Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA21146 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 20 Aug 2001 15:08:26 +0100 From: Philip Jonkers <P.A.E.Jonkers@phys.rug.nl> X-Authentication-Warning: rugth1.phys.rug.nl: www-data set sender to jonkers@localhost using -f To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Spoiled Reward-Pathway Hypothesis Message-ID: <998316307.3b81191395ba5@rugth1.phys.rug.nl> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 16:05:07 +0200 (CEST) References: <3B7D57DB.28568.6D61FE@localhost> <3B7F11A8.9482.3F8BC3@localhost> <998239619.3b7fed837b398@rugth1.phys.rug.nl> <3B804CCE.D348E049@pacbell.net> In-Reply-To: <3B804CCE.D348E049@pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.5 X-Originating-IP: 62.100.8.206 Sender: fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Philip:
> > Natural selection ought to favor birds who aren't drunk an entire
> > season. I am well aware also that drug-usage (including alcohol) is not
> > uncommon in the animal kingdom. I cannot imagine that natural
> > selection would allow for animal `druggies' to emerge and maintain in the
> > extremely competitive and demanding natural world.
Bill:
> It sounds like the Hollywood image of drug addicts as completely
> wasted incompetents is at work here. Excessive intoxication is, by
> definition, suboptimal. However, natural selection does not optimize, it
> allows organisms to be fit enough. Given the prevalence of human addictions,
> perhaps the relative lack of addiction in other animals occurs only
> for lack of opportunity. If other animals were able to make fermented
> drinks, refine drugs, make fire and smoke herbs, make candy,
> audio-visual recordings, video games, and TV programs, then we might
> see much more addiction in them.
Hi Bill, thanks for the feedback. Indeed, the filter of natural selection does
seem to allow for the occasional, perhaps even regular, intoxicated animal
to live out its life successfully. We humans separate from the rest of the
animals in that we have ample opportunities to frequently sedate ourselves and
still be able to thrive. Our cultural tradition to use drugs (in europe:
alcohol, tobacco, coffee) and our ethical systems, providing support to
addicts (social security systems, charity), permit universal sustenance of
addictive behavior. I agree with you that if animals had more knowledge
on ways to acquire more drugs or other redundant addictive stimuli and
provided they wouldn't be engaged in survival and reproduction
all of the time, they certainly run the risk of swapping occasional use of
drugs for habitual. But they don't as this necessarily would come down to
animals having a culture.
I believe that it is precisely our culture that has a large share in rising
(evolutionary) and maintaining human addiction in accordance with my hypothesis.
That is, it is by having a culture what makes humans stand out from the rest of
the animals. If our brain wasn't predisposed to reward activities
aimed at warranting cultural evolution and existence it would whither away as
humans would lack motivation in trying to doing so.
Philip.
===============================================================
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 Aug 20 2001 - 15:12:52 BST