DOCSLIB.ORG

Applying the Sociobiological Synthesis to Education

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Applying the Sociobiological Synthesis to Education DOCUMENT RESUME RD 265 650 EA 018 146 AUTHOR Shaker, Paul TITLE Applying the SociobiologicalSynthesis to Education. PUB DATE 82 NOTE 20p. PUB TYPE Viewpoints (120) EDRS PRICE 14'01 /PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Behavior Patterns; BiologicalInfluences; Cultural Influences; DevelopmentalPsychology; *Educational Philosophy; Elementary SecondaryEducation; *Ethology; *Evolution; Genetics;Individual Development; Nature NurtureControversy; Social Behavior; Social Theories;*Sociobiology IDENTIFIERS Jung (Carl G); Names ABSTRACT This paper argues thatthe emerging discipline of sociobiology has the potentialof doing what epistemologists, developmental psychologists,psychoanalysts, and ethologistshave been unable to do: to providea theory documenting our inherited dispositions as reflected incultural evolution and personal development. Accordingly, thepaper begins with a summary ofthe basic concepts of sociobiology,and then shows how these compatible with concepts are a number of theories already appliedin education, such as those of Piaget, Kohlberg, Chomsky, and Jung,which describe certain inherited behavioralor psychological patterns. A central concern of sociobiologists isan inquiry into the natural selection processes that govern the evolution ofhuman culture. Elements of culture--"memes" whichcan be communicated but not subdivided--are selected according tosome criterion of value. The majortasks that sociobiologists faceare: (1) describing the nature ofthese "memes" or bits of culture, which then evolve in a competitiveprocess; and (2) identifying the values--based on inheritedpredispositions--that determine the survival ofone set of memes over another. (TE) *********************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by * EDRS are the best thatcan be made * from the original document. * *********************************************************************** I a. BEST COPYAVAILABLE U.S. DEPARTMENT Of EDUCATION NATIONAL INSTITUTE Of EDUCATION "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION MATER L HAS BEEN GRANTED BY CENTER(ERIC) The document has been reproducedas received from the percnn or organization 0 onginatmg It. LI Minor changes have been merle to Improve in reproduction quality %NO Points of view or opinions stated in this docu- TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ment do not necessarily represent of icasl NIE LIN posibon or policy. INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." Applying the Sociobiological Synthesisto Education Paul Shaker, Ph.D. Mount Union College Alliance, Ohio 44601 1982 2 An increasing number of ')iologists andsocial scientists have been applying the methods of evolutionarybiology for a decade or more to the study of human culture. Their intent is to identify a process which would helpinterpret the pro- gression of human history. To date much of thiseffort has served to set the stage f r a new synthesiswhich would bring the social sciences more fully into the realmof science. This work has received extensive coverage inthe popular press and has stirred academic controversy. Critics have charged the sociobiologists with propoundinggenetic determinism and the undermining of free will. Such chargesare not justified by the claims mainstream sociobiologists have madethus far in their studies of the nature ofhuman instinct and their efforts to hypothesize a process of cultural selectionand its relationship to natural selection. If one grants, for argument's sake, the central claims sociobiologistsare making, cile arrives with them ata highly challenging junc- ture. This challenge calls for the identificationof the specific components of culture anda clarification of the criteria for theirselection. Until row educatorshave not beena part of the sociobiological debate although many of itsimplications speak directly to 1 them. The-twin processes ofteaching and learning are fundamental to culturaltransmission. And, 2 clearly, motivation and ego developmenthave certain genetic characteristics. A number of theoriesalready widely applied in education, like those of Piaget,Kohlberg, and Chomsky, are compatible with the emerging sociobiologicalviewpoint. The conscious, deliberate enculturationof human beingswho will in turncreate a better, more just society iseducation's charge. No professional goalis so complex. In view of this, if evolutionary biologists are speakingto educationalcon- cerns, educators should begin to listen andrespond. What follows is an effortin this direction. Two Planes of Evolution The realm of instinct provides the transitionbetween natural and cultural selection. Few would argue against the propositionthat a variety of our physical traitsare genetically dictated. However, the geneticbackground of psychology is hotlydebated. Ethologists haveaccumulated, by observation and experiment,a growing body of innate behaviors manifest in animals. To a lesser; butsignificant, degree similar behaviors are found in humans--thesongs of some birds, for example, and theirnest building styles, and the hand grasping reflex and suckingpatterns in infants, and facial expressions 2 in people of allages. At first glance, such specific behaviors mayseem trivial. But their significance lies inwhether theyserve to establish the claim that behavior, the foundation ofculture, can be genetically programed. The food washing ofraccoons, the 4 3 plucking habitof ocelots, the constructionwork of beavers appear innate. The deepstructure of grammar accordingto Chomsky, thestages and nature of cognitivedevelopment 'according toPiaget, and Jung's archetypesof the collective unconscious,3 all bearstrikingly similar qualities. It is clear thatgreat psychologies from unassuminginstincts grow. Certain inherited behavioral/psychologicalpatterns can hardly be deniedin the context of thesetheories. Continually confusingis the fact that instinctis nearly all form withlittle specific content. Any soundscan be used to form words whichwill be structured intoa familiar grammar. The range of human environmentsprovides the specific phenomenaand objects essential forcognitive develop- ment. Gestaltistsare able to decoy the sensesand evoke patternedresponses to fragmentary, enigmatic stimuli. Every society has itsfolklore, religion and esotericstudies. Theconcrete manifestations inall cases exist in thephysical world and have meaning in thatcontext. This parallelsig- nificance createsdifficulty in any analysis ofthe psycho- logical importanceof these objects and eventsand theneu- rolcgicalstructures which resonate withthem. The evolution- ist suggests that we havea long history of usingsymbols to help us exploitour environment. The self-conscious,system- atic study ofour symbol-making apparatus is,however, a relatively recentundertaking. While thedisposition toward language, abstractreasoning, transcendental talesand so on does not change, thespecifics 4 of each, inevery society, do change. It would appearimpos- sible to hold in a static state any ofthese manifestations of culture. This dynamism introduces a centralconcern of sociobiologists, that is: What processgoverns the evolution of culture? Seeing natural selection universallyoperative at the level of biological change, they unsurprisinglylook for a similar process to 4 function withrespect to culture. Ele- ments of culture, "memes" whichcan be communicated butnot subdivided, are selected among accordingto some criterion of value. Culture evolves inthe process. Such a hypothesis provokes at least three major questions: Can memes be defined as specificallyas genes? Is the beneficiary ofsuch selec- tion species, group, individualor the meme, itself? Is the value criterion survival and reproductionor something quali- tatively different? The idea that culture evolves,or changes in an orderly fashion is attractive, but clearly naturalorder has littleto do with human notions of justiceor morality. Up to the appearance of human beings nature seems to havedeveloped in progressively more complex forms. Even grantingour destruc- tive tendencies, there is a similardynamic to the history of our species in the context ofour accumulated culture. A major worry of sociobiologists is thatwe are not ultimately viable as a species because we may befundamentally and inevitably oriented to groups who will vie(war) with other groups with whatever 5 means available. This perspective exemplifies the "determinist" aspect of the new synthesis. However, those who seek to analyze cultural evolution may entertain alternate, more hopeful, hypotheses. Basic to these conceptualizations is the idea that cultural selection is a process of higher order than natural selection. This higher process cannot transcend the physical laws of the universe or the limits of flesh and blood, but patterns with less integral entailments can be supplanted. If we need not be wedded to groups, is it also possible that our consummate value migh",7 not be biological survival and reproduction? Cultural forms which lobby for societies of limited numbers based on a secure standard of living are now with us. For the sake of analysis, let us look a step further. Putting aside the obvious psychological benefits of parenting, if a qualitative element is present in cultural selection, is it possible that the process operates indepen- dently of the demands of biological continuance? It may be that culture, irrespective of its contribution to biological reproduction, is selected in terms of its benefits for the individuals who experience it. With natural selection, the end is always and only the replication of genes.
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]
  • 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.
    [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]