Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The opposite of altruism is human?
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 1 of 12 (410866)
07-17-2007 3:06 PM


http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/07/16/spite_ani.html?c...
July 16, 2007 ” A new study on our closest living relatives, chimpanzees, found the animals might enact revenge under certain circumstances, but never with spite.
The finding, published in the latest Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, suggests homo sapiens are the only known species that sometimes feel a need to see others suffer.
For chimps, on the other hand, the message is, "Don't mess with my lunch, or else."
Researchers Keith Jensen, Josep Call and Michael Tomasello of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany devised experiments where 13 chimps could pull a string attached to a table, causing the table to collapse and fall to the ground. The primates had no trouble doing this, and quickly learned not to pull the string when they were eating food that was resting on the table.
A few study phases tested the general frustration of chimps, since the scientists would allow one chimp to dine in front of another. The onlooker could not reach the food, yet could pull the string. In another version of this test, a person would grab food from one eating, potentially string-pulling chimp and then give the food to another in full view.
The only situation that repeatedly caused the chimps to collapse the table was when a chimpanzee would blatantly steal food from the other. The victim would then pull the string, but without pleasure.
"The chimpanzees who collapsed the table were often angry and would continue to threaten the thief," lead author Jensen told Discovery News. "If they had the chance, and they were dominant, they would likely have beaten up the other chimpanzee."
The chimps did not seem to hold a lasting grudge, however.
Jensen said "when the test was done and the subjects were allowed to be with the rest of the group, there appeared to be no consequences for either individual."
The researchers believe punishment ” in this case disrupting lunch ” can benefit social groups in the long run, since it may discourage selfish behavior and help prevent "the degrading influence of free-riders."
Spite, on the other hand, is not always a means to an end, but rather is an end in itself.
A sneaky human, for example, might hide and pull on the string just to enjoy seeing the table collapse underneath someone else whose lunch was on the table.
Jensen said such spitefulness "is the evil twin of altruism." Just as an empathetic person may help someone even when the only reward is feeling good about the charitable act, a spiteful individual could hurt another even when the only reward is enjoying, or gaining satisfaction from, the other's suffering.
Jensen therefore thinks spitefulness "may form the basis of altruistic punishment, which is a key component for the maintenance of cooperation in groups."
Although the jury is still out on whether non-human primates exhibit altruism, Danielle Stith, primate keeper at the Oakland Zoo in California, has observed that for chimps, "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" is literally true.
"I've seen chimps whimper for food that another chimp is eating," Stith told Discovery News. "After a period of this, the eating chimp will often share, probably because it knows that somewhere down the line, such as during mutual grooming sessions, it may need this other individual's help."
Lower primates, like baboons and monkeys, are not nearly as cooperative. She said dominant male and female baboons may just "push others away," while monkeys might think nothing of taking a bite out of someone else's food.
While differences clearly exist between higher and lower primates, some discrepancies in social behavior between humans and chimpanzees are less clear.
Jensen and his team are now studying whether or not chimps can recognize "nice" and "nasty" human experimenters, based on how the humans treat the animals. They are also investigating how chimps may punish thieves, even when the potential punishers did not directly suffer the losses.
previously somewhere on the board, there was a discussion of the humanity of altruism and then an article was posted which demonstrated that even rats are inherently altruistic. now this suggests that humans developed something after they separated from chimpanzees which allows them to be downright nasty.
this is particularly interesting to me as i study one rather poignant example of human nastiness, genocide. so let's find some other articles and discuss what is it that makes humans want to hurt each other.
human origins i think.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by iceage, posted 07-18-2007 12:47 AM macaroniandcheese has replied
 Message 5 by Ben!, posted 07-18-2007 10:17 AM macaroniandcheese has replied
 Message 7 by sinequanon, posted 12-18-2007 4:23 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 4 of 12 (410974)
07-18-2007 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by iceage
07-18-2007 12:47 AM


However if you read much about Chimpanzee society and behavior they can nasty in their own way - actually quite horrific. They might not be spiteful but they can be consciously cruel for other, maybe more temporal, reasons.
naturally, but this study at least suggests that the nastiness is always deserved. though i know that they have their own territory wars.
Has there ever been a war or genocide were religion or nationalism was not the prime mover?
probably not. but then that is how people have decided to organize themselves. organization defines other and other is attacked.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by iceage, posted 07-18-2007 12:47 AM iceage has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 6 of 12 (410982)
07-18-2007 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Ben!
07-18-2007 10:17 AM


This study does not address between-troop behavior at all, and as you've seemingly agreed in response to another post, genocide is just that--killing based on group inclusion/exclusion.
being based on inclusion/exclusion does not reduce it to inter-troop behavior. many genocides, particularly recent ones, have occurred within national and racial groups which have defined a false other or an other that has only very limited differences. case in point, rwandan difference is a mythical hyperbole of a social ranking system, and bosniaks are southern slavs who converted to islam, but are still the same racial/ethnic group.
i see the issues you list with the study itself. and i see your point about genocide being more practical and less spiteful. but then that is an understanding based on the propaganda and the reasons that participants cite for killing. however, it doesn't address the intellectual processes of the planners for whom genocide is a matter of political expedience. genocide doesn't just happen. it is planned and propogated by people desperate to acheive or maintain power over the in group. when animals kill those outside their group, it is to defend territory or take territory. i would have to see evidence that it is planned and propogated to maintain power over the in group. i've read diamond. i'm not convinced.
also, degree of hostility to or nastiness in killing of external individuals does not demonstrate spite or genocidal thinking. it's a much more subtle construct than that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Ben!, posted 07-18-2007 10:17 AM Ben! has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 8 of 12 (441736)
12-18-2007 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by sinequanon
12-18-2007 4:23 PM


i don't really know what that has to do with the topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by sinequanon, posted 12-18-2007 4:23 PM sinequanon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by sinequanon, posted 12-18-2007 4:43 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 10 of 12 (441745)
12-18-2007 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by sinequanon
12-18-2007 4:43 PM


i don't think that birds fighting over food as "sport" has anything to do with altruism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by sinequanon, posted 12-18-2007 4:43 PM sinequanon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by sinequanon, posted 12-19-2007 3:54 AM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 12 of 12 (441903)
12-19-2007 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by sinequanon
12-19-2007 3:54 AM


you could continue to spout nonsense...
or you could read the article and reference other articles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by sinequanon, posted 12-19-2007 3:54 AM sinequanon has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024