Re: Why are human brains bigger?

From: chuck (cpalson@mediaone.net)
Date: Mon May 22 2000 - 14:55:01 BST

  • Next message: Richard Brodie: "RE: Advertising studies"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA00945 (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 19:57:40 +0100
    Message-ID: <39293C35.3033A838@mediaone.net>
    Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 14:55:01 +0100
    From: chuck <cpalson@mediaone.net>
    X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (WinNT; I)
    X-Accept-Language: en
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Why are human brains bigger?
    References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31CEB1C9@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Vincent Campbell wrote:

    > So what are all those organisms that (probably) don't have beliefs, like
    > insects, doing?

    I think insects are probably different. As I understand it, individual genetic
    structures are quite close - aren't some sort of clones?

    >
    >
    > The implicit point is that beliefs are not required for survival per se, so
    > the question is, why do humans need beliefs?

    Vincent - we never resolved the question of beliefs. As I said before, if
    beliefs are defined as an emotional state that pushes the individual to an
    action, then animals have beliefs. That, of course, seems over generalized. But
    on the other end of a contuum is religion which supposedly also leads to certain
    behaviors and it's quite conscious. But that has its problems too because what
    do we do with the fact that a lot of decisions are made by the lower brain and
    then passed to the conscious brain that then gives the illusion that the
    decision was made there! And what do we do about something in the middle we call
    intuitive physics - where you definitely have a belief in gravity - which
    animals have.

    Frankly, I can't imagine that individual animals don't have some way to monitor
    their motivations and how they are different from other animals.

    >
    >
    > 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?
    >

    It seems to me that humans may simply have more complex ways of doing it. Have
    you read Victor Turner's stuff on ritual? He is an anthropologist. He shows that
    rituals are ways of inducing what he calls liminal states, which I think are
    special psychological states that enable people to act in more cooperative ways.
    I am not sure how he defines it because it's been many years since I read him.

    As to the clear point when humans had beliefs, if animals do have beliefs, then
    it wouldn't be so clear what you mean. Besides, rituals themselves are designed
    to induce cooperative behavior, and that in itself would have survival value.

    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    ===============================================================
    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 - 19:58:10 BST