tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17027941.post6969492579113836674..comments2023-12-29T01:04:14.708-05:00Comments on a cat and twenty.: your thought-provoking, um, thought of the day.kate.d.http://www.blogger.com/profile/09967162934828397188noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17027941.post-78931398726352569882007-10-28T11:06:00.000-04:002007-10-28T11:06:00.000-04:00I think the bigger issue than figuring out when ma...I think the bigger issue than figuring out when maternal instinct has or hasn't existed is tackling the idea that humans have "instinct" at all. Rats have circadian rhythms that largely determine when they go into labor; cats know to make certain noises when they see flying prey. But part of the coolness of the way we adapted -- big brains that make us inherently adaptable to all sorts of environments (rather than instinctually bound to one environment we evolved in) -- is that we ended up being born with very few "instincts." There might be culturally mandated behaviors that we have that look instinctual because they sometimes map onto ones we see in other primates, like "maternal instinct." But I'm just not convinced -- and this is a pregnant woman very excited about having her first child talking -- that there is such a thing as a biological, maternal instinct. We're not going to find a gene for it, and we likely won't find variation in "instinct" with, say, prenatal hormone exposure. It just doesn't make sense.<BR/><BR/>So while on the one hand I think we have some good evidence from child studies that humans do have some instinct to be nice to each other in many contexts, and that when they feel safe and relaxed they are not selfish or mean, I think that generalized niceness is about it in terms of how we treat each other. The rest we figure out in the context of our environment and culture.<BR/><BR/>(Of course, I have a huge post up right now about mutability of biology, so this stuff is very much on my mind right now!)Katehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16995641658376827290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17027941.post-20744601027735993342007-10-26T12:49:00.000-04:002007-10-26T12:49:00.000-04:00JW- definitely socialized. domesticated animals ha...JW- definitely socialized. domesticated animals have figured out a sweet deal, i tell you what! but i'm the same way with my cat (as my recent vet bill can attest). <BR/><BR/>as for the evolutionary angle, i'm certainly no scientist, and the biological imperative to procreate and ensure the survival of one's child is pretty unassailable. <BR/><BR/>but i think i'm not talking about that exactly - some of which, certainly, factoring into protective mother behaviors - but how that imperative functions in this society with all these other contexts. and how those contexts, and the attendant attitudes, have wildly shifted over the centuries and radically changed the nature of "childhood" etc. in essence, it's short-sighted to imagine that this has always been the way mothers have felt about "their" children, because historically it's not.kate.d.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09967162934828397188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17027941.post-75420059990263703872007-10-26T12:21:00.000-04:002007-10-26T12:21:00.000-04:00Complicating things further, I dislike children an...Complicating things further, I dislike children and any maternal feelings I have are activated solely by my cats. Who are my dear sweet wittle babies, etc. Instinct or socialized expectations? Misdirected or not?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17027941.post-75550970371420713882007-10-24T22:06:00.000-04:002007-10-24T22:06:00.000-04:00She is totally right (from an evolutionary perspec...She is totally right (from an evolutionary perspective) that things due to culture are not instincts but I have issues with this argument as well. Saying maternal instinct is a recently arisen concept is way off base in the first place! In an evolutionary context, parental instinct is widespread throughout various types of organisms. <BR/>Also, the maternal behaviors (really most all traits and behaviors) are due to genetic (instinctual) and environmental (cultural) infulences. Her argument seems to discount any genetic influences and it may be far too simplistic to attribute maternal behaviors (which we now incorrectly call instincts) to the cultural pressures only.<BR/><BR/>Very interesting post!DancingFishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10309494766930447380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17027941.post-31057958810740207062007-10-24T08:13:00.000-04:002007-10-24T08:13:00.000-04:00I'm actually not quite sure that I buy this.It pro...I'm actually not quite sure that I buy this.<BR/><BR/>It probably comes a lot from reading <A HREF="http://thecurvature.com/2007/10/01/the-girls-who-went-away-by-ann-fessler/" REL="nofollow">The Girls Who Went Away</A>, about women and teens who were forced into surrendering their babies for adoption. They were specifically told over and over again to not feel attachment to their babies, that their babies weren't really theirs, they belonged to someone else, one day they would have a "real" baby, etc., using this same logic. The problem is that many of the women telling their stories recount strongly believing this to be true and were not attached . . . until they gave birth, and then all of a sudden, they couldn't help it.<BR/><BR/>It was quite interesting, really. And I'm not exactly sure how to reconcile that with this.<BR/><BR/>Also, I saw this book in the store and read the back and was instantly suspicious of it. So maybe that plays a role, too :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com