Animal Minds; social adaptability in macaques (Animals)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, June 25, 2024, 23:15 (130 days ago) @ David Turell

"Our study provides rare evidence of an abrupt change in selection on sociality in the face of a large and persistent ecological disturbance. These findings show the potential of social flexibility to provide resilience to rapid and unpredictable environmental fluctuations in animals and emphasize a dynamic link between the environment and fitness consequences of social behavior."

Comment: that the monkeys were able to change their social behavior when forced with survival issues is not surprising. "I have to tolerate them to have shade" is a self-serving decision. It does not represent empathy.

I think this comment glances by the more critical point that there isn't an intrinsic drive to dominate and push away 'the other' There's a tendency in Darwinism (thanks to Spencer) to view species as a more concrete thing than they really are.

This study demonstrates comparatively that different species can find non-destructive solutions when it comes to resource sharing. Nowhere in the abstract is there an assertion of empathy. However, "if you won't hurt me, I won't hurt you" is in my book empathy.

If you see two species that were formerly fighting with each other and then after a catastrophic event, they get along just fine, it at minimum suggests the ability for a limited imagination even if we're going to decide that empathy is too strong a word for what's going on. Clearly, the macaques are at least able to sequester their previous behavior to permit continued survival. This suggests the following:

1. Memory of past aggression
2. Enough consciousness to realize some level of individual self-control.
3. A willingness to try a non-aggressive strategy to get desired outcomes which directly implies
4. The ability to plan and adjust. You have to be able to imagine different outcomes to pick a different strategy.

What this study directly assaults is the idea that macaques are automatons that react via instinct. They think like we do, sans language. But I mean, even Aristotle acknowledged that dogs have reason.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"