framework
P49 Parental investment asymmetry in humans vs. apes, e.g. gorillas
P53 How far does reason free us from genetic constraint?
Why are females finicky? Parental investment P33-35 Asymmetry of costs of reproduction (parental investment) as the cause of asymmetry in mating choice
Throughout the reading, many passages revolves around why the "evolutionary cause of female coyness and male eagerness" (page 34) exists. On page 35 it states, "Men can reproduce hundred of times a year...Women, on the other hand, can't reproduce more often than once a year. The asymmetry lies partly in the high price of eggs; in all species they're bigger and rarer than minuscule, mass-produced sperms." Through the reading this week, I have a new thought on sexual reproduction -- I realize that sexual reproduction can be viewed as nature's own form of buying and selling. –Judy
An extreme case of reduced male parental investment: Sex is matter of life, then death for male marsupials
Based on the idea of parental investment, females tend to sacrifice more than males when it comes to human sexual endeavors. In Moral Animals, it states that because of this, females are generally more choosier and males tend to be more showy pg. 41-42. With this mind and the fact that the theory is applied as being worldwide, why doesn't the phalarope example (pg. 48), where the males and females switch roles, fit perfectly to the theory? Are theories suppose to have exceptions?? --Kaela
P49 Parental investment asymmetry in humans vs. apes: bonobos
I have heard different things regarding bonobo sexuality than what is stated on page 50 of the text, which says that bonbos follow a roughly a male dominated hierarchy to determine mating rights. I previously believed bonobo society was dominated by females and there is often very little tension or aggression in the community, perhaps because of their frequent sexual encounters. If this were the case, how would this fit in Wright's outline of gender differences in pickiness and sexual dimporhism?-Jonathan
Does the paragraph in chapter two
about rape among orangutans suggest that females who resist
more, but still get raped, will tend to breed stronger sons? And that
this trait increases fitness because it allows subsequent stronger
male offsprings to forcibly "have their way" with a broader
range of females?
If so, I guess this is only a contributing
factor for the selection of strength as a trait, and not a important
factor in general? –Roger
In Wrights' discussion of a "good rapist" (pg. 52), the idea that natural selection works at the level of the gene as opposed to the individual's becomes apparent. It is interesting that something benefiting the genes, (like being raped by a "good" rapist), can be directly detrimental to the individual. I wonder how many conflicts of this nature are present in human behavior –Mario
Rational choice and its
limits (p36, p53)
"Understanding the often unconscious nature of genetic control is the first step toward understanding that - in many realms, not just sex - we're all puppets, and our best hope for even partial liberation is to try to decipher the logic of the puppeteer"(pg 37)
I found that Williams's argument supporting Bateman's idea of male "eagerness" and female "passivity" was interesting in that he relates courtship to sales and advertising (40-41). In today's modern society human males must pitch much more than their physical fitness, with their intelligence, financial stability, and compatibility with the female. However much courtship has been made complicated, I wonder how Darwin would explain homosexuality, asexuality, etc. –Zabrina
In chapter 2, the author mentions several times that females play "coy" to attract males that contend for partners. (pg 51) Rather than playing "coy," to attract males, I believe female behavior rather is more selective in the process of mating to find a better contender for future generations. --Jacqueline
P53 How far does reason free us from genetic constraint?
p.53 - The author refers to the male turkey that tries to mate with a "poor rendition" of a female's head. He then compares it to a human male who "regularly gets aroused after looking at two-dimensional representations of a nude woman" as if those two behaviors are innate and genetic. But isn’t enthusiasm for pornography culturally conditioned?
BONUS QUESTIONS FROM DON
It is often maintained that an evolutionary explanation for physical or psychological attributes should describe how the attribute works to "the benefit of the species", so why does Dawkins say “It is not differential species extinction itself which constitutes the process of natural selection. If you understand that, then you understand Darwinism in my view”?
Are there situations where it seems appropriate to yield to the naturalistic fallacy? (For instance, is it acceptable to promote tolerance of homosexuality by showing evidence that it is genetically influenced?) On what basis can such questions be decided?
UNCLASSIFIED
Miscellaneous
"Males not hereditarily equipped for combat with other males have been excluded from sex, and their traits have thus been discarded by natural selection." (page 34) Is this the reason for male violence? War?
Whitney 4. Mental suffering and the lag of evolutionary adaptation "This disjunction between the contests of our design and of our lives is probably responsible for much psychopathology, as well as much suffering of a less dramatic sort." (Page 38-39)
Self-deception and the unconscious "Natural selection appears to have hidden our true selves from our conscious selves" (p.10) What would be the advantage of such a masking?
Evolution now Compare Idiocracy: The Introduction… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icmRCixQrx8
The author points out that at some point in time, some circumstances encouraged male and female to seek monogamous relationships. Monogamous male would provide for the offspring, thus allowing a better chance of survival. However, in modern days, it seems like the divorce rate is getting higher and higher, and it has become very common for single parents to raise children. Does it mean that circumstances have changed and monogamy is not as hugely favorable as it has been in the past?—Hsin Yee (Stephanie)
Role of culture, Incompleteness of evolutionary explanations
Wright stresses how environment influences and shapes human behavior. Yet in this chapter, he keeps implying on how "genes" are responsible for traits such as parental investment (1), ambition and industriousness (2) and robustness and brains (3). However, in human beings, these characteristics are generated by culture, not only genes….
Pages 51-53 on 'Female Choice': In this portion of the book, Wright discusses some of the logic underlying why and what females choose as a result of various biological predispositions (adaptations prompted by natural selection) and social adaptations of our species. My question has to do with how this may or may not conflict with other theories of sexuality such as sexual fluidity ( at least in women- as explored in the work of Lisa Diamond at Cornell). Or, if they don't conflict, how does the spectrum view of sexuality fits in the context of evolutionary theory? ( perhaps by distinguishing reproductive sex from other conceptions taking into account proximal benefits of sex with constraints on attraction by our biology e.g., SCN, and other sexual dimorphisms which, although show typicalities in size among groups, can range in size [effecting their associated functions] within a group). –Zeve
According to Darwinism, we are genetically designed to do whatever possible to pass down our genes to the next generation. However, I wonder what explains the fact that some people today choose to not have children. From the book, it seems like everything we do happens for a biological reason. Could not wanting children be explained biologically? or does it indicate that we still have some conscious control over our decisions? Hsin Yee (Stephanie)
P56 Pair bonding: Desmond Morris criticized
P57 Trivers: Male parental investment (MPI); Gender asymmetries in sexual eagerness and in parental investment
P58 The Naked Ape
P59 What women want: resources? Status? Kindness, Helpfulness? Incentives to male deceit, betrayal
Concealed (cryptic) ovulation
P63 Philandering in the modern environment: does contraception make this acceptable to women?
P64 What men want: age asymmetry; youth and beauty; male/female differences in jealousy.
P69 Reproductive incentives for women to cheat; significance of size of testes
P72, 78 Madonna/Whore dichotomy
P74 How two Samoan girls kidded Margaret Mead
P86 Reproductive costs and benefits of divorce
P89 Culture and polygyny
***********
Pair bonding
Asymmetry in mate choice
In chapter 3, page 63, Wright claims that in a high MPI species such as humans, female "competition with other females is inevitable" since they want to monopolize a man's attention in order for their offspring (and themselves) to survive. Though the statement may seem superficial, I agree with it. From experience and observation, it is easy to see that oftentimes girls can be very nasty with each other, especially in their early and prime reproductive years. However, I also think it is interesting to note that while female competition is intense, often times girls will have many 'girlfriends' that are not a source of competition, and shows how human nature has evolved to be cooperative and social. –Ana
Statement: The idea of Darwinism and parental investment makes actually a monogamous relationship to be quite hard to achieve. Theoretically, males have to fight for the scarce amount of eggs from females (females are the choosier gender and wouldn't give up eggs that easily) and females have to fight for scarce male parental investment (males have a higher chance of greater genetic legacy if pursue more females). The compromise between the 2 wars is what we call a monogamous relationship. pg.63 –Kaela
Madonna-Whore dichotomy
I find that Wright's "Madonna-whore dichotomy" (Wright, 72) is accurate in that women must maintain a balance between coyness and sexuality to appear attractive and must maintain this throughout marriage. However in today's society it is possible to argue that not all humans act out of the ancestral goal to reproduce--because of the enormous size of our population, is it possible that those with no desire to start a family unconsciously do so because they sense that the world is populated enough? Or that, because marriage/partners are no longer necessary for survival, evolved humans may now focus on self-fulfillment, etc.? –Zabrina
Pg. 72 says that "...women should get better at convincing a man that their adoration borders on awe, their fidelity on the saintly." Is it implied that women must convince men of their adoration so men will keep them because they are only seen as possessions? -Haozhi
I don't agree with the hypothesis/theory that women/girls who are told they are beautiful will be encouraged to tend towards acting the Madonna - having few or no sexual partners/saving themselves for marriage. Or that girls/women who do not have their confidence in their physical appearance reinforced feel inclined to have many sexual partners/not curb their temptations/allow their morals to slide. It seems more likely for girls who are told they are pretty to have the confidence to be proud of their body, so they may (or may not, it all depends on taste) be more willing to wear the shorter skirts/dresses/more revealing clothes that would get more attention than girls/women who are not told they are pretty and do not have the same confidence when it comes to their body image. Then, wild parties aren't full of ugly girls or girls without confidence. Pretty girls would - just from what was said in the chapter - get more attention from men (according to what Wright says men want), they would have more pressure/more chances to be pressured by a boyfriend (or asked by a stranger) to have sex --- whether or not they wear short skirts or express any desire to partake in it. I don't really see the logic in the theory, other than that it was being assumed that since men want chastity and beauty, then for natural selection to fit this/show that it shaped these tastes, beauty and chastity must be linked in some way. Women like intelligence and "strength" (according to Wright) but they don't marry/sleep with a quarterback and expect him to be an honors student as well. –Janina
Chapter 3: As our society hopefully grows more liberal and gender equal: might we rid ourselves of the Madonna-whore dichotomy, or will we forever stigmatize single females as whores if they dare having as many sexual partners as a single man? Roger
Are social personality traits, like introversion and extroversion, in themselves adaptive? Do they contribute to reproductive success in a vacuum? Or are they just the manifestation of some other trait, one that actually was selected for, shown through the filter of society? (pgs. 81-82) -Tom
Polygyny.monogamy.
Discussion point: Why are monogamous societies more peaceful and stable?
Discussion point: Why are monogamous societies more peaceful and stable? -Alisha
Page 71 and page 90 describe evidence for the theory that early humans were polygamous (testes weight and sexual dimoprhism in size). Are there any other strictly monogamous species that practice infidelity as humans do? I think that finding a species that does would strongly support Wright's position concerning the evolutionary explanation of human infidelity. –Jonathan
If modern institutionalized monogamy is an example of Darwinism, in regards to natural selection shaping the minds that drive cultural and political change, does that mean natural selection is the cause of the same change that is giving women more power and less monogamous relationships? -In the text, Wright talks about how monogamy makes most men better off and women worse off. This is due to the security that monogamous cultures impose for men when it comes to their relationship and financial means. Times are changing and women are making more money. Could this be a reason for the high rate in divorce and less monogamous, committed relationships? -Bryce
QUESTIONS FROM DON
Compare current American practices on marrige with more stable traditional monogamous and polygynous societies, (Wright,90). Why does Wright say we have the worst of both worlds (104)?
How might concealed ovulation have aided reproductive fitness? (We’ll return to this I suspect).
What is Wright’s Madonna/Whore dichotomy? Is it just objectively valid, valid only as a stereotyped reaction by males, or just invalid?
MISCELLANEOUS QUESTIONS
Chapter 3: If being attracted to certain qualities of the opposite sex is part of an subconscious sexual strategy for having fit offspring, what explains gay men or lesbian women attraction to others if sexual reproduction is obviously not supported by nature. Does the theory of natural evolution leave that group of people out? (chapter 3) -Chloe
P93 Monogamy/Polygyny and economic stratification
Which gender does monogamy serve?
Pg 98 "All told, institutionalized monogamy, though often viewed as a big victory for egalitarianism and for women, is emphatically not egalitarian in its effects on women. Polygny would more more evenly distribute the assets of males among them..." Your reactions? –Don
On page 100, Wright writes "This is perhaps the best argument for monogamous marriage, with its egalitarian effects on men: inequality among males is more socially destructive". Perhaps I am misunderstanding the argument's rationale, but it sounds to me as a group selection argument. I want to understand how this argument makes evolutionary sense at the level of the individual. -Mario
"The most powerful reason (monogamy) is that leaving lots of men without wives and children is no just inegalitarian; its dangerous. pg. 100. I find this statement to be over exaggerated as the author theorizes that the world would be alot more dangerous if polygyny exists. –Kaela
The chapter refers to the "pacifying effects of marriage" I feel that there is modern evidence that illustrates this theory/concept. In the instance of male aggression increasing due to a lack of access to women. Not to long ago I was reading an article in regards to the gender disparity in china after having implemented the one child policy. After generations of establishing a gender inequality (most household prefer to have male off spring) it has created increase in sex trafficking and "wife" trafficking" which demonstrates that a lack of access to women will cause males to act out more aggressively in some aspects. -Robby
In chapter four, it is mentioned that the anthropologists Steven J.C. Gaulin and James S. Boster have shown that dowry is found almost exclusively in societies with socially imposed monogamy - one of the two types of monogamies stressed by Richard Alexander. Given that the West also has a socially imposed monogamy, are there any examples of dowry in our society? -Roger
P102 Difficulties with step-parenting: Divorce, Adoption, Child Welfare
Genetic Determinism??
I love the point he makes: "But again: emotions are just evolutions executioners." But being one who has a strong belief in free will, I would be interested to hear the classes opinions on the subject. –Anon
"...we should not expect a person to chronically maximize fitness, to optimally convey his or her genes to future generations...This is why behavioral flexibility evolved in the first place. And unpredictability, by its nature, cannot be mastered." (pg. 106) Is deciding which genes are good to pass on to future generations based on the environment? Therefore does the definition of a "good" and desirable gene vary from person to person? -Angela
Is Cheating Adaptive? Regarding what Wright says on page 125 about barren marriages breaking up more often than fertile marriages, couldn't a woman still stay with her husband for his resources and parental devotion while having a child with a potentially more genetically fit male? The man might never even know he's infertile. - Jonathan
P130 Rational considerations for marriage
Despite Darwin coming from a family of status and wealth, and acquiring fame as a naturalist, why didn't he choose a more young and beautiful wife? Did his choice ultimately benefit him, by choosing a wife who was unlikely to leave him for a better man? -Alisha
P133 Divorce
Has the shape of our society (in which men and women can easily remarry after divorce (though more easily for men)) caused a shift back to a less monogamous lifestyle than enjoyed by our hunter-gatherer ancestors (now that monogamy is not necessarily crucial for the survival of the children)? (pgs. 134-135) -Tom
P135 The case for equal/different treatment of men, women: alimony, etc.
P142 Is the Madonna/whore dichotomy inherent in the male psyche, or just the Victorian one? -Anon
Wright p146 Where do moral codes come from?
A moral code is defined by Wright as a "compromise" between "competing spheres of genetic self-interest" (146). To what extent does this self-interest truly benefit Darwinian tendencies (i.e. competition for resources)? How does this explain what was said in chapter 4, that "natural selection...shape[s] the minds that... drive cultural and political change" (99)? –Zabrina
In chapter six, Wright states when describing the difference between moral codes that are hardwired in us and the moral codes one might reach through philosophy that “Darwinism can help highlight the contrast between the moral codes we have and the sort that a detached philosopher might arrive at”. But are these two not the same at a deeper level? Is not the latter just a way of ‘tuning the knobs’ in accordance with the former in just the way Writhe states that evolutionary psychology is supposed to describe human nature? –Roger
UNCLASSIFIED
The topic of chapters 4 and 5 deals mostly with marriage, which is essentially a union made to reproduce and ensure the well-being of any progeny made. What I thought interesting is that across most cultures marriage is openly discussed, while sex and the actual intercourse is a topic often times silenced and regarded as taboo. I wonder why sex, essential to survival, is "hushed up," (while the marriage topic is not) and if that socially affects the way humans regard each other in terms of sexual selection and lifelong companionship. –Ana
Wright talks about "serial monogamy" and its detrimental effects on (I am assuming from the text) morality - where men are following a behavior that is "natural" but which should not be indulged, in order to avoid leaving behind ("abandoning") wives of girlfriends when the emotions or passion fades after they are immediately provided with sex in the relationship.
Women, in pursuing "casual sex" in order to claim their right to this same behavior, are doing so, Wright states, without regards to whether they are at more risk of emotional pain/consequences than men. I could see where this all fits with his descriptions of human evolution, but there seems to be the existence (and belief) of sex creating a deeper bond. Sex won't always let the man (or woman) walk away from a partner in search of another, when they have connected on a physical level which has the potential of drawing out emotional passion. (Like with the talk of keeping the "fire" in one's sex-life - after marriage, as a means of keeping that bond.) –Janina
In an evolutionary perspective why is it so important for some people to adopt knowing that there is no reproductive success by adopting. Pg 104 -Maria
Families and friends: Wright, Chapters 7-9 (pages 155-209)
In Chapter 9, Wright discusses why altruism exists. Do humans always do favors with the expectation that later on down the line the favor will eventually be returned? Is there no such thing as a good deed? Taylor Jeong
Question/Statement: I agree with William's idea that reciprocal altruism does not need to be a conscious action. As in our society, there are times we help friends just because of the "kindness in our hearts". However, if reciprocal altruism is a valid theory, why are there people that do good deeds --> like making blood donations or offering money to a those in need without the need of repayment or recognition that that person is performing the deed? How does natural selection explain such selfless acts? -Kaela
G:\DONS\teaching\141\Altruism.docx
Kin selection and altruism
I find Hamilton's theory on kin
selection (156), no matter how simplified, is essential to
understanding the importance of family. I feel that genes not only
proliferate with altruism and "brotherly love", but the
family as a unit provides a sanctuary for emotional and material
support. How, then, could we explain altruism on a larger scale, such
as the level of a community?
-Zabrina
What about Bereavement? "what's clear is that mechanisms exist. anyone with siblings-anyone in any culture-is familiar with the empathy for a sibling in great need, the sense of fulfillment at giving aid, the guilt at not giving it. Anyone who has endured a sibling's death is familiar with grief. These people know what love is, and they have kin selection to thank for it." -161 I understand that for kin selection to work, genes make us feel love, empathy, and compassion. However, why do we grieve when a sibling dies(the genes are already lost)? Why do humans grieve while some other animals do not? Stephanie
Levels of Selection "It's not surprising that many slime-mold cells fail to reproduce, and devote themselves instead to buffering fertile fellow cells from the elements. Their neighbor's welfare, in evolutionary terms, is identical to their own. That's Altruism. So too with human being's--not groups of human being, but the group of cells that are human beings...It is fair, technically speaking, to consider even so coherent an organism as a human being a tight-knit community of single celled organisms"p.164 I thought this was a a very enlightening perspective on the human body and the human species. It basically views the cells of the human body(excluding the sperm or egg itself), much like the cells of slime-mold or worker ants and bees, as merely vehicles or as i like to call them "slave" cells of the cells that will actually transmit genetic material. -Kevin
Kin Discrimination
Parents and Children Chapter 7: If a mother's love for their children can be explained by their gene's attempt to help the survival or reproductive prospects of shared genes, why is postpartum depression a common occurrence? Chapter 7 & 9?: Wright says that reciprocal altruism for others started within the family and spread but how is there reciprocal altruism between father/mother and children? It is largely parental investment with hardly any reciprocity from the children. Children don't provide for their parents in even close to the same way. -Chloe
This chapter mentions that gorillas are not conscious of biological paternity. I remember learning from a different class that an experiment showed that people could identify the father of a baby easier than the mother of the baby. So in theory, children look more like their father than mother. This experiment was based on humans. If this was the case for gorillas as well, wouldn't gorillas know to some degree which babies belonged to who? By seeing a baby resemble another gorilla, the gorilla will know that the baby probably isn't their own and would not have to invest in its survival. I don't think gorillas knew what they looked like, so they wouldn't know which baby resembled them. I think that alongside the "be nice to children if you've had a fair amount of sex with their mothers" gene, I think that there is also a "be nice to children that doesn't resemble another adult gorilla" gene. -Anon
Polygamy again (Ch.9; pg. 173) If a very fit man can in fact have more children then the fittest women and fit women would rather have a fit man with a surplus of resources, why doesn't that man provide his genes to many different women? If he can provide resources for multiple families, why not? Wouldn't this be better for the sake of evolution and all human/animal kind? -Bryce
Trivers-Willard: The point on page 173 in Chapter 7, where Wright lists off a series of statistics: I found the pattern to be interesting. I was wondering whether the birth order were taken into account - if firstborns may be breast fed more or less than the siblings that follow, and whether this could have an impact on how much or how little female or male infants are breastfed (if there are more resources available to the mother, is she more likely to give birth to males vs females - as with the pack-rat?). I would also be interested in how this would be applied to highly stratified societies/cultures - where the daughter would not be more likely than the son to rise in status via marriage because of social/cultural constraints. –Janina
In chapter 7, page 173, Wright says "natural selection tends to work underground, by shaping human feelings, not by making humans conscious of its logic" when referring to how parents of different social classes treat their male and female children differently. I wonder if humans were conscious of what natural selection "wanted" them to do they would act differently as parents. -Ana
Valuing youth vs age p. 174-175...
Are you persuaded by the evolutionary account of how the sense of loss following death of offspring varies with their age? - Don
On pages 205-206 Wright discusses the evolutionary advantages of aggression and anger, especially noting that such behavior is better served if seen publicly. Public displays of aggression, even murder, can be beneficial in an evolutionary sense because they dissuade others from cheating you or trying to take advantage of your altruism without reciprocating. From this point of view, murder when warranted and within tolerable risk levels should be selected for. If this is the case, why does the thought of murder make us uneasy and, for some people, cause significant psychological trauma? Is it only because we are taught by our parents and our cultures to suppress our anger and aggression in favor of cooperation? Would a feral human be completely willing to kill, without guilt, if put in a scenario that warranted (from an evolutionary standpoint) such a course of action? -Jon
Ch 8 Darwin and the Savages, pp180-189
When elaborating on why there are so many different moral codes in different cultures Wright describes that “… adherence to any moral rule has an innate basis. It is only the specific contents of moral codes that are not innate.” It is not the content that matters for natural selection – it is the behavior it produces. I therefore maintain that the moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant (as discussed in class) is directly related to natural selection, not because of the contents of his ideas – but because the root of creating and following such rules has an innate basis, and that this produces behaviors that may or may not be favorable in terms of natural selection. Roger
Chapter 9: Friends
Reciprocal Altruism
I agree with the chapter and find the reiterated prisoners dilemma simulation by Robert Axelrod combined with the TIT FOR TAT-program by Anatol Rapoport to be a convincing explanation for how reciprocal altruism evolved. It is also suggested that for altruism to prosper it needs to have a “head-start”, which is described to have been possible through kin selection. This is further supported by findings in other mammal species, which ultimately gives the theory a broad range of support. -Roger
in reference to "tit-for-tat" and reciprocal altruism... which is not really altruism its a display of cost risk analyzes. Is there such a thing as true altruism which is not self serving? -Robby
Guilt
Wright argues in page 206 that the sense of guilt is "just a way of keeping everyone happy with your level of reciprocation". I was wondering if we have studies of other animals, those who engage in cooperative interactions (like chimpanzees), showing manifestations of guilt. -Mario
"But if guilt is, as Trivers says, just a way of keeping everyone happy with your level of reciprocation, its intensity should depend not on your misdeeds but on who knows or may soon know about them." I don't agree with the intensity of guilt depending on who knows about it and think that it really depends on the misdeed with the other just being an influential factor. Thoughts of the class? -Chloe
Gossip In chapter 9, page 195 I thought it was an interesting point Wright brought up that "gossip...may be one of the main reasons friendship exists." I agree with his statement, especially when applied to small hunter-gatherer clans, because I think it makes sense that sharing important knowledge would create amicable bonds with non-genetically related people; helping explain why friendship developed. I also think it's interesting to examine why gossip tends to be mostly associated with females rather than males. -Ana
Darwin and Social Status: Wright, Chapters 10-12 (pages 210-262)
Joint dependence of moral codes on natural selection plus cultural context
"Parents are designed to steer kids toward 'moral' behaviors only insofar as those behaviors are self-serving." (pg. 216) If this is true why do parents teach their kids not to steal and to be honest and to tell the truth? For example, stealing from a grocery store would be self-serving because you would save money on groceries. –Angela, also Maria
p. 222 Wright offers that, "Many people in the inner city face limited opportunities for 'legitimate' cooperation with the wider world. And the males, risk-prone by virtue of their gender to begin with, don't have the long life expectancies that so many people take for granted. Martin Daly and Margo Wilson have argued that the 'short time horizons' for which criminals are famous may be 'an adaptive response to predictive information about one's prospects for longevity and eventual success" as a further explanation as to why children of the inner cities are risk-prone to developing a "cramped" or underdeveloped conscience. I find this train of logic a bit unsettling in that it assumes that these people have a perspective and understanding of their relative success and potential longevity. The two things are merely correlated in my opinion. -Kevin
The "Victorian Conscience", described by Samuel Smiles as one involving "truthfulness... [and] integrity in word and deed" (Wright, 219) seems to support the idea that some aspects of humanity are shaped by social environment (which indirectly acts in favor of natural selection). How, then, does a social environment form? At what point does one belief or thought become widely accepted? -Zabrina=
I believe morals developed in a hunter/gatherer society (being rewarded for altruism, through increased gene survivability), when applied in a society, were turned into laws (murder being illegal). Has this shift from innate morality to external law caused a dissociation from our former morality? –Tom p. 213
Interaction between reciprocal altruism and kin selection?
Chapter 10: "The kin should critically guide moral development" but there use to be a significant number of couples who used permissive parenting to raise children in which they let the child decide for him and her self what to do and to learn the consequences. Could natural evolution be used to describe why permissive parenting declined rather than the studies that refuted it? –Chloe
Social Status
Gender and status seeking "Besides, the evolutionary pressure behind male competition for sex seems to have been stronger than the pressure behind female competition for investment. The reason, again, is the potential differences in fitness are so much greater among males than among females" (246-247). I do not fully understand this argument. Surely females and males range equally in their levels of reproductive fitness. What I think Wright is trying to say here is that males have a larger range of fitness due to status, because status correlates strongly with reproductive fitness for males and not so much for females. If this were the case though, I fail to see Wright's argument. How can varying levels of fitness by status lead to competition? It is competition, and how well one fares in these competitions, that create status. And the reason for male competition for sex rather than female competition for investment stems from differing levels of reproductive investment by males and females and a polygamous society (in a monogamous society there would be female competition for investment). -Jonathan
Chapter 12: "Low status brings reproductive success" but what about low income males who may not have the best qualities/genes to pass on yet are still having children by sometimes multiple women in what can be said as in a careless manner? –Chloe pg 260
Zuni Culture: I find it very interesting that there are cultures out there in the world that could efficiently reinforce niceness with our natural tendency to gain status. Within our society, the natural instinct to gain power usually involves negative emotions (jealousy & hate) and also at some point violence. I feel that even though natural selection has engraved in our minds to obtain status for the better, every individual can approach it differently depending on their own culture and environment. -Kaela
Evolutionary stable states, frequency-dependent selection:
Chapter 12: John Maynard Smith describes the hawk-dove frequency as a model for how a hierarchy can be achieved in many species and also reach an evolutionary stable state. However it is mentioned that this may not be the case for humans, since a human “dove” will have a low reproductive effect. Is this to say that hierarchies in human societies, however universally it is obseved, is not an evolutionary stable state? -Roger
"When less cooperative strategies flourish, the amount of locally available cooperation declines, further devaluing cooperation, so that less cooperative strategies flourish all the more." (221).
'Cheating' is an adaptive response, triggered when people are shunted to the bottom of the heap and thus find it hard to get resources legitimately." (244)
pg. 225 "the conscience - was designed to maximize fitness, to exploit the local environment in the name of genetic self-interest, but success in this endeavor is far from assured, especially in social settings alien to natural selection." and pg 208 "reputation is the object of the game for this 'moral' animal." -Janina
MISCELLANEOUS, Ch 10-12
p.216 Sexual restraint is an important part of the moral code promoted by parents. Why should parents urge sexual restraint? Should we assume that natural selection favors this parental attitude, since it seems initially disadvantageous to reproductive fitness? –Don
page 222 Wright says that "cultural influence can be just as unconscious as genetic influence". This may be true for early ‘mother’s knee’ socialization…but what about peer group acculturation during the teenage years? (On this, see Judith Rich Harris: The Nurture Assumption)
P243 serotonin (the Prozac target) and dominance: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1794096 -Don
"Female social coalitions - friendships - often last a lifetime, whereas male coalitions shift with strategic utility" (246). Do you agree or disagree with Wright's statement? –Don
Oct 17 Self-Deception: Wright, Chapters 13-14 (pages 263-310)
Chapter 13: "Deceit is fundamental to animal communication, then there must be strong selection to spot deception and this ought, in turn, to select for a degree of self-deception, rendering some facts and motives unconscious so as not to betray - by the subtle signs of self-knowledge- the deception is practiced" & "People in all cultures, whether they fully realize it or not, want to wow their neighbors, to rise in local self esteem." Could the phenomenon of pathological lying be an exaggerated form of some evolved traits humans possess related to the role of deception and the thirst for approval? Pathological lying is characterized by a long history (maybe lifelong) of frequent and repeated lying for which no apparent psychological motive or external benefit can be discerned. Chloe
What exactly is meant by saying that we deceive ourselves? Does this idea require us to postulate a Freudian unconscious? P264 -Don
Self-esteem
pg.265 Wright mentions that human species as well as other animals in the world lie to others for the benefits of ourselves, as we lie to fit into the society and make others find us appealing. I find it very interesting how our Western society developed the telling of white lies to others so we can fit in. My question is what is the point of white lies in the Darwinian point of view when these white lies don't really deceive the other person? =Kaela
Are people who are humble actually self-deprecating? Or are they just seen that way because it is so natural for people to be self-aggrandizing that anything besides that seems self-defeating? p.269 -Tom
"negative reinforcement. Lingering pain from this incident may have served to discourage Darwin from repeating behaviors (the confused analysis, in this case) that lead to humiliation" (pg.271) For people who are the "class clown" are they positively reinforced to repeat actions that lead to their humiliation? Is humiliation necessarily a negative thing? –Angela
"Often the derogation of others hovers at a barely detectable level, and it may disappear if they are kin or friends" (268). I think it is worth noting that this derogation doesn't always diminish for kin, as one might expect from kin selection and reciprocal altruism. There is definitely sibling rivalry, and this may be an evolutionary advantageous strategy. As we have already seen, one should value oneself over siblings because, even though they share some amount of our genes, they they are still less genetically valuable than we are. One reason to try and reduce the status of our siblings could be to get more parental investment. If we can distinguish ourselves as the most status worthy and the most likely to be reproductively successful, we might get more resources and care from our parents. -Jonathan
"It may be in their genetic interest not only to accept low status, but, in at least some circumstances, to convey their acceptance of it-- to behave submissively so that they aren't erroneously perceived as a threat and treated as such." (270) I never thought of low self esteem to be a protective trait. But I think evolution didn't account for self esteem to get so low as to become harmful and counter productive. -Anon
According to modern Darwinism, people use self-deception in order to deceive others better. Wright then states that "humans do their self-inflating verbally." Is this the only technique people use to alter one's own image in the presence of others or are their other deception techniques that are used? (pg. 266) –Bryce Also: "Language evolved as a way of manipulating people to your advantage." (295) Agree or disagree? Don
"One of the strongest bonds two friends can have--the great starter and sustainer of friendships--is a common enemy...This strategic convenience is often obscured in modern society. Friendships may rest not on common enemies but on common interests: hobbies, tastes in movies or sports. Affinities emerge from shared passions of the most innocent sort." p.285 -Kevin
Wright states, "We are built to be effective animals, not happy ones...the frequent absence of happiness is what keeps us pursuing it, and thus makes us productive" (Pg. 298). What aspects of human happiness suggest this evolutionary account of its origin? -Don
For chapter 13 P. 294. " we tend to like people we find we can influence, and we tend to like them even more if they have high status". This I believe tends to go back to what we have previously discussed where we like to manipulate people and if we are able to manipulate them, those are the people we like and tend to associate because we are given power over them. We also like people with status because they open the doors for us in that status or we are able to gain credibility. This is again a form of social acceptance that we are constantly seeking. -Maria
Evolutionary Ethics: Wright, Chapters 15-16 (pages 313-344)
"We do our friends the favor of overlooking their flaws, and seeing (if not magnifying) the flaws of their enemies. Affection is a tool of hostility. We form bonds to deepen fissures." (314). -Jonathan
pg 315[oedipus complex as vying for mother's attention] If the Oedipus complex is understood as offputting a mothers continued reproduction wouldn't it become somewhat unproductive from a kin selection point of view? Also, can this view of the Oedipus complex account for the cross-gender pattern of affection between child and parent? And is there clear evidence for such a cross-gender pattern? –Don
Pg 318 "...Darwin's two basic kinds of self-doubt - moral and intellectual - ...both of them manifestations of social insecurity....designed in a way to make him a prized social asset when other ways seemed to be failing." pg. 319 (forgetting unpleasant memories -- Darwin and things that didn't fit his theory, would write down quickly) Freud: "cited this remark as evidence of the Freudian tendency..."-Janina
P.320 "Forgetting inconvenient facts makes its easier to argue with force and conviction, and arguments often had generic stakes in the environment of our evolution" –maria
page 320 " Did this mean the tendency to forget unpleasant things wasn't general after all? No. Freud opted for another explanation it was just that sometimes the tendency to discard painful memories is successful, and other times it is not. The mind is, 'an arena, a sort of tumbling ground' where opposing tendencies collide, and it isn't easy to say which tendency will win." -Zeve
On page 322, Wright says that we may repress friends' transgressions in order to protect our (or because of their) status. Does anyone find this idea too far fetched? A lot of wrights ideas to me are a bit extreme, but in this chapter I feel like his ideas are extremely contrived. Perhaps there are some things that we do that are perhaps for evolutionarily based reasons, but perhaps we forgive friends for the simple fact that they are our friends. –anon
"And of course, the arena of sex is rife with occasions for tactical repression. Surely a Man can better convince a woman of his future devotion if he isn't vividly imagining sexual intercourse with her. That impulse can blossom later, once the ground has been prepared." p.322 -Kevin
"'Homo homini lupus. [Man is a wolf to man.]'" p.323 I feel that Freud's cynicism towards the inherent goodness of man is misplaced. He seems to argue that any goodness is imposed by society, and truly the only inherent qualities about humans are the nasty ones. But both the nasty and the not came to us (probably) through natural selection, and have actually become innate. –Tom
Demonic Temptation
"There is indeed a force devoted to enticing us into various pleasures that are or once were in our genetic interests but do not bring long-term happiness to us and may bring great suffering to others. You could call that force the ghost of natural selection...our genes....the word evil, there is no reason not to." -Janina
"Your happiness is designed to interfere with the happiness of others; the very reason it exists is to inspire selfish preoccupation with it." (pg.337) I find this hard to believe. If this is true, how can marriage work? Is one person in the relationship not fully happy? -Angela
Pg. 342 "Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but int itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before" -Kaela
"A powerful person who uses his or her station humanely is a valuable asset, and thus may merit special treatment, so long as the treatment facilitates such conduct." (pg. 343) -Bryce
Oct 24 Determinism and Responsibility:
Wright, Chapters 17-18 (pages 345-379; concludes Wright)
"Give up on free will; no one really deserves blame or credit for anything; we are all slaves of biology." p. 353 There seem to be implications far beyond the courtroom for a claim like this. -Tom
He uses a quote from one of Darwin's notebooks that says, "it is right to punish criminals, but solely to deter others." (pg 354) If people have no control over their actions how would deterrence work? If a person's opinion of their actions, or someone else's actions, informs their future behavior, it would require a certain amount of free will. –Anon We should punish people only so long as that will raise overall happiness... It is warranted only when outweighed by the growth it brings in the welfare of others, through the prevention of future crime." (354). –Jonathan
"If on some desert you happen upon a ninety-five-year-old prison escapee who's very existence was long ago forgotten, you will serve the cause of justice by somehow making him suffer." (pg. 354) If this neither gives you happiness nor brings growth, why is it done? –Angela
"On one hand, by stressing that incarceration is always a moral tragedy, if a practical necessity, determinism accents the urgency of erasing the social conditions, such as poverty, that lead to punishable behavior" What would Darwin's take be on the New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander? The New Jim Crow points: "No other country in the world imprisons so many of its racial or ethnic minorities." "Studies show that people of all colors use and sell illegal drugs at remarkably similar rates." "Prisons do not deter crime significantly. There's overwhelming evidence that these institution create crime rather than prevent." -Chloe
Free will was, in an important sense, created by their belief in it. pg. 358 –Kaela, Ana
“And most of us would rather see compliance enforced by an internalized moral code than by a ubiquitous police force" (pg. 359).
"In those days, various statistically aberrant lifestyles, such as homosexuality, were considered grave crimes against humanity, even thought it was hard to find a human they hurt." P. 359 - Maria
I found the Capuchin monkey experiment to be relevant and something to supplement our discussion of morality! (Skip to 1:30) http://youtu.be/meiU6TxysCg -Zabrina
"Darwin shared this hope. He wrote in The Descent of Man: "As man advances in civilization, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all the members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him."" (p.372).
John Hartung on tribal morality: http://strugglesforexistence.com/?p=article_p&id=13
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/susan_blackmore_on_memes_and_temes.html
pg. 377. "A good conscience, in the most demanding, most moral sense of the term, is one that doesn't work only as natural selection "intended"". -Mario
*******************
Oct 29
Workman and Reader Chapters 1,2: Introduction to Evolutionary Psychology
Chapter 1, page 13:
"Humans are born as blank slates: knowledge, personality traits and cultural values are acquired from the cultural environment. Human behavior is infinitely malleable: there are no biological constraints as to how people turn out." -Ana
"He suggested that those individuals whose traits might benefit society (the innovators, the highly intelligent, etc.) be encouraged to produce many offspring, and those whose traits are seen as less desirable (the less intelligent, the indolent, etc.) be discouraged from reproducing, a controversial programme that he called eugenics (page 10)." If only people with traits that were desirable in that time (specific period in time), how will they evolve to adapt to changing times that require different traits?-Angela
Pg. 11 -- "Negative eugenics...attempts to curtail or prohibit reproduction among those who are considered unfit" I find this subject to be very contradictory to the idea of natural selection and the need of variation in a population. -Kaela
"Critics inevitably focus on the nasty side of evolutionary psychology- rape, violence, infanticide and so on - and rarely discuss the fact that evolutionists also propose predispositions for cooperation, conflict resolution, morality and altruism." (pg. 30-31) Can evolutionary psychology prove to be bad in the short run but good in the long? examples? –Bryce
(38) "Processes as diverse as disease, climate change and extra-terrestrial collisions have played key roles in pruning the tree of life into its present shape, but natural selection leads not simply to change, but to adaptive change." -Janina
"their lighter skin makes it more obvious if they are infested with parasites" –Mario
Cryptic Oestrus:"...that by concealing their period of oestrus...women may have made men attentive to them continually, since only in this way would males be able to ensure that they father a partner's offspring."
But wouldn't that mean A) woman had control over the oestrus swelling in the first place, and/or B) when the trait of cryptic oestrus appeared, how would the first women with cryptic oestrus be preferred to the women with unconcealed swelling(if the oestrus swelling is meant to attract the males/indicate fertility? Wouldn't women with cryptic oestrus just be treated as infertile/have less mating opportunities? Pg. 100 –Janina
Chapter 4: Mate Choice
...men generally prefer older men, but, interestingly, as men grow older they prefer women who are increasingly younger than themselves. As they age, women, in contrast, still expect to date older men". P.107 -Maria Quezada
"Some evolutionists have suggested that the increased possibility of cuckoldry may have been the very reason that marriage was invented since it acted to increase a male's certainty in paternity."pg.110 -- Is it possible that with the invention of contraceptives (and the easy access of it for women) be one of the cultural reasons why our society has such a high divorce rate? -Kaela
Chapter 5: development and innateness
Chapter 6: Social Development
"Such individuals (children whose families involve either parent-absence or insecure-avoidant attachment) might therefore engage in opportunistic relationships, not fully committing to their partners and perhaps even exploiting them. Furthermore, such individuals might have a series of sexual partners and might begin mating at a comparatively young age." p. 156 -Tom
"Children who grew up with unresponsive or abusive mothers, or if the mothers were absent, would have working models that led them to view relationships and other people with suspicion." -part of Bowlby's theory, page 165. I wonder how this is complicated by the child's relationship with their father. Can a father's role compensate for the unresponsive or abusive mother? -Carmine Aiello
"They seem to be very demanding of the mother, and it is difficult for anyone else to comfort the child. Belsky proposes that such children are being driven into a null reproductive strategy, where they are destined to have no children" (169). -Jonathan
Chapter 6: "Child's attachment style is a response to a particular reproductive strategy adopted by his or her parent's" (page 170) I disagree with this. I don't think parents have an unconscious reproductive strategy in regards to parenting their offspring. –Chloe
The effects of parenting (174) "Parents... provide not only food...but also emotional support and a safe base from which their children can explore the environment." (for exploring the environment, I'm assuming this refers more to infants - as scene with the strong parental attachments vs weaker, where the baby will cry when separated from the caregiver vs the baby will be indifferent of parent's presence or absence) "babies that love their parents are also going to be at an advantage over those who do not as this will tend to keep them physically closer to their parents and hence safer." How do we determine whether babies feel love for their parents/caregiver? it could just be a natural instinct/case of learned association of parent with safety --- something that can be a result of 'nurture' rather than nature, as seen with varying degrees of attachment observed with infants.-Janina
Chapter 6, page 180, "Children want to be successful in the eyes of their peers and behaving like an adult probably won't help then achieve this." -Ana
If children learned everything they knew from their parents their skills and ideas would be very similar. Having children learn from their peers increase the variation of knowledge that is in their culture; variation is useful if the environment suddenly changes. (pg.180) Is this true? Roughly what age do we start learning from our peers? –Roger
pg 172 BSD theory: Harsh Mother definition, spanking children when bad, children would respect authority, should be quiet when adults are around, believed praise spoiled the child and didn't give many hugs. All by individual report + when observing? How do they measure quantity of hugs? Also most of this sounds reasonable, though more of the grandfather or father of older values than traditional mother figure? Is the argument that they aren't sensitive and nurturing enough? And discipline their children rather than the father? /Then environmental risks: low birth rate, no paternal investment, separation from mother, short term of breast feeding = risk of young pregnancy? In modern day terms of what a young pregnancy is, in the face of the typical age of mothers/wives/second or etc. wife? Also considering shorter life expectancy and higher infant mortality? -Janina
Chapter 7: kin and conflict
The conflict at puberty and who should reproduce is just really strange to me. I don't think a mother wanting to have her daughter have a child relates to her reproductive age. –Chloe
"conflict between mother and daughter is likely to be higher in families where both are of reproductive age" -Mario
Chapter 7 page 219, "such a finding [no girl of reproductive age in the Trinidad society became pregnant while living with her mother until the mothers last-born child was at least 4] suggests that there may be a reproductive suppression mechanism." –Ana
Chapter 8: Reciprocity
"Also, mothers will sometimes kill their own infants if they are fatherless.Such harsh treatment is not uncommon for forager people..."(page230) I thought it was interesting how the author makes a judgment on this observation of the Ache people. I know there are some theories such as cultural relativism that seek to take a different look on infanticide as a survival strategy. I wonder if this infanticide by the Ache is done without emotional suppression because if they didn't have emotional attachments to their children, that seems counterproductive for survival. -Carmine
"Tajfel called this behavior minimal intergroup discrimination, that is, they were discriminating in favor of some individuals on the basis of arbitrary and anonymous group membership alone" (244). Jonathan /Could this be grounds for racism? At least explanatory for how people are racist (I'm not advocating for racism!) Although it seems like racists take the grounds to be more than just arbitrary, even though they really are. -Tom
In the example of the !Kung San, are they more likely to share their meat since they would all suffer if there was no meat? Does sharing the punishment play a part in influencing whether everyone should share their meat or not? –Angela
231 - "As is generally the case for polygynous societies, a small number of Yanomamo men have several wives while the remainder are either married to one wife or remain as bachelors. ... beat her or even shoot an arrow into her!"
-reduction in reproductive fitness;-risk of mates death; -arrow: possibly scare away other potential mates -Janina
Chapter 9: Cognition
Why are we able to be fooled by illusions? What evolutionary purpose does being fooled serve? –Angela
How can evolutionary psychology account for cognitive mistakes like base-rate neglect and gambler's fallacy? What cognitive equivalent was there (if any) in our ancestors' environment that would select for these fallacies? p. 248-249 Tom
Chapter 9 P 264 "such 'false memories', it has been suggested, occur because of the process of abstraction; we forget the details and are left with the impression that we actually saw the lure word".-maria
Page 267: "Researchers using the adaptive memory approach claim that memory has evolved not only to be an efficient mechanism for supporting decisions but is more sensitive to certain kinds of content than others, particularly things that would have been important to the lives of our ancestors." -Ana
Ch. 10: Language
"Miller's argument is that language may have originated as a means of enabling the process of competing for a mate; it was only later that it was used for all its other purposes." p. 295 Miller's theory of the importance of evolution in reproductive fitness seems too narrow-that it strictly helped individuals mate. Rather, it seems that communication would apply in almost every situation of an ancestor's daily life, and each situation would be improved (at least in survivability). It seems like it would have improved survivability first, and reproductive fitness second (being able to whisper sweet-nothings into a mate's ear). –Tom
"Symbolic language thus permitted the formation of social contracts, which enabled groups to stay together, which enabled the specialisation of male and female roles in terms of the provisioning of food (men hunt, women gather - see chapter 4) and permitted the moderately high male parental investment." p.323 He argues that the shift from non-symbolic to symbolic communication is explained by sexual selection. This is fine, but his argument is that it was through the social contract to stay faithful, which I simply do not believe is sufficient to be evolutionarily advantageous enough to warrant its formation. –Kevin
"This is a classic example of the learnability argument; the information needed to turn statements into questions is not something that is given to children in the linguistic environment, nor do parents explicitly teach children about verb and noun phrases. But this information must come from somewhere and Chomsky argues that it is innate." -Angela Zhou
Pg 293
'Natural language and natural selection'
...explain all the costs associated with the specialist hardware language requires. The comprehension and production of language uses a large amount of costly neural material in dedicated brain regions... And speech + choking -Janina
Ch 11: Emotion
"James (1842-1910) specifically developed Darwin's ideas arguing that, rather than the physical signs of an emotion following an internal state, the reverse is the case. So we feel fear because we tremble, rather than the other way round (James, 1884). In this way humans were seen to have evolved to react to our inward and outward bodily signs of emotions. In particular, James argued that the brain monitors the state of the viscera (that is 'gut feelings') and then we react to these signs with the appropriate internal state." p.333 –Kevin
The compromise argument: "...selection pressures act on inclusive fitness, not on perfecting psychological (and physical) devices" (335). -Zabrina
Chapter 11, the evolution of emotion: Does the example of Phineas Gage's brain injury support the valence hypothesis? pg. 344 valence hypothesis: pro-social/approach/left hemisphere vs antisocial/withdraw/right hemisphere dichotomy –Janina
"Jamison uses an evolutionary argument to suggest that the energy, creativity and focus that accompany a manic state may have been of sufficient advantage that the individuals with the genes for such states were kept in a population because of the advantages they conferred on their ancestors." p. 346 Can we infer from this hypothesis that creativity and novelty were selected for? This seems like a shift towards "modern" humans, that focus less on physical characteristics in looking for a mate, and more towards other traits. -Tom
"Since the wild pig state is unknown in other cultures, Averill uses this example to support his view that most emotional reactions are socially constructed" –Mario
"People with serious emotional problems are frequently unable to look after themselves, let alone form stable attachments and rear offspring. Such findings suggest epiphenomenon explanation is less likely than the adaptation one. " Jonathan
"In fact, although we are often told to be more open about our feelings, social life would grind to a standstill if everybody continually reported their moment-by-moment internal state to the world." -Angela
Ch 12: Psychopathology
Anxiety and OCD + Depression Pleitropy argument = "many genes have more than one phenotypic effect, so the negative effects of a gene may be maintained in a gene pool because the positive ones outweigh them." (heterozygous advantage also similar?) Time Lag argument = "humans have developed a lifestyle that did not exist in our ancestral past too rapidly for selective pressures to have led to appropriate changes (also known as the mismatch hypothesis)."Compromise argument = "Some psychiatric disorders may be due to design compromises rather than genetic flaws." –Janina
Chapter 13 “...variation arises simply as a result of the impossibility in specifying an entire organism..." (380). -Zabrina
Schizophrenia: p385 "charismatic leaders from Adolf Hitler to David Koresh may well have schizophrenia." It's hard to associate these characters to have schizophrenia as the mental disorder gives symptoms like the inability to be coherent and hearing internal voices that tell them they are "worthless" –Kaela
"This means that between 30 and 50 per cent of the variation among people in personality is accounted for by genetic factors. This therefore means that between 50 and 70 per cent of the variation is down to the non-genetic factors" (pg. 405). This suggests that nature is more influential than nurture. Is it possible for nurture to ever win over nature? -Angela Zhou
Ch13: Individual Differences
Page 440: "Once culture had been identified as a force that can shape human behavior...some argued that culture was superorganic; that it existed as an autonomous force free from human influence." -Ana
Page 411: "the successfulness of a 'personality type' will, up to a point, be dependent on the strategies adopted by other members of the population." –Ana
pg.439 -- "Personality, in Skinner's view, is just a set of behaviors that are learned by the various processes of reward and punishment." -Kaela