COGNITIVE SCIENCE: ON HUMAN ATTACHMENTS
ScienceWeek http://scienceweek.com
The following points are made by Melvin Konner (Nature 2004
429:705):
1) Attachment is the name we give to bonds between people. It has
been central to song and story since the dawn of human time, but
has only recently become a subject of scientific study. Sigmund
Freud (1856-1939) had much to say about how the mind handles it,
but conceded that "our provisional ideas in psychology will
someday be based on an organic substructure". Today, we have
glimmerings of that substructure.
2) John Bowlby emphasized the most basic attachment, that of an
infant toward its primary caregiver. Bowlby's model of attachment
was informed by evolution -- eons of selection had pressed
mothers and infants into each others' arms. The notion shared by
Freud and B. F. Skinner (1904-1990) (otherwise sworn enemies) --
that infants became attached through reinforcement of their
hunger drive -- had failed decisively. Harry Harlow (1905-1981)
demonstrated that "love in infant monkeys" transcended such
simplicities when a wire-mesh surrogate mother supplying
delicious milk lost out in the battle for infant attachment to
another inanimate surrogate providing only warmth and contact
comfort. From this and other observations, Bowlby reasoned that
attachment was something built into infants and was programmed to
unfold on a predetermined schedule. Anthropological evidence
supports this general model. In all cultures, attachment
behaviors -- such as turning and clinging to the primary
caregiver in distress and privileging that person by
preferentially quieting the distress -- becomes very strong in
the second half-year of life.
3) It is probably not a coincidence that in the brain, major
pathways of the limbic system become coated with myelin during
this phase of infancy. This improves the function of the
subcortical circuits that process emotion and their connections
to the frontal and cingulate cortex. Although there is no direct
evidence, it is reasonable to hypothesize that this facilitates
the infant's side of the bond.
4) For the other half of the relationship, oxytocin is vital in
many non-human mammals. This peptide hormone, also involved in
milk let-down and uterine contractions, causes mothers to
retrieve and respond normally to infants. Oxytocin knockout mice
develop a strange social amnesia. And vole species with strong
maternal behavior have a different and denser distribution of
oxytocin receptors in the brain than closely related species
where maternal behavior is weaker. Sue Carter has shown that this
brain pattern is also associated with other forms of affiliative
behavior, not just in the maternal realm.(1-5)
References (abridged):
1. Bowlby, J. Attachment and Loss (3 vols) (Hogarth Press,
London, 1969-1977)
2. Cassidy, J. & Shaver, P. R. (eds) Handbook of Attachment:
Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications (Guilford, New York,
1999)
3. Konner, M. in Hunter-Gatherer Childhood (eds Hewlett, B. &
Lamb, M.) (Aldine, New York, in the press)
4. Insel, T. R. Rev. Gen. Psych. 4, 176-185 (2000)
5. Fisher, H. E., Aron, A., Mashek, D., Li, H. & Brown, L. L.
Arch. Sexual Behav. 31, 413-419 (2002)
Nature http://www.nature.com/nature
--------------------------------
Related Material:
ON ALTRUISM AND LOVE
The following points are made by Christian de Duve (citation
below):
1) Even the most powerful human sentiment does not escape an
explanation calling on natural selection. Maternal love, mate
bonding, altruism have their equivalent in numerous animal
species. It has been pointed out that such behaviors favor the
protection and multiplication of genomes and may, for this
reason, have been selected in a purely passive fashion.
2) This explanation is plausible for the instinct that drives a
female to go so far as to sacrifice her life in defense of her
young. From the point of view of evolutionary success, several
young lives are worth more than a single old one. Even a single
young life is likely to produce more progeny than an older one,
provided, of course, it has acquired a sufficient degree of
independence. The solidity of the bond between sexual partners,
although it varies considerably from one animal species to
another, generally parallels, as predicted by the theory, the
importance of the joint roles of the two sexes in reproductive
success. Birds are a characteristic example. Finally, even
altruistic behavior -- the sacrifice of one member of a group for
the group's benefit -- is explainable by natural selection. This
has been shown by the late British biologist William Hamilton in
his theory of kin selection, which evaluates the evolutionary
benefit of the sacrifice as a function of the degree of kinship
between the 'altruist' and the other members of the group. There
is benefit if the loss of the altruist s genes allows a greater
number of the same genes to be saved in the group.
3) All this, we are told, is explained by the fact that
individuals genetically disposed to protect their young at the
risk of their lives, to remain united in a manner that favors the
welfare of their offspring, or to sacrifice themselves under
circumstances such that a danger threatening their kin is
lessened have a greater chance of propagating their genes, and
thus their behaviors, than those devoid of those genetic
characteristics. Those are seen as mathematical truths. Whether
feelings are associated with such behaviors may be guessed from
the attitudes of the animals, but in a purely anthropomorphic
framework; we don't know what goes on in their minds.
4) The naturalistic explanation of altruism is convincing. But
thence to reduce to the mere play of the evolutionary lottery the
flame that burns in the hearts of lovers, the tenderness of a
mother for her child, the complicity between two old people
contemplating, hand in hand, a life-time spent together; to bring
down to a purely utilitarian function the sentiment that has
inspired so many poets, writers, musicians, and artists,
motivated so many heroic acts, and engendered so many bitter
rivalries and conflicts, even between nations; there cannot be
many prepared to take this step. Love transports, transfigures,
gives a feeling of participating in a sort of cosmic rapture, to
the point of sometimes blinding the senses and reason. As with
other mental manifestations, one has the impression that the
development of the human brain has drawn love out of its
primitive shell and allowed it to blossom in a more subtle
sphere, a sort of 'love for love's sake', so to speak.
Adapted from: Christian de Duve: Life Evolving: Molecules, Mind,
and Meaning. Oxford University Press 2002, p.200.
--------------------------------
Related Material:
ON ALTRUISM AND MORALITY
The following points are made by Monroe W. Strickberger (citation
below):
1) The importance of social interactions in developing behavioral
and communication skills can be seen throughout primate groups in
the panoply of calls, grimaces, gestures, and activities they use
to indicate social positions (e.g., dominance, subordination,
group affiliation), needs (e.g., food, sex, reassurance), and
changes in any of these areas (e.g., new social positions,
alliances, sexual states, or dietary interests). Such behaviors
range from transmitting only information on themselves as
individuals to actions that may immediately affect the survival
of other group members.
2) Information affecting the survival of other group members is
most obvious, for example, when a monkey encounters a leopard and
reacts with a loud scream, signaling nearby listeners to take
refuge. Thus, although this warning signal may call the
predator's attention to the screamer and diminish its own chances
for survival, the effect can nevertheless help preserve its
relatives or compatriots.
3) Population geneticists beginning with Haldane and Wright have
suggested that there were genetic advantages in such altruistic
behavior in which individuals may even go so far as to endanger
their own genetic future for those who carry closely related
genotypes. In 1964, Hamilton popularized this cooperative process
under the name "kin selection", and provided formulas by which
some of its benefits could be evaluated. As Maynard Smith has
pointed out, "the main reason for thinking that kin selection has
been an important mechanism in the evolution of cooperation is
that most animal societies are in fact composed of relatives."
4) Some years after Hamilton's proposals, Trivers introduced a
concept of altruism that seemed to have special applicability to
human social behavior. Trivers's theory of "reciprocal altruism"
suggested that altruism can become established in a group where
the frequency of interaction between individuals is high and the
life span sufficiently long to enable recipients of altruistic
acts to return favors to the altruists. The benefits to
individuals who partake in such reciprocal altruism can far
outweigh the costs, since even slight expenditures of altruistic
energy (such as throwing a life preserver to a drowning
individual) may have significant benefits to the altruist when it
is reciprocated by the previous beneficiary or other group
members. Frequent interaction and exchange of roles ("sometimes
an altruist, sometimes a beneficiary") is necessary in order to
recognize "cheaters" early on, who would otherwise continually
try to act as beneficiaries and exploit the altruists.
5) By refusing cheaters the benefit of future aid, through either
punishment or exile, moral sentiments are developed and enhanced
in such cooperative groups, and emphasis is put on precise
accounting and balancing of exchanges among individuals. As
pointed out by Trivers, the maintenance of such systems is
therefore supported by introducing or reinforcing a variety of
emotional traits: friendship, moral indignation and resentment,
gratitude, sympathy, guilt and repentance.
Adapted from: Monroe W. Strickberger: Evolution. 2nd Edition.
Jones and Bartlett 1996, p.475.
ScienceWeek http://scienceweek.com
--
Best,
Frederick Martin McNeill
Poway, California, United States of America
mmcneill@fuzzysys.com
http://www.fuzzysys.com
http://members.cox.net/fmmcneill/
*************************
Phrase of the week :
My own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we
suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.
-- J.B.S. Haldane (1892-1964)
God cheats.
:-))))Snort!)
*************************
.
|
