Instinct, as Jones defines it, is any action that does not require learning or experience for the animal to perform it and is done without the animal necessarily knowing what the benefits or consequences of that action will be. It is important not to forget that behavior, like physical attributes, evolve because it is both inherited and varies between individuals. Although behavior is not completely controlled by genes, much of it is. Instinct follows the same basic rule that all other characteristics organisms possess, which is to do whatever it takes to ensure that genes, either one's own or a similar set, are passed on. This causes a variety of behaviors that include altruism, cannibalism, violence, enslavement and rape to name a few. In each situation that instinct applies itself its choice of tactic is governed by cost-benefit ratio. Even behaviors that end in an individual's death are not altruistic in the sense that we typically use the term, but are actually motivated by selfishness.
Jones first discusses the enslavement instinct and utilizes the example of ants to do so. Ant society is impressive from both an architectural and a logistical view and all of it is built upon the foundation of slavery with all players in the game, even the slaves, interdependent on one another. The slavemakers will sometimes raid other colonies and steal their cocoons so the inhabitants are born into enslavement without knowing that they are helping promote the success ants with dissimiliar genes than their own. Without the mutual need of each other, the master-slave relationship would soon tip and once the cost of a relationship outweighs the benefits, it quickly collapses.
Ostrich nests are a site of what might first appear to be altruistic behavior. Several female ostriches share the territory of a male with one female in charge. The dominant female is supposed to be the only one with mating rights, but of course life happens and other females become pregnant. The dominant female will allow the others to deposit their eggs in the colony's nest, not because she is concerned at all about their eggs survival, but because she cares about the fate of her own eggs. The lower-ranked eggs are distributed around the outside of dominant females, thus decreasing the chances of the inner eggs falling victim to poaching. What appears as charity is in the end nothing more than an act dripping of deciet and motivated solely by self-interest.
Natural selection, Jones states, is interested in the passing of DNA and not the vessels that DNA is carried by. Therefore, kinship becomes important because, just as with the ant colony, cooperation leads to success and by relatives helping each other their very similar, and in some cases identical, DNA have a better chance of surviving to the next generation. Many animals are born sterile with the sole purpose of defending their family's territory so that their fertile siblings can reproduce. The example provided in the text involves naked mole rats of Africa. Though the mole rat 'soldiers' are not born sterile, the intense stress caused by their role prevents them from reaching puberty. This is easily proven by removing them from their home environment and witnessing their sexual maturity begin immediately. This is similar to the development of secondary sexual characteristics in orangutan populations.
-I have heard people state that they have identified their purpose in life to enriching the lives of relatives and helping ensure the success of their kin's offspring. Do you think that this is instinct? Did they settle on this decision from learning about evolution? Is it a coping mechanism do deal with how life worked out for them as individuals and their own reproductive success? Or something else?
-I have read that some male earthworms rape other males when they come in contact with each other. By doing so they render the raped male sterile and eliminate that him as a sexual competitor. What other examples of behavior do we see in nature that are driven by instinct and directly increase an animals' reproductive success?
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Many societies have some form of support network that ensures the health and survival of their kin in both short and long term situations. Many of these "insticts" are bound within the culture and are not viewed from a scientific perspective; it becomes an intangible. Biologically, there is the argument that it does help ensure the survival of a genetic line since evolution and natural selection are inherently selfish and not capable of caring for the greater good.
ReplyDeleteOne of the easier examples is infanticide. Male chimpanzees often go on patrols around their "terrritorial boundaries" and kill chimpanzee young, but often do not kill the mother. This elimates one males genetics while providing an opportunity by leaving the female alive for future reproduction.
In response to the first question.
ReplyDeleteSuggesting that supporting your relatives’ kin offspring to have success solely on instinct; will fall into the classic debate "nurture vs. nature"
For example, someone who supports nurture would suggest this: “Distinct social fabric” describes how each civilization chooses the characteristics of their culture, how some with choose to ignore or adopt certain characteristics such as beauty, gender, age, family structure and so forth......
I think it is a mixture of both instinct and cultural determinism
Another example of instinct behavior involves the complexity of bee society. For the purpose of protecting thousands of larvae, bees are segregated into different jobs. Many won’t even mate at all, and those that have the honor of being chosen by the Queen are killed afterward when mating is complete.
ReplyDeleteJones states that “evolution had no commonwealth; self-interest is what matters,” and that “there is no charity in Nature (148).” I would be interested in discussing whether this should be applied to humans as well. Does altruism exist at all?
In response to the second question: Some primates, like Zach, stated, will kill the young of other primates of their species. While emilinating the gene pool of a competing male.I have also heard of males of certian species eating the young of another mail, for example cats, hamsters, and gerbils.
ReplyDeleteBelow is a link to an article I saw about lemurs killing the young of other lemurs.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/rats/instinct.html
While this is a side note I have read articles that pertain to Humans forcibly sterilizing less desriable individuals, such as sex offenders. While I think that the general idea is to reduce sexual impulses in such individuals, I have also heard that it is an attempt from procreating and producing more sex offenders
http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/reprint/31/4/502.pdf
Or in another case the use of sterilization to purify the blood lines and produce Hitler's "Master Race"
http://www.uffl.org/vol%207/jlamonica7.pdf
Another relavent topic might be the forced sterilization of individuals with the HIV virus. This was done in an attempt to control the outbeak and reduce the number of people with the HIV virus.
http://www.icw.org/files/The%20forced%20and%20coerced%20sterilization%20of%20HIV%20positive%20women%20in%20Namibia%2009.pdf