Why did we need dogs to develop gesturing. We could gesture to people. On 3/31/10, CeJ <jann...@gmail.com> wrote: > One interesting theory is about what separates our line of development > from other homonids--co-evolution with another highly intelligent, > highly social animal--dogs. This might lead us down other areas of > inquiry, such as , if human language first devloped as gesture, did it > develop with canines , with our interaction with canines? Did > domestication of dogs help make us more communicatively capable? > > CJ > > > http://www.uwsp.edu/psych/s/275/Science/Coevolution03.pdf > > Co-evolution of Humans and Canids > > http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-1405262/Co-Evolution-New-evidence-suggests.html > > If the DNA evidence is correct, it is creatures such as these that > domesticated the wolf and turned it into a dog. People may have stolen > wolf pups from their dens to play with or just to keep for the > enjoyment of watching them. Like the young animals that are brought > home as toys by tribal hunting peoples today, most of these pups > probably had short lives. As Susan Crockford argues, some may have > possessed the hormonal characteristics that produced dog-like > behaviour and would have adapted to life in a human camp. (5) Those > that survived to adulthood and produced pups of their own may have > been the first ancestors of the dogs, which have lived with humans > ever since. > > This was a new development in biology and history. For the first time, > hunting parties and camp groups composed of two distinct species began > to spread across the landscapes of the world. It makes little sense to > think of this process as one in which early humans "domesticated" the > wolf. Aside from the human use of simple tools, there was probably > little difference in the complexity of hunting patterns or social > organization between early human bands and wolf packs. If humans > domesticated the wolf, is it not equally probable that wolves > domesticated humans? Were the changes that developed between wolf and > dog any more significant than those that occurred to early humans > through their constant association with canids? > > In a recent article in the magazine Discovering Archaeology, biologist > Wolfgang Schleidt notes the apparent temporal coincidence between the > emergence of humankind and of dogkind, and suggests that, "This > intertwining process of hominization and caninisation suggests > co-evolution." (6) Schleidt proposes a specific scenario, involving > humans emulating wolves and eventually co-opting wolves in hunting the > migratory reindeer of Ice Age Eurasia. Yet a much broader view of the > interactions between humans and wolves, and the results of these > interactions, might be envisaged. > > In comparing ourselves with other animals, we think of intelligence, > self-awareness, the ability to conceive new ideas and foresee > long-term consequences as traits that are uniquely human. In the > animal world these traits are most clearly mirrored by the great apes, > and in a lesser way by our other primate relatives. But are all the > characteristics that we think of as making us human inherited only > from our primate ancestry? What about qualities such as patience, > endurance, unthinking loyalty, co-operation, devotion to family and > social group? What of our abilities to organize co-operative > activities based on a finely tuned sense of social hierarchy and > mutual responsibilities? > > Wolves seem to do these things significantly better than humans, and > at least as well as most non-human primates. The biologists who have > made their life-work the study of wolves describe an animal that lives > in a world of complex social hierarchies, with well-organized > co-operative work patterns, finely tuned communication skills, and > outbreaks of spontaneous joy. Together with their superior ability to > scent prey, to run more swiftly and endure longer than humans, these > social qualities are the basis of their successful adaptation as > hunters. And these are also qualities that would have been useful in > the environment that saw our early ancestors turn into true humans. > > Given the situation of hunting bands composed of early humans and > their wolf-dog companions, animals with complementary character and > abilities, can we be sure that the process of domestication acted in > only one direction? The DNA evidence suggests that these animals lived > and worked together for some 5000 human generations before the > emergence of societies and cultures that we can describe as fully > human. > > In the course of these generations wolves were transformed into dogs, > but did their dogs also transform ancient people into humans? Would > archaic humans have developed into such a successful and dominant > species if we had not had the opportunity to learn from, imitate and > absorb into our cultures the traits and abilities of the wolves with > whom we lived? > > Hints of our unacknowledged debt to wolves may perhaps be found in the > cultural memories of human societies. Wolves play contradictory roles > in human folklore and in human emotions. On one side stands the wolf > as arch-villain of the forest, the creature who tries to devour Peter, > Red Ridinghood and three small pigs. On the other stands the wolf as > rescuer and nurturer of lost children. Romulus, Remus and a continuing > series of feral children are said to have been raised by wolves. These > children are never saved and nurtured by bears or tigers, badgers or > wolverines, but always by wolves. Do we assign this role to wolves as > a vague recollection of our special and ancient relationship with the > species, or perhaps through recognition of our common links through > the dog? > > If so, how do we explain the fear and loathing that seem to be the > central emotions that most human societies generate toward the wolf? > Biologists assure us that, despite the tales of slavering packs > pursuing hapless troika-drivers across the Russian steppe, or of > Canadian pioneers passing winter nights in trees surrounded by leaping > and snarling wolves, wolf attacks on humans are extremely rare. Bears > and large cats do kill people regularly; coyotes and cougars and feral > dogs kill many more livestock than do wolves; yet it is the wolf that > attracts our hatred and our fear. Can we see in this another hint of > our special ties to the wolf? As loathed villain and as rescuer of > lost children, the wolf stands apart from all other animals in human > consciousness, and perhaps in this we may detect a deeply felt > knowledge of our ancient kinship. > > The contradictory roles of wolves in folklore continue to be played > Out in our dealings with actual wolves. Our society develops rules to > control human impacts on other animals. We limit hunting, trapping and > habitat destruction in order to preserve most of the animals that > share our environment. But aside from the inadvertent and limited > protection offered by a few wilderness parks, in most jurisdictions > wolves are fair game for humans who wish to trap them, snare them, > poison them, shoot them or run them down with snowmobiles. Folklore > has a powerful hold over our beliefs and our actions. > > _______________________________________________ > Marxism-Thaxis mailing list > Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis >
_______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
