"James Michael Howard" <jmhoward at anthropogeny.com> wrote in message
news:5st411dpq1v1vpaolsnrf6f6qi2bc4h812 at 4ax.com...
|| Accerated Human Brain Development: Cell, Vol 119, 1027-1040, 29
| December 2004
|| Accelerated Human Brain Development May be Due to Increased
| Testosterone
||| It is my hypothesis that human evolution is driven by testosterone
| (Androgens in Human Evolution, Rivista di Biologia / Biology Forum
| 2001; 94: 345-362). I suggest increases in testosterone formed
| primates out of mammals (Mitochondrial Eve, Y Chromosome Adam,
| Testosterone, and Human Evolution, Rivista di Biologia / Biology Forum
| 2002; 94: 319-326). That is, increases in testosterone produced
| primates and Homo sapiens from primates as testosterone increased.
|| I suggest the findings of Dorus, et al., may represent the effects of
| this increasing testosterone. There is a strong "male-driven" effect
| on gene mutation in humans and apes (Kateryna, et al., Nature 2002;
| 416: 624 and Ebersberger, et al., American Journal of Human Genetics
| 2002; 70: 1490). This effect is greater in primates than rodents
| (Huang, et al., Journal of Molecular Evolution 1997; 44: 463) and is
| "particularly pronounced in the human brain," (Enard, et al., Comment
| in Science 2002; 296: 233).
|| The effect may be driven by an increase in percentage of females of
| higher testosterone within populations. This would increase exposure
| of the fetal brain to increased testosterone which could accelerate
| brain development as well as favorable mutations.
|| James Michael Howard
James, I saw a =Nature= episode on
PBS the other night. It was about an
Orangutan named "Kusasi", and it was,
at least in-part, in accord with the pos-
ition you champion.
Kusasi was orphaned as an infant, but
matured to be "king" of his Orangutan
group, and part of that was what the
show attributed to a massive testoster-
one flow in him, which, in Orangutans,
is evidenced by a pronounced facial
"broadening" that occurs in proportion
to testosterone level, and a correlated
increase in body mass and physical
strength.
The show gave an account of Kusasi's
ascendence within his Orangutan com-
munity, which included his being dom-
inant with respect to mating -- which
would substantiate the position you've
taken -- passing Kusasi's testosterone
dynamics to a majority of the community's
offspring.
The show also showed, though, that
there were other factors involved in
Kusasi's ascendency to "reproductive
dominance".
When he was orphaned, he did something
that the Narrators [members of a Leaky
group of Researchers] described as ~"being
extraordinary". He escaped from his con-
tainer as an infant and survived for 18
'months' in the jungle -- which the Narrators
said was ~"unprecedented". Unfortunately,
the events of Kusasi's existence during these
18 'months' were not documented, so we
cannot know what the factors were in his
survival were. Typically, Orangutan infants
need to spend ~six 'years' under their mother's
protection and tutilage before they are able
to survive.
Somehow, Kusasi, made it through the
first 18 'months' on his own(?).
But then he came back to the camp and
tried to attach himself to the dominant fe-
male, who barely tolerated his presence,
but he followed her around, and the Narr-
rators called his decision to do so ~"bril-
liant" -- because the other Orangutans
~"spread from where this dominant female
walked like the parting of the Red Sea".
And, in Kusasi's own climactic ascendency
to being "king", the Narrators said that
~"his attack on his predecessor was so
violent that he almost ripped its face off".
But I see, in all of this, something more
than "just testosterone" -- a kind of
learning to "expect" that becomes a
"self-fulfilling" dynamic -- and that phys-
iological response =follows= that, instead
of leading it.
You know -- like the way =any= dog can
be made vicious by a malicious owner,
and like the way that Human Children,
abandoned to the streets, become "tough".
And conversely, with respect to sheltered
existences.
So I remain seeing more than "testosterone".
What it comes down to is that it's ability
to learn that matters, and other physiology
is secondary to that, its unfolding actually
being shaped by ability to learn.
There was another Orangutan in the camp
that did something that left me amazed.
She got on a canoe and "rowed" [using her
forlimbs] down a river to where she knew
there was some good stuff to eat. Of course,
female Orangutans are much smaller than
males, and they do not fight for reproductive
dominance as male Orangutans do. But they
do have their own dominance hierarchy,
as Kusasi's surrugate "mother's" position
demonstrated.
But, given a viable 'normal' Orangutan
infant, I can see how all of that can derive
in learning that occurs at the hands of
adults that've learned earlier.
It's just hard to "fit" all such learning dyn-
amics into "testosterone".
Of course, it's right in my own work that,
because "new" products of learning tend,
strongly, to induce "TD E/I(up)" within
the nervous systems of folks who are 'un-
familiar' with the "new" stuff, and such
"TD E/I(up)" is mapped in stereotypical
ways within nervous systems that "prime"
the "fight/flight" mechanisms, a nervous
system that's able to learn "new" stuff
must also be able to find its way through
the stereotypical reactions to occurrences
of "TD E/I(up)" within other nervous sys-
tems, or the "new" stuff will be "aggressed-
against", and lost.
It's just that such "defense" is secondary
to the ability to learn, and the learning, be-
cause, without it, there's nothing "worth
fighting for" -- except "reproductive" dom-
inance.
While I can see that that's probably "enough"
in the case of non-Humans, Humans are
=more= than that.
And what about dogs that are "fixed"?
They don't stop "trying to please" -- don't
"roll over and die".
The main thing that differentiates Human
experience from that of the animals is
Progress.
But I'm chuckling at myself as I write this,
for, when I was Young, I looked to my
own work in Science as the "means"
through which I'd find a "mate" :-]
It's just that that hope "passed", and the
"drive" remained, and remains still. So it's
just obvious, within my own experience,
that there's more than "testosterone".
It's more like "climbing mountains" be-
cause we "want" to discover, and gain the
benefit of what's "there".
And, although a certain "forcefulness"
assists in such, if it all came down to
"just forcefulness", we'd still be apes,
wanting only "reproductive dominance".
I do, of course, understand that "re-
production" is necessary for species'
Survivals, but if "reproduction" was
all there is there'd be over-population
that'd be self-defeating and cyclically-
insurmountable.
There'd be no longing for Peace.
There'd be no ~"turning the other cheek,
going the extra mile, and giving 'em your
shirt, too." [Why help 'them'?]
There'd be no efforts to ~"do good to
those who persecute you." [Why help
'them'?]
There'd be no Progress -- because
"reproduction" would be "enough".
There's more going on in-there than
"testosterone".
All this said, I "cheered" for Kusasi as
I watched the PBS episode.
A "primal" 'recognition'.
A "primal" 'sorrow'.
A, then, fully-Human recognition that
I'll have made the world a better place
for =all= of it's Children, and assisted
my Species' Survival, in ways that
Kusasi could not dream of.
k. p. collins
