[Marxism] Human origin
Paul H. Dillon
illonph at pacbell.net
Mon Aug 1 10:06:38 MDT 2005
Yes, the trashcan lid example is a completely contaminated example, at a
time when Goodall was leaving big bunches of bananas out for the chimps and
they would "hang out" at her camp. I cited it because of its general
relationship to human military tactics; e.g., Shock and Awe. The family
resemblance of the basic idea is stiking.
The examples of chimpacide, food preferences, multiple forms of symboling,
etc. come from non-interventionist field studies given in the book I cited
earlier, Bonobo chimps seem to be the most advanced in the use of symboling.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Brown" <cbrown at michiganlegal.org>
To: <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 7:33 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Human origin
> Paul H. Dillon :
> I'm not familiar with the PBS special. What's also interesting, besides
> symbolic stuff, is that chimps plan "military" actions and kill other
> that try to secede from the primary band with females. I love the
> footage of the chimp who figured out how to scare the other ones by
> trash can lids at them which made an incredibly horrible noise.
> CB: The presence of a trash can lid raises some concern about the level of
> intervention of humans with these chimps. How many other aspects of their
> conduct is the result of long term contact with humans , especially
> primatologists ? Are the chimps "in the wild" of all these studies really
> all the way in the wild ?
> There's a real "contact" and "contamination" problem.
> My point about the human speciation issue is simply that I'm not sure what
> the question is. A long time ago our ancestors embarked on a journey in
> which tools came to constitute the pattern of adaptation. That went on
> a couple of million years with increasing sophistication of stone tool
> construction correlating to some degree with anatomical variation.
> of fire was discovered by homo erectus approximately 1/2 million years
> Homo erectus isn't the same species as modern humans. Our current species
> (homo sapiens sapiens- highly inaccurate classificatory name)
> CB: Yea, in my opinion , there can't be a sub-species that is not a race
> some sense. But race doesn't exist ( See C.Loring Brace, et al).
> is about
> 100,000 ya. That's about 90,000 years before agriculture. So what's the
> point? Where do you think that first anatomically sapien sapien popped
> of the homo line?
> CB: This is a very good point to focus on.
> I'm thinking that - now here's a fuller definition - some group of
> discovered or invented using symbols to represent dead members of the
> and organizing the social life of the living members of the group based on
> relationships to dead , former members of the group. In other words, a
> system of kinship based in ancestors and ancestor "worship". This group
> became an isolated population and gene pool, speciating. The rest is
> Chimps probably look at us as the species that took the
> wrong turn.
> CB: With nukes, it's looking like they are right.
> Marxism mailing list
> Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
More information about the Marxism