DOCSLIB.ORG

Redalyc.Innateness and the Instinct to Learn

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Redalyc.Innateness and the Instinct to Learn Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências ISSN: 0001-3765 [email protected] Academia Brasileira de Ciências Brasil Marler, Peter Innateness and the instinct to learn Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, vol. 76, núm. 2, june, 2004, pp. 189-200 Academia Brasileira de Ciências Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=32776202 Cómo citar el artículo Número completo Sistema de Información Científica Más información del artículo Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal Página de la revista en redalyc.org Proyecto académico sin fines de lucro, desarrollado bajo la iniciativa de acceso abierto Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (2004) 76(2): 189-200 (Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences) ISSN 0001-3765 www.scielo.br/aabc Innateness and the instinct to learn PETER MARLER Animal Communication Laboratory, Department of Neurobiology, Physiology and Behavior University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA Manuscript received on January 15, 2004; accepted for publication on February 5, 2004. ABSTRACT Concepts of innateness were at the heart of Darwin’s approach to behavior and central to the ethological theorizing of Lorenz and, at least to start with, of Tinbergen. Then Tinbergen did an about face, and for some twenty years the term ‘innate’ became highly suspect. He attributed the change to Lehrman’s famous 1953 critique in which he asserted that classifying behaviors as innate tells us nothing about how they develop. Although Lehrman made many valid points, I will argue that this exchange also led to profound misunderstandings that were ultimately damaging to progress in research on the development of behavior. The concept of ‘instincts to learn’, receiving renewed support from current theorizing among geneticists about phenotypic plasticity, provides a potential resolution of some of the controversies that Lehrman created. Bioacoustical studies, particularly on song learning in birds, serve both to confirm some of Lehrman’s anxieties about the term ‘innate’, but also to make a case that he threw out the genetic baby with the bathwater. The breathtaking progress in molecular and developmental genetics has prepared the way for a fuller understanding of the complexities underlying even the simplest notions of innate behavior, necessary before we can begin to comprehend the ontogeny of behavior. Key words: innateness, song learning, phenotypic plasticity, behavioral genetics, Tinbergen’s four questions. INTRODUCTION I have been most intimately involved, vocal commu- nication in birds, and the development of birdsong. One of the great issues that have long confronted biologists, philosophers, and social scientists is the HISTORICAL BACKGROUND controversy about nature and nurture. To what ex- tent are we products of our genetic make-up, and I was lucky, as a student, to be present at the very be- to what extent are we reflections of the cumulative ginning of birdsong studies, and to participate in the consequences of the myriad of experiences over a initial spread of ethology, first in Europe, and then lifetime? In our own case this is a conundrum that in America. These were exciting times in the early we will never solve, but with animals we may have 1950s, when so much about the study of behavior some chance of gaining at least a rough understand- was in a state of ferment, much of it triggered by the ing of the principles involved. It has been a central contributions of Konrad Lorenz (Fig. 1). issue in the study of animal behavior for a long time, Many new directions were emerging, summa- especially in that aspect of bioacoustics with which rized in Tinbergen’s list of issues to be addressed, outlined by him for me as external examiner on E-mail: [email protected] my PhD thesis committee. Interestingly he was An Acad Bras Cienc (2004) 76 (2) 190 PETER MARLER not alone in trying to forecast the future. Julian Huxley, acknowledged as an influential colleague by Lorenz, (Fig. 1) wrote an appreciative piece called ‘Lorenzian ethology’, with a list similar to Tinber- gen’s (Huxley 1963). The two of them shared the same three main points of focus: (1) the causation of behavior, by which they meant the underlying physiological machinery; (2) the survival value of behavior; and (3) its role in evolution. In the years that followed, there has been dramatic progress in all three of these areas, and research in bioacoustics has made major contributions in all of them rang- ing from insects (e.g. Otte 1977, Michelsen and Larsen 1983, Michelsen 1992, Bennet-Clark 1989, 1998, 1999) to anurans (e.g. Ryan 1985, Wilczyn- ski and Ryan 1999, Schwartz 2001, Gerhardt and Huber 2002), birds (Thorpe 1961, Kroodsma and Miller 1982, 1996, Catchpole and Slater 1995) and mammals (Eisenberg 1976, Gould 1983, Cheney and Seyfarth 1990). But Tinbergen chose to add a fourth area, the development of behavior (Tinbergen 1963), which was destined to become something of an orphan. Even today we have no comprehen- sive theory of behavioral ontogeny. I have spent much time trying to understand why it happened that progress in the study of development was the slow- est of the four areas of study. In doing so, I have gone back repeatedly to other events taking place in the behavioral sciences in the fifties, many of them Fig. 1 – Six key figures in the innateness controversy: Lorenz, directly provoked by the renewed interest in Tinbergen, Heinroth, Huxley, Lehrman, and Hebb. instinctive behavior. That is the theme that I want to present here. but his teachers took the view that behavior was too The Concept of Innateness variable and amorphous to be amenable to the same Lorenz, Tinbergen, and my own teacher and men- kind of study. But with the encouragement of his tor, W.H. Thorpe, like Darwin, were all fully con- most influential mentor, Oscar Heinroth (Fig. 1), vinced of the value of the concept of in- Lorenz became convinced that ethology could be as stinct, defined by Webster’s dictionary as ‘‘an in- objective as comparative anatomy. As director of the born tendency to behave in a way characteristic of Berlin Zoo, Heinroth was intimate with the behav- a species’’. As a medical student in Vienna, Lorenz ior of scores of animals, many of which he raised in was exposed to the ferment of phylogenetic theo- captivity, often by hand, especially birds. His mon- rizing in comparative anatomy and morphology, umental ‘Die Vögel Mitteleuropas’, written with his mostly based on the study of bones and skeletons. wife, Magdalena Heinroth, is full of details, richly The young Lorenz was more interested in behavior, illustrated, about the development of behavior in an An Acad Bras Cienc (2004) 76 (2) INNATENESS AND THE INSTINCT TO LEARN 191 amazing number of birds (Heinroth and Heinroth Tinbergen became much more cautious about using 1924-1933). Among Lorenz’s zoo favorites were the term ‘innate’, and he was joined by other lead- waterfowl, and watching them he found that many ing ethologists, including Patrick Bateson, Robert of the distinctive, species-specific displays they per- Hinde, and Gerard Baerends, and many other in- formed in captivity matched those in the wild, even fluential figures. As a consequence, the very fun- though they had no adult tutors to instruct them. dament on which the ethological approach to the In his 1941 monograph on duck behavior, Lorenz development of behavior was founded suddenly be- compared in detail 20 species, all of whose dis- came suspect. In the years that followed, the term plays appeared to him to develop normally in cap- ‘innate’ became a forbidden word. And of course tivity, down to the finest details of nod-swimming the message was not lost on students who, like me, and the grunt-whistle and head-up/tail-up, and so were in the midst of launching their own careers in on (Lorenz 1941). It seemed natural to regard these animal behavior. displays as instinctive or innate, and the concept of For young and old alike, Lehrman’s paper was innateness became central to his view of behavior. influential not only because of its cogent criticisms Ethologists then began describing how young of ethology, but also because of his eloquence, and animals of diverse species, raised under similar con- the tone in which it was written, which was ex- ditions, consistently developed distinctive behaviors tremely hostile. He almost ridiculed the concept that were sufficiently stable and stereotyped to yield of innateness, stressing the difficulty of excluding insights into taxonomy and phylogeny. Lorenz de- environmental influences on ontogeny, especially in veloped his notion of ‘fixed action patterns’, build- the study of behavior. By implication he called into ing on some of Heinroth’s ideas, characterizing units question the very idea that genetical approaches to of behavior that could be studied in similar terms to the study of behavioral development could be of anatomical and morphological features. value. Lorenz was furious and, although they be- This in turn was the view embraced by Tin- came reconciled later, I suspect that he never really bergen (1951) in his pivotal book on The Study of forgave Lehrman. At times the confrontation esca- Instinct. It appeared in the year I became a graduate lated and assumed an almost religious fervor. The student in Thorpe’s laboratory. Tinbergen’s com- aftermath of these angry exchanges could be felt mitment to the idea of innate behavior was clear and decades later, and I am convinced that the bitter- unequivocal. But over the next few years something ness of the controversy inhibited many in the next strange happened. Tinbergen made a radical change generation of behaviorists from even acknowledg- in his position on innateness.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Animal Welfare and the Paradox of Animal Consciousness
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Animal Welfare and the Paradox of Animal Consciousness Marian Dawkins1 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 1Corresponding author: e-mail address: [email protected] Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Animal Consciousness: The Heart of the Paradox 2 2.1 Behaviorism Applies to Other People Too 5 3. Human Emotions and Animals Emotions 7 3.1 Physiological Indicators of Emotion 7 3.2 Behavioral Components of Emotion 8 3.2.1 Vacuum Behavior 10 3.2.2 Rebound 10 3.2.3 “Abnormal” Behavior 10 3.2.4 The Animal’s Point of View 11 3.2.5 Cognitive Bias 15 3.2.6 Expressions of the Emotions 15 3.3 The Third Component of Emotion: Consciousness 16 4. Definitions of Animal Welfare 24 5. Conclusions 26 References 27 1. INTRODUCTION Consciousness has always been both central to and a stumbling block for animal welfare. On the one hand, the belief that nonhuman animals suffer and feel pain is what draws many people to want to study animal welfare in the first place. Animal welfare is seen as fundamentally different from plant “welfare” or the welfare of works of art precisely because of the widely held belief that animals have feelings and experience emotions in ways that plants or inanimate objectsdhowever valuableddo not (Midgley, 1983; Regan, 1984; Rollin, 1989; Singer, 1975). On the other hand, consciousness is also the most elusive and difficult to study of any biological phenomenon (Blackmore, 2012; Koch, 2004). Even with our own human consciousness, we are still baffled as to how Advances in the Study of Behavior, Volume 47 ISSN 0065-3454 © 2014 Elsevier Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Behave in a Beehive Eusociality, What Is It? the Colony
    1/6-2017 How to behave in a beehive Krisztina Csiki Popular scientific review of Independent Project in Biology 2017 Biology Education Centre, Uppsala University Did you know that the European honeybee has other interesting properties besides producing honey? It is a widely studied insect today, but the fascination goes back to the19th century and Sir Charles Darwin. So what is this fascination about? They have a strange genetic makeup which is very different from ours. How can a female be more related to her sister than to her offspring, and why are some individuals sterile? Moreover, some bees seem to work every waking hour while others spend their time doing practically nothing! Eusociality, what is it? Honeybees are social animals. However, their social system is organized in a different fashion than ours. Eusociality is in fact the most advanced social system known in the animal kingdom! What makes it special is that it is made up of large colonies where the tasks of guarding, nursing, foraging and reproducing are divided amongst its members. Individuals are usually born into performing particular tasks and are unable to change this. Moreover, at least some members in these systems are sterile, and others help the reproducers to nurse offspring. Many theories have tried to explaining this behaviour. They all hope to answer the question why sterile individuals have evolved. The most famous theory is called kin selection, which is a modification of Darwin’s theory. It suggests that the gene - rather than the individual itself - is the fundamental unit of selection. It is thus the gene that “wants” to survive.
    [Show full text]
  • The Strange Survival and Apparent Resurgence of Sociobiology
    This is a repository copy of The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/118157/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Dennis, A. orcid.org/0000-0003-4625-1123 (2018) The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. History of the Human Sciences, 31 (1). pp. 19-35. ISSN 0952- 6951 https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117735966 Dennis A. The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. History of the Human Sciences. 2018;31(1):19-35. Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117735966. Article available under the terms of the CC- BY-NC-ND licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology Abstract A recent dispute between Richard Dawkins and Edward O. Wilson concerning fundamental concepts in sociobiology is examined.
    [Show full text]
  • Learning Vs. Instinct *Dichotomy = Two-Part Classification
    8/28/2012 The Study of Behavior Humans vs. Animals Historical Background Descarte in 1600’s: animal’s behavior governed Shakespeare on solely by the laws of Instincts physics, “I’ll never be such a whereas human beings had a gosling to obey instinct, soul, which was thought to but stand as if a man reside in the pineal gland ... were author of himself and knew no other kin.” Humans, unlike animals, had -- Corolianus , ca. 1608 free will. The learning-instinct dichotomy Cartesians created a dichotomy* : Eventually known that animals could humans as reasoning beings learn, and behavior still pitched as: vs. animals as automata learning vs. instinct *dichotomy = two-part classification 1 8/28/2012 Evolution by Use and Disuse Lamarck on Instincts “…the continued use of any organ leads to its development, strengthens it, and even enlarges it, “ “By instinct is meant the fixed tendencies displayed by animals in while permanent disuse of any organ is their actions; injurious to its development, causes it to deteriorate and ultimately disappear if and many people have held that these the disuse continues for a long period tendencies are the produce of a reasoned choice, through successive generations.” J-B. de Lamarck and therefore the fruit of experience.” Philosophie Zoologique (1809) Will body-building cause one’s children Problem with Lamarck’s Theory to be more muscular from birth? ◊ Required effects of environment on non- reproductive tissue be transmitted to NO! DNA in gametes ◊ ‘Refuted’ by August Weismann in early 1900’s 2 8/28/2012 Charles Darwin, 1809-1882 ◊ Dropped out of medical school ◊ Studied theology at Cambridge ◊ Held lifelong interest in nature 1831-1836 Naturalist aboard the H.M.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Sociobiology
    SOCIOBIOLOGY C. George Boeree Ever since Darwin came out with his theory of evolution, people - including Darwin himself -- have been speculating on how our social behaviors (and feelings, attitudes, and so on) might also be affected by evolution. After all, if the way our bodies look and work as biological creatures can be better understood through evolution, why not the things we do with those bodies? The entemologist E. O Wilson was the first to formalize the idea that social behavior could be explained evolutionarily, and he called his theory sociobiology. At first, it gained attention only in biological circles -- even there it had strong critics. When sociologists and psychologists caught wind of it, the controversy really got started. At that time, sociology was predominantly structural-functionalist, with a smattering of Marxists and feminists. Psychology was still dominated by behaviorist learning theory, with humanism starting to make some headway. Not one of these theories has much room for the idea that we, as human beings, could be so strongly determined by evolutionary biology! Over time, Wilson's sociobiology found more and more supporters among biologists, psychologists, and even anthropologists. Only sociology has remained relatively unaffected. Instinct Let's begin with an example of instinctual behavior in animals: The three- spined stickleback is a one-inch long fish that one can find in the rivers and lakes of Europe. Springtime is, as you might expect, the mating season for the mighty stickleback and the perfect time to see instincts in action. Certain changes occur in their appearances: The male, normally dull, becomes red above the midline.
    [Show full text]
  • HS138 Syllabus
    HistSci 138. Sex, Gender, and Evolution Tuesdays and Thursdays, 10 am - 11 am, Northwest Building B101 Weekly section, TBA Prof. Sarah Richardson [email protected] Office hours: Wednesdays, 10 am – 12 pm, online sign-up Myrna Perez, TF [email protected] Office hours: TBA Course Description: Evolutionary theories of sex and gender and central controversies in human evolutionary biology from Darwin to the present. Topics include debates over the theory of sexual selection and the evolutionary basis of monogamy, sexual preference, physical attraction, rape, maternal instinct, and sex differences in cognition. Readings: primary texts and historical, philosophical, and feminist analyses. Texts: Required texts (marked [T] on the syllabus) are available for purchase at the Harvard Coop. Additional required readings (marked [E] on the syllabus) are available via the course website. 1. Londa Schiebinger. Nature’s Body: Gender in the Making of Modern Science. Boston: Beacon Press, 1993. 2. Cynthia Russett. Sexual Science: The Victorian Construction of Womanhood. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989. 3. Diane Paul. Controlling Human Heredity, 1865 to the Present. Amherst, N.Y.: Humanities Books, 1995. 4. Martha McCaughey. The Caveman Mystique. N.Y.: Routledge, 2008. 5. Joan Roughgarden. Evolution's Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004. Course Requirements: This course requires 100-200 pages of reading/week, regular attendance, participation in a weekly discussion section, 3 entries on the class blog, and completion of three 5-7 pp. analytical papers or multimedia essays. There will be five essay assignments, corresponding to the units of the course.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Magnets May Repel Mosquitoes and Other Predatory Insects Thesis 'Theory in Practice' by Stephen Verdon, Ph.D
    Why Magnets may Repel Mosquitoes and other Predatory Insects Thesis 'Theory in Practice' by Stephen Verdon, Ph.D. Mosquitoes are literally wired for hunting. These predators are equipped with a special sense known as Electroreception which allows them to home in on their prey with precise accuracy. Other members of the Mosquito family also share this trait but the Common Mosquitoes Electroreception (Electroreceptive animals use this sense to locate objects around them) are the extremely finely tuned. Electroreception is used in electrolocation (detecting objects) and for electrocommunication. Electroreception simply means the ability to detect Electrical or Magnetic currents. What does electricity have to do with Mosquitoes? Any muscular movement or twitches in living animals create a small electrical current. At hospitals, electrocardiogram machines track the electricity resulting from our heart beat. Bees for example, collect a positive static charge while flying through the air (see Atmospheric electricity). When a bee visits a flower, the charge deposited on the flower takes a while to leak away into the ground. Bees can detect both the presence and the pattern of electric fields on flowers, and use this information to know if a flower has been recently visited by another bee and is therefore likely to have a reduced concentration of pollen. The mechanism of electric field reception in animals living in the air like bees is based on mechano- reception, not electroreception. Bees receive the electric field changes via the Johnston's organs in their antennae and possibly other mechano-receptors. They distinguish different temporal patterns and learn them. During the waggle dance, Honeybees appear to use the electric field emanating from the dancing bee for distance communication.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scope of Neuroethology
    THE BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (1984) 7, 367-412 Printed in the United States of America The scope of neuroethology Graham Hoyle Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oreg. 97403 Abstract: Neuroethology, an interdisciplinary subdivision of neuroscience, has emerged in recent years. Since 1976 there has been a regular session under this heading at the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience. In 1980 two introductory texts in English were published on the subject (Ewert 1980; Guthrie 1980), and a third (Camhi 1984) was published recently. There is widespread interest in neural mechanisms underlying behavior, but they encompass such a vast array of often unrelated topics that proponents do not share common goals. This article describes the emergence of ethology as a discipline, pointing out that its practitioners were successful because they confined their research to stereotyped, complex, nonlearned, innate behavioral acts. A limited number of profoundly significant principles emerged. Each of these is redefined. The major concepts of earlier ethology were embodied in a simple hydraulic model used by Konrad Lorenz in 1949 (Lorenz 1950). It is pointed out that this model implies the existence of common neurophysiological mechanisms and neuronal circuitry. This model has now been made obsolete by neurophysiological progress, but with appropriate ~nodificationsan updated version may still be useful in focusing attention on possible principles. The initial aim of neuroethology should be to examine the neurophysiological events in a variety of behaviors, exhibited by diverse animals from different phyla, which meet the criteria of innate behavioral acts. The behaviors should be sufficiently complex to interest ethologists, yet they should be addressable with neurophysiological methods down to the cellular level.
    [Show full text]
  • Niko Tinbergen R
    Niko Tinbergen R. W. Burkhardt, Jr., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA ã 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Life and Scientific Career was to live in the Arctic among the Inuit and witness the stark, natural beauties of the area. Nikolaas (Niko) Tinbergen, the third of five children of After 15 months in Greenland, the Tinbergens two Dutch schoolteachers, was born in The Hague on returned in the fall of 1933 to Holland. Tinbergen took 15 April 1907. Remarkably, two of the family’s four up again an assistantship in the Leiden Department of sons were eventually awarded Nobel Prizes. Niko’s elder Zoology (a position to which he had been originally brother Jan received the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1969; appointed in 1931). In this capacity, he developed a pro- Niko received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine gram of research and teaching involving field and labora- in 1973. When reporters asked Niko how it was that his tory studies of animal behavior. He established in the family had produced two Nobel Prize winners, he attrib- spring of 1935 a special, 6 week, laboratory ‘practical’ for uted this not to innate abilities but rather to the support- third-year undergraduates. In this course, he and his ive conditions in which he and his siblings were raised. students researched the reproductive behavior of fish, The Tinbergen parents allowed their children to follow most notably the three-spined stickleback. In summers, their own interests. For Niko, this meant outdoor activ- he took students to a field camp in the Dutch dunes to ities – sports, nature rambles, camping out, and eventually study the behavior of insects and birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Academic Year 2018- 2019 Third Term Biology Revision Sheet
    Academic Year 2018- 2019 Third Term Biology Revision sheet Name: ____________________________ Date: _______________ Grade 11 Section: _____________ Section A I. Choose the correct option from the list. 1. Which of these is a major cause of extinction? A. biodiversity B. loss of habitat C. the greenhouse effect D. use of plants for medicine 2. When a species fails to produce any more descendants, it is said to __________. A. be extinct B. be divergent C. have speciated D. have become isolated 3. The Galápagos Islands in the Pacific Ocean have varied habitats. Adaptive radiation occurred on these islands in finch populations, meaning that the finch species that live there __________. A. have lived unchanged through long periods of stability B. have become more like each other in response to their habitats C. changed rapidly from an ancestral species into many new forms D. changed in response to changes in other species they interact with 4. Behaviors animals use when interacting with members of their own or other species are called ________ A. kin selections B. eusocial actions C. social behaviors D. inclusive fitness Page 1 of 5 5. Cooperation, reciprocity, and altruism are three kinds of __________. A. helpful social behavior B. innate animal cognition C. learned defense behavior D. adaptive eusocial behavior 6. Behavioral costs can be measured in terms of __________. A. time, risk, and survivorship B. energy, risk, and opportunity C. energy, instinct, and opportunity D. instinct, opportunity, and survivorship 7. Eusocial species live in large groups in which most members do not __________. A. live long B.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Consciousness: Paradigm Change in the Life Sciences
    Animal Consciousness: Paradigm Change in the Life Sciences Martin Schönfeld University of South Florida This paper is a review of the breakthroughs in the empirical study of ani- mals. Over the past ªve years, a change in basic assumptions about ani- mals and their inner lives has occurred. (For a recent illustration of this paradigm change in the news, see van Schaik 2006.) Old-school scientists proceeded by and large as if animals were merely highly complex ma- chines. Behaviorism was admired for its consistently rigorous methodol- ogy, mirroring classical physics in its focus on quantiªable observation. In the old analytic climate, claims that animals are sentient raised method- ological and ideological problems and seemed debatable at best. Bolder claims, that animals are intelligent, or even self-aware in a way that is for all practical purposes human, were regarded as unfounded. Empirical trials to substantiate such claims were nipped in the bud, since it appeared that such inquiries would unduly humanize nonhuman beings. Scientists are not supposed to project their own intuitions, feelings, or thoughts on ob- jects of their investigation. Studying the afªnities of humans and animals would appear to violate this well-established rule, and would risk sliding down the slippery slope from fawns to Bambi, from rabbits to Thumper, and from science to myth. The task of science in the past four centuries had been to demythologize the past. Erasing myths had been the hallmark of progress; it turned astrology into astronomy, alchemy into
    [Show full text]
  • The Study of Instinct. N. TINBERGEN.(Xii, 228 Pp., 130 Figs., $7.00
    2 70 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [55, 1953 and the mandarin attitudes Anderson deplores are no longer so widespread as he would lead his readers to believe. However, if the value of plants in the study of man is not fully recognized, this book should do a great deal to remedy that fault. The problem of the origin, development, and dispersal of cultivated plants and weeds is so complex that new methods had to be devised to record information and to analyze it. The methods Anderson developed and the difficulties and adventures he encountered in applying these methods are among the most interesting parts of the book. Some of the procedures described could be applied to the study of artifacts. The reader is provided some insight into botanical methods and into the importance of taxonomy-a much scoffed-at but essential study. A good taxonomist is not buried in a mass of minutiae; his observations provide him with new and more fundamental ways of ordering his data and contribute to a virogous sense of problem. Anderson does not stop with taxonomy. However, one wishes the author had indulged in fewer diver- sions of a personal and somewhat emotional nature and provided a simpler explanation of some of the genetic data. In the short space of one book it was obviously impossible to discuss fully the pres- ent status of our knowledge on the origin and diversity of even the most important cul- tivated plants; so this is summarized in a chapter, “A Roster of Our Most Important Crop Plants and Their Probable Origins.” Most of the data presented in this chapter are not new, perhaps; but their concise presentation in one place is a great convenience.
    [Show full text]