MC Philosophy

Edward Wilson and Features of Sociobiology

This is the fourth and final entry on Edward Wilson's "On Human Nature".  The first is Edward Wilson: On Human Nature, the second is Edward Wilson and Sociobiology, and the third is Edward Wilson: Sociobiology and Humans.

- After discussing the biological aspects of materialism and sociobiology, then relating it to how this theory could affect humans, it is now time to discuss some large topics that need clarifying.  These will include the difference between biological evolution and cultural evolution, and how sociobiology affects very important human institutions. 

Cultural Vs. Biological Evolution

- We will start with a necessary clarification, that between biological and cultural evolution.

Our devoted readers will remember a reference made earlier  to the possibility that Marilyn Monroe and her busty blond look could have been a determining factor in biological evolution.  That because of the huge cultural influence she had, more blond women with big boobs (or manufactured thusly) would get the better mates and change the gene pool to their favor. 

  Thus we would see this type of woman as having a greater likelihood of passing her genes along, and maybe in the future we would have more and more Pams.  This is not the case that sociobiology makes exactly (though this is possible).  The blond haired, big boobed traits and especially the plastic surgery to attain them are examples of cultural evolution.  In this case, the evolution of what is "sexy" or "looked for" in a woman, physically.  In fact, the vast majority of human biological evolution occurred in times never recorded and the explosion of cultural evolution has since been far outpacing any biological evolution. 

"We can be fairly certain that most of the genetic evolution of human social behavior occurred over the five million years prior to civilization...On the other hand, by far the greater part of cultural evolution has occurred since the origin of agriculture and cities approximately 10,000 years ago.  Although genetic evolution of some kind continued during this latter, historical sprint, it cannot have fashioned more than a tiny fraction of the traits of human nature...It follows that human sociobiology can be most directly tested in studies of hunter-gathering societies and the most persistent preliterate herding and agricultural societies."

-So there is a reason that culture has not deviated the human nature to an amazing degree, because most of it evolved far ago when culture was not as strong a force.  And we are still able to see amazing similarities (as stated specifically in the last entry) in all human civilizations, without certain cultures differing greatly genetically. 

-This does not mean that no biological evolution is occurring at all, just that the major features will most likely remain the same.  Just recently, scientists from the University of Chicago found many forms of evolution in humans that affect things like the ability to digest milk in Europeans, or specific sugars in East Asians.  These minor changes to help survival in specific places and due to specific cultural practices are exciting.  More on this will surely be coming as the genetic field prospers. 

So, for now, we don't have to worry about this being our future.  Actually, if the power of advertising persists, we might. 

Religion

-Many of the major institutions that people would consider "cultural" or completely disconnected from biology, actually can be easily explained by sociobiology, "religions are like other human institutions in that they evolve in directions that enhance the welfare of the practitioners...the benefit can arise as the sum of the generally increased fitness of all the members." 

Once you understand the tenets of sociobiology, it is easy to see how adhering to a religion would help pass along genetic traits.  Becoming a member of such a strong and enormous group is a dream for genes. 

- This institution of religion serves to promote certain biological traits, "xenophobia, the dichotomization of objects into the sacred and profane, hierarchical dominance, intense attention toward leaders, charisma, trophyism, and trance induction are among the elements of religious behavior most likely to be shaped by developmental programs and learning rules."  Since forms of religion have been around since before "time", and have only prospered since, it makes sense that these genetic predispositions would be very powerful. 

- Even Martyrdom (not pictured to avoid promotion of activity) makes sense evolutionarily.  Once you understand that evolution is not about spreading individual genes at all costs, but also involves spreading your close familial genes or group genes, the existence of martyrdom is obviously a positive move for your genes.  Because people revere the martyr and it helps promote their ideals and spread their religion; the martyr is a powerful force evolutionarily.  "The loss of genes suffered through the deaths of disciplined individuals can be more than balanced by a gain of genes attained through expansion of the benefited group."

Thus, I give you Sociobiology and Humans through Edward O. Wilson's "On Human Nature".  And one last gratuitous shot of Marilyn Monroe as a toast to the great effects of Sociobiology. 

Edward Wilson: Sociobiology and Humans

This is the third entry on Edward Wilson's "On Human Nature", the first is Edward Wilson: On Human Nature , the second is Edward Wilson and Sociobiology

-Now the brush up on the material mind and the tenets of sociobiology are behind us, we can move into the effect that Wilson claims sociobiology has on humans.  A central claim that is reinforced by many examples in the human and their society is that "beliefs are really enabling mechanisms for survival" and that "human institutions, evolve so as to enhance the persistence and influence of their practitioners." 

This may seem an unusual claim since humans have created some really wierd institutions.  It may seem impossible that the Trekkie world could in any way be a "mechanism for survival" or in any manner "enhance the persistence and influence of their practitioners."  But this claim should not be taken in an absolute literal way; it is not the Trekkie-ness that promotes its participants, but it is the institution in general - the gathering of people with like minds (obsessive for a science fiction escapism, maybe), who create an institution that makes their type solidified through the security of the group.  And people of that type will then be more likely to find a mate, or an intimate group.

Similarities in Human Cultures

- Biology has created a nature in humans that promotes the creation of certain institutions in all human cultures, "There are social traits occurring through all cultures which upon close examination are as diagnostic of mankind as are distinguishing characteristics of other animal species."

Americans, Indonesians, Ancient Romans, and even the rare Bulging Buttocks Bushmen all share similar institutions and cultural traits that the anthropologist George Murdock claims have been recorded in every culture known to history.  Some of them include: "Age-grading, athletic sports, bodily adornment, calendar, cleanliness training, community organization, cooking, cooperative labor, courtship, cosmology, dancing, divination, dream interpretation, faith healing, family feasting, fire making, food taboos, gift giving, government, hair styles, incest taboos, inheritance rules, kin groups, language, law, luck superstitions" and many more. 

-These are societal similarities that are alike in all known civilizations because they come from institutions created by ancient man in order to better ensure his/her survival and that of their clan.  The fact that they still persist is due to cultural influence.  Even in societies where these structures are not needed for survival, they are continually propagated because that is what society demands of its participants.  The genetic traits that cause humans to fulfill these cultural institutions are thus reproduced.

Prepared Learning

"The learning potential of each species appears to be fully programmed by the structure of its brain, the sequence of release of its hormones, and ultimately, its genes.  Each animal species, is 'prepared'  to learn certain stimuli, barred from learning others, and neutral with respect to still others...Each year indigo buntings migrate...Like many other native birds they travel at night.  After leaving the nest, young buntings are prepared to learn the north star and circumpolar constellations, which they proceed to do quickly and automatically." 

This is the same with humans.  We are born with prepared learning capabilities to perform many cultural traits.  We are born with the tendency to adhere to a governing body, to use symbolic gestures to promote that body, and sometimes to blindly follow that body ignoring all their problems in the face of a stern father figure who tells them that all will be great if they listen to him and use their ingrown hatred for others to perpetuate divisiveness and serve to keep that figure in power through this fear and hatred.  Like the bunting, we too have tendencies, though unlike the bunting, many of ours are more direction guides than instinct givers. 

It is imperative to note that we do not necessarily blindly follow our instincts and thus are not metaphorical slaves to our genetic coding.  We don't just follow lines, whether man-made or genetically made. 

"It is possible to estimate roughly the relative strictness of controls on various categories of behavior.  Genetic studies based on the comparison of identical and fraternal twins suggest that primary mental abilities and perceptual and motor skills are most influenced by heredity, while personality traits are least influenced.  If this important result is confirmed by additional studies, the inference to be drawn is that the abilities needed to cope with relatively invariant problems in the physical environment develop along narrow channels, while the qualities of personality, which represent adjustments to the rapidly shifting social environment, are more malleable." 

So some hereditary features push us through a narrow valley, tightly regulating our actions in that regard, like creating incest taboos to diminish interbreeding. 

Whereas other heredity features are less directive and more malleable by culture, a wider valley if you will, with more options for straying (though not hopping over the edge of the valley to the other side).  This would equate to personality issues like how a girl who goes to UCLA might start talking a certain way, acting a certain way, flirting a certain way, and overall changing due to the environment she comes into contact with. 

And oh how we revel in the power of culture. 

Next Up: Features of Sociobiology

Edward Wilson and Sociobiology

This is the second entry on Edward Wilson's "On Human Nature."  The first is Edward Wilson: On Human Nature.

- After getting a brush up on the materialism of the mind and the evolution of the brain, it is now time to investigate the prospect of sociobiology.  Sociobiology is not a theory that is only attributable to humans.  In fact, Wilson found it by studying ants and other animals and then found that it also could apply to the more intricate human cultural system. 

When Wilson studied insects like ants, he saw that certain biological traits in the species promoted certain societal aspects of their population.  When you study an ant population, perhaps the most intriuing aspect is the amazing amount of division of labor evident.  This occurs because of biological traits within the species, one of which is haplodiploidy. 

AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!   Haplodiploidy is the word of the day! 

-Haplodiploidy is the trait in ants, bees, wasps, and others in which fertilized eggs produce females and those left unfertilized produce males.  This is a genetic trait that seems to have been introduced about 150 million years ago in primitive wasps.  This trait accidentally caused highly advanced forms of social life, because it "causes sisters to be more closely related to each other than mothers and daughters, and so females may derive genetic profit from becoming a sterile caste specialized for the rearing of sisters.  Sterile castes engaged in rearing siblings are the essential feature of social organization in the insects." 

- The profit at the time that haplodiploidy gave to the wasps is unknown, but it might have been a source of control over populations.  Nonetheless, over time it gave rise to fertile individuals producing primarily females, whose sisterhood no longer made individual survival necessary.  If they divided labor amongst sterile castes, then the survival of the species was greatly increased, and the individual could be sacrificed for the whole.  It is in this way that the biology of a species determines the society in which it is most likely to prosper.  Then the societal order promotes that specific trait in the offspring. 

Much like the busty beautiness of Marilyn Monroe and her contemporaries may have made it more likely that girls with big bazongas (who showed them off) would get better mates.  And if you aren't beautiful like she, do what she did and fix yourself superficially so you will be!!  What is to follow is a generation of women showing more and looking similar, and that notion of beauty affects who will be a better choice for offspring.

Here is the basic structure of the notion of sociobiology. 

- Through this amazingly helpful visual, we can see the circular nature of evolution affecting biology, biology affecting culture/society, and culture then affecting the biological evolution of a species.

- If my stunningly clarifying diagram is correct, then the only exterior inputs necessary to believe are that "biology affects behavior", and that "individuals affect the culture of a species".  Many people seem to put a divide between biology and culture.  But if our biology is a determining factor in our behavior (as discussed in the previous entry), and culture/society is not a free-floating phenomena that moves on its own but is grounded in behavior, then the biology of a species affects the society.  Furthermore, it allows culture to be flexible to the changing needs of a species.  The most important element is then that culture has the power to affect who in the species will be most likely to pass on their and their family's genes. 

And like with our friend Marilyn, we can demonstrate how culture would affect the genetics of our biological offspring.  (Actually, as we will see next, the culture of Marilyn-ness probably didn't have any real genetic effect on the human species, but it's still an example of culture affecting what is more attractive in a mate - and she's hot.)

Next Up: Sociobiology and Humans
   

Edward Wilson: On Human Nature

Edward O. Wilson (1929 - )

- Biologist, Professor at Harvard
- Made famous by work with ants, discovering the pheromones used in their communication
- Previously discussed on MC Philo for his work Consilience
Positions Defended: Unity of scientific thought, Reductionism, Truth in Nature
Those Who are Wrong: Deconstructionists, Rorty, Religions, Rationalists, Skeptics
Work Discussed: On Human Nature

- In Wilson's work Consilience, we saw how he was promoting the unifying of the sciences such that the human species could ultimately attain the most basic and beautiful of understandings of our world and universe.  It would be an understanding based on mathematical representations of the world such that they corresponded exactly to phenomena and their systems.  In this work, On Human Nature, we are taking a step back in time, to an earlier work of his mostly focusing on his new concept "sociobiology".  In 1975, Wilson published Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, a scientific tome of his new idea that biology affects the social life of species, in which he also included human beings as animals whose societal functions were ultimately due to their biology.  Outrage from social scientists and humanities professors soon ensued, with harsh charges of social darwinism, and other characterizations.  This work, On Human Nature, is a more lay-person friendly account of this theory and a defense of his true meanings. 

Evolution

In order to understand sociobiology, we first must understand the tenets of evolution (hopefully, dear reader, you have a basic knowledge of this, for I shan't go over all the ins and outs and whathaveyous). How humans came to be how they are, and how all animals came to be, is due to the process of natural selection in which genetic changes made in a species that were most advantageous and receptive to change were passed along.  We can see traces of it in old bones dug up, like our Friend above, that were ancestors of ours who weren't as badass (to use a Stephenson term).  And sometimes these old genes can be seen in modern people:

(Yes, this is Sheldon Williams of Duke fame, who fights for title of ugliest NBA player with Chris Kamen)

- Evolution has been responsible for amazingly intricate processes in animal and plant bodies.  Perhaps the most amazing product is the brain, and the most badass of those is the human brain.  Knowing that the human brain is a product of evolution, we must then infer that the reason for its current form is because it gave some advantage to early humans.  We have the tendency to think of the mind as an elusive, sometimes non-material, thinking entity in the brain - a place where senses resonate and higher-minded functions occur.  But there is no difference between the brain and the mind, and the brain has evolved for a plethora of reasons, "The human mind is a device for survival and reproduction, and reason is just one of its various techniques."

A common way to think of this is if you think of the brain as represented by a  large factory with many pipes.  The pipes all work in concert with each other to perform many different functions necessary to keep the factory as a whole functioning.  If we think of the neurons as these pipes, then we can envision how, on a much smaller yet more complicated scale, they interact to perform all the functions necessary for survival.  The thought is, if we could only enlarge the neurons in the brain to this size, the mystery of the "mind" would be destroyed. 

- Once we realize that our brains, and thus what we think of as our "mind", is a fully material substance that evolved for very specific reasons, it is easier to understand certain patterns in human beings.  Humans are animals that needed to survive and reproduce and though it's more complicated than that, other actions in the brain are correlated to those very basic functions. 

"There are three basic components of genetic fitness: increased personal survival, increased personal reproduction, and the enhanced survival and reproduction of close relatives who share the same genes by common descent."

So don't worry that you masturbate every day - its because of evolutionary tendency

Don't think bad of men who use huge guns to defend their homes - its because of evolutionary tendency

And don't judge people who voted for Bush - its because they're fucking stupid or too greedy (and evolution will deal with them - well, maybe, they do seem to have a lot of kids)

Human Nature

- So if our brains are composed of material stuff and that material stuff was formed because it was most advantageous to our specific species, then there will be a level to which these brains function in similar ways.  Mutation and change within a species is healthy and natural, so not all people are exactly the same - our brains all have different, unique aspects.  But there are many functions of the brain that will be similar for all people, and it is here that we find Human Nature. 

"Particularities in decision making distinguish one human being from another.  But the rules followed are tight enough to produce a broad overlap in the decisions taken by all individuals and hence a convergence powerful enough to be labelled human nature." 

- There is a reason why we all have the same exact reactions to happy or pleasurable experiences...

To smile

That chimps smile in the same way is no accident, we have extraordinarily similar genes to the chimp, and display many of the same actions and social patterns. 

- Our genes are patterned to program us in a way that can only be described as Human.  Luckily for us, the traits that make us human are more limited and idiosyncratic than probably all other animals in the world.  But, according to Wilson, that there are traits that make us act specifically human is without doubt. 

-After this brush-up on materialism, next we will focus on how this evolutionarily formed human nature interacts with society. 

Next Up: Wilson and Sociobiology