Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA10326 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 23 May 2000 13:36:48 +0100 Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31CEB1D0@inchna.stir.ac.uk> From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Why are human brains bigger? Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 13:34:47 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Intuitive physics is something new to me, thanks to this list, on which I
cannot comment (not before doing some reading on it anyway- suggestions
anyone?).
As I said to Robin, I think discussions about 'acts' and 'beliefs' can
become quite reductive and semantic. And such definitions of acts and
beliefs that have been offered here don't really seem satisfactory to me.
Never mind.
Let us assume that animals have beliefs, requiring them in order to act.
Is the difference between human and animal belief, therefore, simply a
quantitative one? In other words, we have more varied and complex beliefs
but their purpose and determinant characteristics are essentially the same
as for all other animals. Or, in addition to a quantitative difference in
human and animal beliefs there is there also a qualitative difference, in
that humans express beliefs through particular kinds of behaviours?
This would add a whole new level to the importance of belief, because once
you start have behaviours whose specific purpose is to maintain a belief
(for the reason you suggested) then you start to have physical expenditure
which needs to be 'justified' in terms of the return benefits of that
belief. Now, because the beliefs can be maintained through behaviours which
in themselves produce the latent benefits (latent as in non-material, such
as feeling motivated, or cementing social bonds), this can escalate into
behaviours which impinge on other survival elements in ways which we haven't
evolved (yet) to cope with. Now, this should mean that such behaviours
eventually lead to the 'failure' of the humans maintaining those behaviours
(the previously discussed suicide cults, for example), as those people won't
survive.
But, and I've said it before and I'll say it again, behaviours no longer
need to be passed directly from person to person through interpersonal
contact. As a result it is possible that 'failed' behaviours may be able to
persist regardless of thoe behaviours being anti-utilitarian, and as such we
need to consider whether this allows other processes to act on human
behaviour.
I sense a level of circularity emerging in our discussion. Perhaps we
should agree to disagree, and move on?
Vincent
> ----------
> From: chuck
> Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 2:55 pm
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Why are human brains bigger?
>
>
>
> 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 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 : Tue May 23 2000 - 13:37:23 BST