Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA23914 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 22 May 2000 16:31:51 +0100 From: Robin Faichney <robin@faichney.demon.co.uk> Organization: Reborn Technology To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: RE: Why are human brains bigger? Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 16:10:32 +0100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.21] Content-Type: text/plain References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31CEB1C9@inchna.stir.ac.uk> Message-Id: <00052216252702.00758@faichney> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
On Mon, 22 May 2000, Vincent Campbell wrote:
>So what are all those organisms that (probably) don't have beliefs, like
>insects, doing?
They don't act, but they do behave.
>The implicit point is that beliefs are not required for survival per se, so
>the question is, why do humans need beliefs?
I wouldn't assume that they do. The fact that something exists doesn't
imply it's required. But see also below.
>The biggest problem, as I think I've said, is that only humans seem to
>express beliefs in external ways, through ritual essentially, and there
>seems to be a clear point in human evolution when ritual emerged. So what
>was is that created the conditions in which natural selection favoured
>humans that had beliefs, which it undoubtedly appears to have done?
>Moreover, what were the triggers that turned internal beliefs into shared
>ritual behaviours?
You seem to be thinking particularly about religious beliefs, but I'm not
sure they're the best examples. I might believe that a particular area is
best for hunting, and such simple, concrete beliefs are likely to have
come about earlier than religious ones, I'd guess.
However, that misses the point I was trying to make linking belief with
action. It seems to me that a member of a simpler species might well
exhibit behaviour quite similar to that of a human who had the
hunting area belief. So what's the difference (if any)? The human
thinks "I believe this, and I want to influence my comrades, because
not only will we have success in our hunting, but I'll get the credit".
And the animal doesn't! So what I'm saying is that belief and the
self-concept go together, and action goes right along with them. The
animal can be said to have a sort of working hypothesis, but it does
not have a concept with which it identifies: "I, me, my belief!". Nor
does it act on the basis of such a belief -- it just does what it's
inclined to do. Susan Blackmore would have us be just like that, and
I'm inclined to agree with her.
-- Robin Faichney===============================This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 22 2000 - 16:32:20 BST