RE: USA Today - interview with Gugatkin and de Waal on animal cul ture

From: Vincent Campbell (v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Jun 08 2001 - 15:50:57 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Research in memetics"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA15285 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 8 Jun 2001 16:19:05 +0100
    Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745EF1@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: USA Today - interview with Gugatkin and de Waal on animal cul ture
    Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 15:50:57 +0100 
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-Type: text/plain
    X-Filter-Info: UoS MailScan 0.1 [D 1]
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Just for my own comprehension (not a challenge), when you say convergent
    adaptation, are you talking about things like animals that develop
    camouflage (or aggressive) markings that are similar, but haven't emerged
    from the same body parts? So, insects have camouflaged caitin (is that
    spelt right?), birds have camouflaged feathers, mammals camouflaged fur etc.
    etc.

    I read a piece in New Scientist the other day that was talking about
    'personality' in animals- things like being bold (e.g. investigating rather
    than shying away from new objects) or shy (e.g. hiding for longer when
    threats are introduced). Studies of things like spiders and fish suggest
    there are distinct behaviour difference within species, usually related to
    differences in environment. So, in one study spiders living in woodland are
    more cautious because there's a high risk of predation, whereas as spiders
    living in more open ground are braver, as food is scarcer.

    I wouldn't want to ring fence culture for humans, as I might once have done
    (before joning this list I should add), but I wouldn't want to open the
    flood gates either- to mix metaphors. Clearly human culture must have
    evolved from earlier ancestral versions in nature, so our culture is simply
    different by degree, rather than fundamentally.

    Incidentally, I've just ordered these books off Amazon.com on one of my
    usual whims, and also 'The Evolution of Culture: An Interdisciplinary View'
    edited by R.Dunbar, which looked interesting. No doubt they'll sit on my
    shelves for some time before I get around to reading them...

    Vincent

    > ----------
    > From: Scott Chase
    > Reply To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Sent: Friday, June 8, 2001 2:33 pm
    > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > Subject: Re: USA Today - interview with Gugatkin and de Waal on
    > animal culture
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >From: Philip Jonkers <P.A.E.Jonkers@phys.rug.nl>
    > >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > >To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > >Subject: Re: USA Today - interview with Gugatkin and de Waal on animal
    > >culture
    > >Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 14:50:45 +0200 (CEST)
    > >
    > >Nice article indeed.
    > >It is good though to know that animals do imitate. If imitation
    > >would be exclusively human it would have necessarily have to be
    > >evolved with a quantum leap out of animal traits which
    > >do not support imitation then. This seems highly unlikely
    > >since evolution graduates.
    > >Darwin rules!
    > >
    > >
    > Part of the fan club I see.
    >
    > If imitation or culture (or whatever) might be rooted deeper than many
    > conceited humans would care to appreciate within the phylogenetic bush,
    > then
    > imitation (or culture or whatever) would be quite archetypal, in which
    > case
    > Richard Owen or Johann Wolfgang von Goethe would rule.
    >
    > If rooted deep enough, imitation (or culture or whatever) might be a part
    > of
    > the body plan, much like a limb or spinal column. I'm skeptical on how
    > deeply rooted these things might be. Superficial similarities may arise
    > from
    > convergent adaption to similar circumstances, not shared parts (homologies
    >
    > reflecting unity of type) modified by the conditions of existence into a
    > hand or wing.
    >
    > _________________________________________________________________
    > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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
    >
    >

    -- 
    The University of Stirling is a university established in Scotland by
    charter at Stirling, FK9 4LA.  Privileged/Confidential Information may
    be contained in this message.  If you are not the addressee indicated
    in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such
    person), you may not disclose, copy or deliver this message to anyone
    and any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is
    prohibited and may be unlawful.  In such case, you should destroy this
    message and kindly notify the sender by reply email.  Please advise
    immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email
    for messages of this kind.  Opinions, conclusions and other
    information in this message that do not relate to the official
    business of the University of Stirling shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
    

    =============================================================== 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 : Fri Jun 08 2001 - 16:22:54 BST