Mike Palij writes (referring to my comment): >Indeed, I did infer that you were simply following Michael >Sylvester's example but wanted to clear up the matter >before it turned into one of those situations where a >reader might create a false memory about Goodall's >observation and think that she watched chimpanzees >eating ants instead of termites.
Sorry, Mike. I realized after I'd posted that your comment (with the reference) was directed at TIPSters in general, so my comment about what you wrote was not apposite. Sometimes I think there should be an automatic email function that one can set up that so that the "send" function remains on hold for half-an-hour to allow one to repent at leisure on the wording one has used, and modify it before it actually goes out into cyberspace. :-) Congratulations on your Freudian interpretation on "ants" for "termites". It would be right up there among the finalists in any competition. But you wouldn't get top rating until you had checked out a sample of women put to a similar test to see if they were equally "guilty", in which case it would be incumbent on you to find an explanation in their case. :-) >Of course I was joking. But what do you think explains your > slip of attention? ;-) Just for the fun of it (and because a Freudian might well, with a sense of triumph, challenge me to come up with a non-psychodynamic explanation), I would say that I automatically repeated Michael's using the word "ants" not just because I was responding to, and copying, what he wrote, but that my mind was focused elsewhere, on the point I was making, namely, that the "scientific community" was not initially sceptical to Goodall's reports of her findings. There is also the fact that indelibly in mind are the numerous images of documentaries I have seen over the years showing chimpanzees using small branches to collect and devour termites. Now for the uninitiated there is no way one could tell they were termites rather than ants, so my memory images are not inconsistent with them being ants, and therefore would not press themselves on my consciousness as contradicting what I wrote, as would be the case if I had written "horses" when it should have been "zebras"! Note that on this occasion I have not used the word "chimps". The Chimpanzee Liberation Front has recently issued a manifesto pointing out that the shortened form is demeaning to a creature that deserves to be recognized as a sentient being with cognitive faculties not far behind homo sapiens. Indeed I'm sure we can all name some supposed members of the latter species who would be hard put to match the cognitive abilities of some chimpanzees. :-) P.S. I shall refrain from commenting on the fact that you misspelled my surname "Esterton", for which the (psychodynamic) explanation is too obvious to spell [sic] out. :-) Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London allenester...@compuserve.com http://www.esterson.org ------------------------------------- Re:[tips] Who's on first? Mike Palij Thu, 28 Oct 2010 06:38:39 -0700 On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:31:08 -0400, Allen Esterton wrote: >> Mike Palij wrote, quoting me first: >> >On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 23:50:01 -0700, Allen Esterson wrote: >> >>On 26 October Michael Sylvester wrote: >> >>I saw a program on Jane Goodall where she saw chimps use >> >>sticks to fetch ants from an ant hill. She was fascinated by their >> >>tool utilization and alerted the scientific community who initially >> >>remained skeptical. >> >> >I'm sure there's probably a psychoanalytic explanation for >> >people's fixation on chimpanzees eating ants but the fact >> >of the matter is that Goddall observed the chimpanzees eating >> >TERMITES. >> >Don't take my word for it, consider the "Jane Goodall Institute of >> >Canada" as a source, eh? >> >> Yep, I got it wrong. But given my interest in Jane Goodall's work, >> Mike, you might have realised I didn't need a reference to appreciate >> that fact. It was just a slip, no doubt arising from the fact that I >> was responding directly to (and quoting from) Michael Sylvester's post >> in which he referred to ants. Indeed, I did infer that you were simply following Michael Sylvester's example but wanted to clear up the matter before it turned into one of those situations where a reader might create a false memory about Goodall's observation and think that she watched chimpanzees eating ants instead of termites. Since no took the bait on a psychoanalytic interpretation, let me give it a try though I actually have no idea how one would actually go about formulating one. Consider that male scientists might feel some insecurity and anxiety when confronted with female scientists, especially successful ones. For purposes of appearing egalitarian, this uncomfortable feeling is suppressed but affects other cognitive process such as what is remembered about the female scientist. The "ant-termite" confusion might arises because in U.S. popular culture having an erection can be referred to "having a woody" or "sporting wood" (in the porn industry, males who can maintain erections for a long period of time are called "woodmen"). But, since a male's self-esteem and confidence is already under attack but by a successful female scientist, there may be an unconscious fear that termites might eat up and tear apart his "woody" (i.e., castration anxiety) which could be a quite intense experience. In order to reduce this fear and anxiety, the male substitutes ants for termites, reducing the overall and specific anxieties. I have no idea how this would apply to women referring to the termites as ants but since the only woman in the thread did not refer to ants as termites, so I feel I am off the hook on this issue. ;-) >> So no psychoanalytic explanation (which I'm sure you mentioned >> jokingly), not even for a slip for want of attention. :-) Of course I was joking. But what do you think explains your slip of attention? ;-) -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6062 or send a blank email to leave-6062-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
