Primate Evolution and Adaptation

https://www-jstor-org.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/stable/pdf/10.1086/420909.pdf?refreqid=search%3Ada04a69836e56d120a5af95f6bb059f0

Your Place in the Primate Family Tree

Great video sponsored by PBS Eons explaining our place as humans and the primate family tree. This short correctly identifies human relationships with their nonhuman, primate counterparts.
(Note: Please skip as needed first 13 seconds of advertising)

Primate Culture: Two Opposing Views Cont.

2) On the opposing view, some believe that primates do have culture.

As we see from the previous post, early studies often linked animal culture to “social traditions”, though in modern science shows, tradition is not bound to culture. In broad use, culture concerns both “behavior and material manifestations of behavior” (Sapolsky, 2oo6, p. 218). Instead of the unyielding six conditions outlined by Washburn and Benedict, Sapolsky defines several perquisites for animal culture to exist. Firstly, any behavior manifested cannot have arose from genetic or ecological factors. Said behavior must also occur in multiple generations, past its originators. One must detect behaviors by observing them in nature, finding a pattern, and ruling out genetic and ecological factors as its roots cause. If all merits are met, said behavior designates culture.

Recent years have shown numerous demonstrations of culture within primates. Records of material culture, or the construction and use of tools, have been shown to exist amongst non-human primates. Humans are no longer the only ones with the unique ability to use tools, these skills have been demonstrated in both primate and non-primates. A primary example of such is tool use amongst chimpanzee populations, in which the behavior of “pounding hammers against anvils, made of wood or rock, in order to break open nuts”, is frequently observed (Sapolsky, 2006, 219). This behavior has been transmitted throughout generations through three methods. Instructional models, which involve the direct instruction of hammer use, where a skilled chimpanzee teaches another by “shaping the movements of the neophyte” (Sapolsky, 2006, 219). Observational models, in which young chimpanzees learn nut cracking by copying their adult counterparts. Finally, facilitation models, in which the mere proximity of young chimpanzees to adults with hammers increase the likelihood of them experimenting with said hammers and independently gaining the skill. Such models are observed within chimpanzee populations and provide the mechanics of transmission of behavior among generations.

A Chimpanzee using self constructed tools to crack nuts.

Another example of tool use in chimpanzee society is the construction of termite sticks, created by stripping sticks naked of their leaves and branches. These sticks can be used to puncture termite or ant mounds, then withdrawn to provide food to the infiltrating primate. The use of insect sticks is also a popular method of food gathering for both Sumatra and Borneo orangutan populations. In fact, many applications of tool use among non-human primates goes hand-in-hand with their food acquisition.

A Chimpanzee group scavenging using termite sticks

Although our previous article tended to discredit culture in primates due to the lack of language, Sapolsky argues that communication is lavish within primate societies. Communication in other ways, besides language and speech, can be met. For example, vervet monkey's expose each other to vocalizations of different meanings. So we see that speech is not the only precursor to communication and language. Non-verbal methods can also be utilized, and a rich example of communication amongst primates concerns our closest relative, the chimpanzee. Some groups of chimpanzees share a distinctive gesture of “knuckle knocking on the ground to gain attention”, while other groups slap branches to achieve the same result (Sapolsky, 2006, 221). Thus, we learn that culture in communication is not limited to the verbal language and speech used by humans.

Finally, let us consider the social customs exerted in primate culture. Grooming, which involves the cleaning of various dirt and insects from one’s coat, allows for the occurrence of various social behaviors. Tanzanian region chimpanzees use “hand-clasp” grooming, in which “each animal raises and arm, grasping hands with one another” (Sapolsky, 2006, 221). It is important to note that different groups performs this hand clasp differently. If one were to subject an chimpanzee of one group to another, they are both “influenced by, and in turn, influence the style of hand clasping in their new group” (Nakamura and Uehara, 2004). One social custom I found particularly interesting was the act of the rain dance, in which during heavy rains, primates and other animals participate in the act of displays “involving chest thumping, hooting, tossing of branches, and charging through an open field. Though this behavior occurs almost exclusively in all East African populations and is not seen within West African ones.

In conclusion, we should note that culture is not limited to six conditions, and is not defined by one’s use of speech or one’s knowledge of language. As stated by Sapolsky, and based on my own beliefs, the precursors of culture are that said behaviors are not genetic or ecological, and can be transmitted amongst many generations. Non-human primates do have culture, and culture is not limited by a lack of language, nor is language a necessity in the development of culture. 

Primate Cultures: Two Opposing Views

Do Non-human primates have culture?

This is the question that S. L. Washburn, Burton Benedict, and Robert M. Sapolsky seek to answer. In today’s blog posts I will be detailing the extent of both arguments, ending with a short synopsis of my view on culture in primates.

1) Six conditions designate culture:

As stated by Washburn and Benedict, the six conditions that designate culture are as follows: Innovation, dissemination, standardization, durability, diffusion, and tradition. Early definitions of culture were equal to the sum total of what an individual acquires from his society. Observable differences in behavior between populations are based off learning and history. Washburn and Benedict argue that learning is very important for nonhuman primates! From our textbook we know that the social organizations of various primates are very different, but the major differences are biologically determined and modified by learning and local conditions.

The article states that human social behavior depend on language[and speech], and we learn such language with great ease. One of the major differences that sets nonhuman primates apart from us is the lack of speech in primates. While large parts of our brain work together to demonstrates speech, the same cannot be said for primates. The article argues that since nonhuman primates lack speech, they thus lack tradition, which is arguably the most important of the six points abstracted in culture. Though I disagree with this notion, as various social traditions exhibited in non-human primates… this is touched on more in the second part of my blog posts. Still, tradition ties in with our ability to speak and relay thoughts, various human traditions are made possible solely through speech. Speech brings a wealth of tradition, and this cannot be denied.

Language is a given for our culture, and through language we humans are able to meet the six conditions designating culture. The article states that "The difference is basic and the difference is rooted in biology" (Washburn and Benedict, 1979, p. 164). Washburn and Benedict argues that language and speech are necessities in developing culture.

The article vehemently denies that primates could possess culture as reaching the six conditions would only be possible with the use of language.