0
   

Do Primates have culture?

 
 
SCoates
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 04:18 pm
Tehcnically, lots of animals have culture. Like ants. Although theirs is probably less deliberate.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 04:39 pm
Hmmm - seems to me more of a continuum than a yes/no thing. I don't think it is the same as La Belle Epoque culture, for insyance - but I think it is there.

I would argue that these monkey games are evidence of the beginnings of culture - just as tool use, which must be taught, or which is sometimes invented by as pecific individual, amongst chimps and crows and such is.

The Koko (who was a gorilla, I believe) and other signing apes (and the African Grey parrot who talks with meaning, 'tis thought) are very interesting.

Some of them hide their hands from their trainers, and "talk to themselves" - some have taught their babies to sign. I know there is controversy - but I do tend to think that a lot of the critiscism is pernickety.
0 Replies
 
rufio
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 06:04 pm
Can you read the rosetta stone, cav?

What you are calling a "sign" is neccesarily a symbol, acqui. If it is not the thing that it stands for, than it is something arbitrary and requires that the creature using it be able to understand symbols. Just because the meaning does not change does not mean that it cannot. Animal culture may be harder to study and harder to understand than human culture, but I think that it is a mistake to overlook it.
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 06:07 pm
I was being aloof rufio. Smile
0 Replies
 
JoanneDorel
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 06:18 pm
Gorillas too - the Dallas, TX, SWAT team just had to kill a gorilla last week to save human folks.


Gorilla Jabari will be missed Sad
0 Replies
 
Piffka
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 06:37 pm
Wow. Great find. I've followed the lives of the chimpanzees who learned and passed on some of the American Sign Language they'd been taught. The aren't exactly reading the NYTimes, but they have acquired personal tastes in food, clothing (!) and like to mess around with art stuff. They have been photographed paging through books. Theirs is a sad life though and they seem "angry" at humans. If you ever visit their out-of-the-way place in Central Washington University, you must be very respectful or they'll throw a fit.

So, yes, I'm inclined to believe that apes and monkeys have a "culture" of sorts. Possibly a proto-culture would be a better term -- I'm no expert as to what constitutes "culture." It appears, btw, that whales & dolphins do, too.

Speaking of the need for a cultural trait to be on-going and generalized...
here's something amazing (in the last paragraph) that I found online while checking out Thomas' potato-washing monkeys:
Elaine Meyer's "100th Monkey Revisited"

Quote:
Based on.... the Japan Monkey Center reports in Primates, vol. 2, vol. 5 and vol. 6, here is how the real story seems to have gone.

Up until 1958, Keyes' description follows the research quite closely, although not all the young monkeys in the troop learned to wash the potatoes. By March, 1958, 15 of the 19 young monkeys (aged two to seven years} and 2 of the 11 adults were washing sweet potatoes. Up to this time, the propagation of the innovative behavior was on an individual basis, along family lines and playmate relationships. Most of the young monkeys began to wash the potatoes when they were one to two and a half years old. Males older than 4 years, who had little contact with the young monkeys, did not acquire the behavior.

By 1959, the sweet potato washing was no longer a new behavior to the group. Monkeys that had acquired the behavior as juveniles were growing up and having their own babies. This new generation of babies learned sweet potato washing behavior through the normal cultural pattern of the young imitating their mothers. By January, 1962, almost all the monkeys in the Koshima troop, excepting those adults born before 1950, were observed to be washing their sweet potatoes. If an individual monkey had not started to wash sweet potatoes by the time he was an adult, he was unlikely to learn it later, regardless of how widespread it became among the younger members of the troop.

In the original reports, there was no mention of the group passing a critical threshold that would impart the idea to the entire troop. The older monkeys remained steadfastly ignorant of the new behavior. Likewise, there was no mention of widespread sweet potato washing in other monkey troops. There was mention of occasional sweet potato washing by individual monkeys in other troops, but I think there are other simpler explanations for such occurrences. If there was an Imo in one troop, there could be other Imo-like monkeys in other troops.

Instead of an example of the spontaneous transmission of ideas, I think the story of the Japanese monkeys is a good example of the propagation of a paradigm shift, as in Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The truly innovative points of view tend to come from those on the edge between youth and adulthood. The older generation continues to cling to the world view they grew up with. The new idea does not become universal until the older generation withdraws from power, and a younger generation matures within the new point of view.

It is also an example of the way that simple innovations can lead to extensive cultural change. By using the water in connection with their food, the Koshima monkeys began to exploit the sea as a resource in their environment. Sweet potato washing led to wheat washing, and then to bathing behavior and swimming, and the utilization of sea plants and animals for food. "Therefore, provisioned monkeys suffered changes in their attitude and value system and were given foundations on which pre-cultural phenomena developed." (M Kawai, Primates, Vol 6, #1, 1965).
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 07:01 pm
That is interesting!
0 Replies
 
Piffka
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 07:23 pm
Yeah, I thought so.

It seems, btw, that one of the main aggression events cited as a reason that the chimpanzee Washoe (who learned ASL and taught it to her "adopted son") could no longer live with humans was that she threw a fit while ordering a meal at a drive-in restaurant. I wonder if it were a McDonald's? I have so much sympathy for these creatures and am dumb-struck that we humans still use primates in laboratory tests.
0 Replies
 
satt fs
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 07:23 pm
I have long since heard about monkeys which have a habit of washing potatoes before eating as a learned behavoir.
I would be surprised if there is a group of monkeys which wash their hands before eating potatoes.
0 Replies
 
rufio
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 07:34 pm
Teaching chimps sign languages is rather beside the point. If sign language were a part of their culture, it would be there already. Matching animals up to the way humans live does not help to understand them. They are different creatures. We should try to understand them on their own terms.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 09:45 pm
Well, Rufio - it is not really beside the point - since if they can learn it it becomes much more possible to find out what they think and feel about things.

If you are referencing my comments, I did not give it as an example of culture, simply as a comment related to a previous one.

However, if the apes CONTINUED to teach it to their young, and the ability persisted, and spread throughout a community of apes, that would become, I think, PART of their culture - much as cooking Indian food has become part of mine.

It is interesting to me how detailed study is showing the importance of maternal style in the personality of individual animals, and even in families of them.

More about this in relation to Goodall's work, and with kangaroos, when I get home from work. It is fascinating!
0 Replies
 
Eve
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 10:14 pm
Who's saying I've got no culture!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 10:40 pm
Hee hee!

Koko is interesting, yeah. I have a book on her, will read and refresh my memory and then comment later.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 11:32 pm
truth
Yes, Piffka, I believe that ethologists would prefer the term "proto-culture." And while a sign is a type of symbol, I think it differs in that it is univocal. It means one thing unambiguously, otherwise street signs would cause more accidents than they would prevent. Symbols are mostly multi-vocal, meaning different things for different people and different things for the same individual at different times, take the cross or the flag as examples. It is the symbol's ambiguity that gives it its power as a literary, political and artistic tool.
0 Replies
 
rufio
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 12:23 am
Yes, monkies (or apes) passing practices that they have learned onto their young is cultural, but they do that already, whether they know sign language or not. And there hasn't been a huge amount of success at teaching apes to sign anyway. If an entire group of apes were to absorb the use of sign language from humans, it would become part of their culture - but the few apes that have been successfully taught are kept in research facilities, so it's very unlikely. Razz

Don't you do the same thing at every stop sign, JL? And how many times can a word mean two different things at the same time in serious conversation?
0 Replies
 
JoanneDorel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 04:01 am
Monkey Business - Do the quirks of capuchins make them creatures with culture?

Sorcha McDonagh

Quote:
One smart monkey

Perry and her colleague Joseph Manson, a cultural primatologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, decided to study capuchins in part because these feisty creatures have the highest brain-to-body-size ratio of any primate other than people. "I was interested in finding out what they were doing with these big brains," says Perry, who also has a position at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Their study is the first detailed observation of capuchins' social lives. In the April 2003 Current Anthropology, Perry, Manson, and their colleagues published their analysis of the monkeys' social behaviors. It's based on data collected over 13 years.
They had tracked 13 capuchin troops in four nature reserves, including Lomas Barbudal. Each troop contained 15 to 38 monkeys and had more females than males. More than half of each group was made up of juveniles. "Because they live in multimale, multifemale groups, they have a lot of potential for politics," Perry explains.
The groups selected were geographically close enough to each other to ensure only limited genetic variation from group to group, but they were far enough away so that they didn't ordinarily mix. By comparing notes, the researchers following different troops could check which behaviors were unique to their group. And within groups, they could trace the rise and fall of different behaviors. "The most important aspect of a tradition is that it's transmitted to new practitioners via social learning," Perry explains.

In all, she and her colleagues nominated five conspicuous, lasting behaviors to be considered as social traditions in the monkeys. All of them were playful activities: the hair-in-mouth game; the fingers-in-noses pastime, which the scientists call hand-sniffing; the sucking of a companion's body parts, such as fingers, tails, or ears; a finger-in-mouth game; and a game in which a pair of monkeys use their teeth to pass an object, such as a stick or pebble, back and forth.

"We arbitrarily set a 6-month minimum for a behavior to be considered a tradition," Manson says. "This was a conservative cutoff to be sure that we didn't count as traditions behaviors that were tried only once or twice by a very small number of individuals."
When Perry started following her group, some of the capuchins were already practicing hand-sniffing. After grooming each other, the monkeys would stick their fingers up each other's nose, sometimes poking each other in the eye while doing so. They would then sit together, swaying gently, in what appears to some observers to be a trancelike state. The capuchins "have very long fingernails, and it's probably not very comfortable," Perry says. And having a finger in its nose can make a monkey sneeze. When that happens and a finger is ejected, the partner puts its finger back in place, and the pair continues swaying.

The researchers noticed the hand-sniffing behavior in different monkey groups and often with different practitioners. In some groups, all pairs were females; in others, all were males. "In one group, hand-sniffing faded out and then years later came back in, being performed by different individuals," Manson says.

In another type of behavior, monkeys lie side by side and suck on each other's tail. In a novel iteration of this social convention, one monkey would sit on another's head, and the monkey underneath would suck the top monkey's tail while giving the partner a foot massage. Once a pair of capuchins figured out a configuration they liked, the behavior became routine. Various monkeys have independently invented "funny little mutations of these behaviors," Perry says. Finally, there's the game in which one monkey keeps another monkey's finger firmly gripped in its mouth. The trapped monkey uses its feet and other hand to pry open the captor-monkey's mouth and free the finger. "It's a very slow, methodical, relaxed interaction," Perry says. "They're working hard at getting the mouth open, but not in a frantic way. It's more like they're solving a puzzle."
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 08:33 am
Interesting stuff, whatever you want to call it. (First thing that came to mind for me was the potato washing bit, too.)

I do agree that language is the sticking point, if you're going to try and attach a rigorous definition of "culture." Still, that's just splitting hairs -- itself a uniquely human train, however much capuchins might yank them out and pass them around. I'm generally of the mind that we fancy ourselves a bit too much. Thus, I don't think I anthropomorphize animals so much as animalize the anthropos.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 08:42 am
There's a bumper sticker! (Anything come of that?)
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 08:48 am
Nope. Requires too much initiative. (Have quite a few that would sell at a hempfest or what's-left-of-the-dead show, tho, if you'd like to buy the rights.)
0 Replies
 
kitchenpete
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Apr, 2004 08:49 am
Deb

Thanks for sharing the article and giving us an opportunity to discuss:

a) the definition of "culture"
b) the amazing things that certain primates are able to do (they are the most similar animals to ourselves and that's always interesting)

The question now in my head is: "At what stage did humans move beyond the same kind of level of communication/interaction and develop the kind of things we agree on as being Culture?"

KP
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/27/2024 at 06:20:32