Re: newb question
- From: "g" <gillawton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:59:09 -0400 (EDT)
"saraband" <darwin886@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.06.23.02.40.53.219702@xxxxxxxxxxx
> I've been lurking for a while - great stuff!
>
> I don't have a background in science so please go easy on me. I would
> like to know if there is a set of criteria that have been generally
> accepted
> as indicators that a given behavioral trait in humans is vestigial. Are
> there examples - I guess fear of snakes might be one - of behavioral
> traits that are generally considered to be vestigial and if so what would
> indicate
> this? If any of this makes sense, can someone point me to some sources
> on this subject for a non-specialist reader?
>
> Thanks in advance for replies.
Sara, your question is one that has been the target of a veritably infinite
number of experiments in the field of psychology over the past century
and more. Also, currently, some immensely enlightening data is coming
out, for comparison to the psychological approach results, from brain
scan imaging studies, using iMRI (and other) technology. The voluminous
data from the latter is still coming in and nowhere near all potentially
informative scenarios for making meaningful determinations have been
exhausted yet. Brain "mapping" through use of bran scan technology is
providing data that is shattering some notions as to how and why certain
behavior is the norm, and how and why departures from those norms are
substantial.
Much of the new data also confirms some long-held notions; so it can't
be generalized that the entire apple carts of such thinkers as Sigmund
Freud are being dispensed with.
In short, the answer to your question begs a vast number of mini-answers
that are even now just coming in at the research level and probably will not
filter down to the non-science-expert public level for years to come. These
questions being examined, in terms of the locations, frequency, volume
and other characteristics of neurological "events" and their sequences,
are at the cutting edge of your question.
If you would wish to have a better knowledge of the tentative efforts of
those working at that cutting edge to make the best sense of how those data,
as compared and analyzed in conjunction with data attained from a
primarily psychological approach, there are some good books that have
come out within the current century that will expose you to much of the
findings (and speculations in their regard).
Some of the best books out for non-experts (and don't let the titles mislead
you)
are:
Music, the Brain, and Ecstasy (prepare for a physiologically-based
treatment)
by Robert Jourdain
Moral Intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ, Samuel Goleman
While the titles of these books might appear, at first glance, to be at best
peripheral to your question, you will find that after reading them you will
have
not only a better understanding of current progress made toward answering
your question but, also, a better understanding as to why if anyone gives
you
a quick and easy answer, they don't have a clue...
Hope this helps you.
g
.
- References:
- newb question
- From: saraband
- newb question
- Prev by Date: Positive adaptations to the pain of being (was: Re: Article: On the Great Chain of Being)
- Next by Date: Re: Singing as prerequisite (or aid) to language.
- Previous by thread: Re: newb question
- Next by thread: scientific questions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|