Hi Selma, At 08:52 21/03/02 -0500, you wrote: (SS) <<<< Humans share have some reflexes (suckling, e.g.) but there are no biologically determined human behaviors that will allow them to survive without culture. What humans have that no other animals have is culture -- a way of life of the people in a society that is learned, shared and transmitted from one generation to the next. Humans, through culture, have been able to change their environment whereas other creatures can only react to their environment. >>>>
It would be impossible to demonstrate your assertion for ethical reasons. But there must have been a definite juncture in times past when an animal "without culture" gave birth to a human mutation "with culture" -- or, rather, the potentiality for culture. If that particular individual did not express his/her potentiality for culture during his/her lifetime, are you saying that that individual would not have survived? For a long time biologists have been trying to suggest unique human behaviours which are not found in animals. They have suggested altruism, deviousness, sense of wonder, inventiveness, humour, numeracy, articulacy and so on. One by one, all these qualities have been found in other species, too. As to culture, some scientists are now describing lyre birds as having a culture of nest building styles which are handed on from one generation to another. Another example is the totally different social behaviour between bonobos and chimpanzees which, otherwise, are almost genetically identical. It seems very unlikely that these huge differences are based purely on instincts. Then again, I should be very surprised if culture is not handed on between some species of cetaceans -- which appear to be highly articulate . (SS) <<<< I don't know what is meant by the statement that "people's desires are unlimited". Desires for ??? I certainly have no unlimited desire for a supply of poisoned arrows nor do I desire a mink coat or diamonds. >>>> Harry supplied that assumption (though I agree with it) and I'll leave Harry to answer it if he wants to. I'll just suggest that your assertion is a non sequitur. Keith __________________________________________________________ “Writers used to write because they had something to say; now they write in order to discover if they have something to say.” John D. Barrow _________________________________________________ Keith Hudson, Bath, England; e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________
