Aside from Richard Dawkins interviewing Stephen Pinker, there’s not a lot of evolutionary psychology related video content online. So I was pretty excited to find this recent talk from Wonderfest. An added bonus is that it’s not by evolutionary psychologists, but a pair of paleoanthropologists. Since critiques of evolutionary psychology are often levied by non-anthropologists by dismissing EvPsych for making too many assumptions about life in the paleolithic, this has a different flavor of credibility.

One point that I appreciated was Dr. Gilbert’s view on the “job” of scientists. Some scientists (and its critics) are fond of implying that us laymen should just sit around and wait for scraps of knowledge to be tossed our way. Here’s a more enlightened view:

“[As scientists], our business is not to speculate stories that you can then think about. Our business is to give you empirical evidence that you can go home and have all that fun of speculation yourself.”  – Henry Gilbert, PhD.

Protagonists

David DeGusta is a Research Paleontologist at the Paleoanthropology Institute.

Henry Gilbert is an Assistant Professor of Anthropology at California State University, East Bay.

[cft format=0]
[Link (from RSS feed)]

Topics

• Studying the Evolution of Human Traits
• The Science of Human Origins
• Examining How Evolution Has Shaped Behavior
• Landmarks in Human Evolution
• The History of Evolutionary Psychology
• The Rise of Behaviorism
• Cognitive Psychology and the Refinement of Adaptationism
• Nature vs. Nurture and Modern Evolutionary Psychology
• The Dangers of Discussing Hardwired Behavior
• Studying the Evolutionary Origins of Language
• Studying Language Through the Fossil Record
• Studying Language Through the Genetic Record
• Studying Language Through the Archaeological Record
• Discussion on the Evolution of Language
• Studying the Evolution of Culture
• Possible Causes for the Development of Culture
• Discussion on the Evolution of Culture
• The Evolutionary Origins of Art
• Signs of Neanderthal Culture and Language
• Animals and the Neurological Basis of Lan

I highly recommend investing an hour into watching this video. It’s a great archaeology/anthropology introduction for everyone interested in modern diets. It touches on a lot of the main concepts necessary to understand what the heck is being talked about when referencing the methods used to figure out what was going on during the paleolithic era. The talk is super-approachable for intro purposes, but Teresa Steele is also an actual scientist, so more advanced folks will probably appreciate some of what she discusses.

The Australopithecus afarensis to Agriculture Talk (3.4 million – 10,000 years ago)

One concept that seems obvious, but I’d never consciously considered is the size of animals eaten by humans vs. other primates. It’s easy to look at a timeline of the paleolithic and see that human ancestors ate some meat, but there’s a key distinction. Humans eat animals much larger than themselves, while all other primates eat animals much smaller than themselves. Thus, talking about primates as “meat eaters” is factually true, but it ignores a huge difference between Homo sapiens and other surviving species. Hunting large game necessitates a degree of cooperation that is on an entirely different level than the individuality of hunting small game. Since we know Homo neanderthalensis also hunted in groups, we can start to make some interesting comparisons with the rest of the Homo lineage.

“I’d like to add to that one of the things that’s unique about humans among primates is how much meat we consume. A large percentage of our calories come from meat on average – compared to other primates. Amongst primates, chimpanzees eat the most amount of meat. And humans on average eat about 10x the amount of meat as other primates.”

The interesting question professor Steele attempts to address in her research and in this talk is: “When did the differences in human and chimpanzee diets evolve?” The implications of this answer impact us in terms of social organization, evolved behavior, and optimal diets in the modern context. A big factor in determining this is that there is little evidence of hominin plant consumption during the Acheulean (~1.6 m – 100,000 years ago) period of the paleolithic. Admittedly, part of this is because plant evidence doesn’t fossilize as well as bones, but it’s interesting that the plant eating assumption persists on such small amounts of evidence. As usual, this refutes the vegetarian position in terms of evolutionary biology.

“Humans specialize in nutrient dense, hard to extract sources, while chimpanzees specialize in ripe fruits and plants that have low nutrient density which are also easily collected.”

The relative difficulty of resource extraction also carries implications for human society versus primates. This impacts the necessity of tool use and social organization to sustain expanding populations. Thomas Malthus’ famous prediction that human population would be restricted by a linear growth in the food supply compared to an exponential growth in population comes to mind. The Malthusian limit suffers from an assumption that humans are stuck in the chimpanzee mode of resource collection. To be fair to Malthus, it’s still possible that there is a limit on production that is simply beyond the date he predicted. Thus, the growth in production and population since his prediction doesn’t completely refute his hypothesis. The questions raised by Malthus remain at the foundations of geopolitical debates to this day.

Looking at this from the perspective of adaptive evolution, we also see foundations for hypotheses to explain the explosive growth in human brain size over the paleolithic. Dealing with the problems of tools and groups certainly placed different pressures on the evolution of humans. In other words, the information in this video underpins everything I write about on evolvify. Watch it. Love it.

Methods of study

1. Archaeological record (tools, artifacts, bones)
2. Skeletal morphology (bone mechanics & dental structure)
3. bone chemistry

[cft format=0]

• Human Diet Unique in High Meat Content
• Australopithecus afarensis Diet
• Cut-Marked Bones 2.5 Million Years Ago
• Evidence of Ancient Hominids Eating Aquatic Animals
• Acheulean Hunting and Scavenging (Homo erectus)
• Exceptional Preservation Sites with Wood Spears
• Neandertals in Europe
• Bone Chemistry Findings
• Hunting Technology
• Middle Stone Age in Africa
• Modern Humans in Europe
• Plant Use
• Intensification of Resource Extraction
• Why Humans Replaced Neandertals
• Conclusive Evidence of Cut Marks
• Ratio of Fatty Acids in Diet and Brain Size

From a speciation standpoint, this wouldn’t be unprecedented. Whales evolved to their current iterations from land mammals. Though not a direct evolutionary ancestor, think about the modern hippo. They spend the bulk of their time in the water… even for mating. Interesting evolutionary side-note: Did you know whales have vestigial hips and legs embedded in their bodies… similar to our tailbones? Did you also know that whales are sometimes born with external legs through peculiar gene expressions?

As you watch the video, keep in mind that the hypothesis doesn’t say that we evolved from apes who had moved into aquatic areas and became fully adapted to aquatic life. It merely suggests that our ancestors spent a significant amount of time in the water for hundreds of thousands of years (guessing)… or just long enough to begin to develop adaptations for “a life aquatic”. Compelling evidence is our slightly webbed fingers and toes, and our ability to consciously override our breath control. The latter is key for diving and isn’t found in the majority of mammalian species. It’s also related to our ability to speak, a la voice control.

However, the mammalian dive reflex doesn’t really fit with the hypothesis. Since it’s found in nearly all mammals, there’s no reason to believe that the hominin line evolved it during the Paleolithic.

Did I mention this theory is almost universally ignored? Did I mention I don’t think there’s currently any compelling reason to believe it? Oh well, it’s interesting. It also attempts to explain some things that aren’t necessarily 100%  explained by the strict African savanna hunter-gatherer hypothesis. As such, I think it’s an interesting exercise in testing our assumptions…

[cft format=0]

Edit: I was sent the following video via a friend on Twitter:

<object width=”640″ height=”385″><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/0kVbW_ZoC_8?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US”></param><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”></param><param name=”allowscriptaccess” value=”always”></param><embed src=”http://www.youtube.com/v/0kVbW_ZoC_8?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowscriptaccess=”always” allowfullscreen=”true” width=”640″ height=”385″></embed></object>

Whatchya think?

Dr. Disotell received his Ph.D. and Masters degrees from Harvard University, and his Bachelor’s degree from Cornell University.

[cft format=0]

This short-ish (42 minute) documentary explorers the spread of the Tuuli/Inuit from Eastern Siberia, across Alaska and Canada, and eventually to Greenland during the last period of relative global warming. It touches on the importance of specialized knowledge required to hunt specific animals, and how that changes during migrations. The Tuuli migrated away from plentiful whaling and walrus grounds and through areas in which foraging for berries and fishing provided the main sources of nourishment.

There isn’t as much depth here as I would have like to seen. I could have watched about 2 additional hours of analysis on this. All the same, it’s an interesting look at a recent hunter-gatherer culture… Well worth the 42 minutes.

[cft format=0]

There are some bloody scenes in this! In general, the cinematography does a good job of showing the beauty of parts of the Arctic.

If you watch this, I’d love to hear if you got anything useful out of it in the comments below.

Paul Ekman

Aside from being the scientific force underlying hit TV series “Lie to me”, Dr. Paul Ekman was a Professor of Psychology in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of California, San Francisco for 32 years. He received his undergraduate education at the University of Chicago and New York University. Ekman then received his Ph.D. from Adelphi University in 1958 after spending a year in clinical internship at the Langley Porter Psychiatric Institute, part of UCSF.

His interests have focused on two separate but related topics. He originally focused on ‘nonverbal’ behavior, and by the mid-60’s concentrated on the expression and physiology of emotion. His second interest is interpersonal deception.

His many honors have included the Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award of the American Psychological Association in 1991, and an honorary doctor of humane letters from the University of Chicago in 1994. Dr. Ekman retired from UCSF in 2004. He currently continues to consult on research and training related to emotion and deception.

Dacher Keltner

Dacher Keltner, Professor of Psychology, is a social psychologist who focuses on the prosocial emotions, such as love, sympathy and gratitude, and processes such as teasing and flirtation that enhance bonds.

He has conducted empirical studies in three areas of inquiry. A first looks at the determinant and effects of power, hierarchy and social class. A second in concerned with the morality of everyday life, and how we negotiate moral truths in teasing, gossip, and other reputational matters. A third and primary focus in on the biological and evolutionary basis of the benevolent affects, including compassion, awe, love, gratitude, and laughter and modesty.
[cft format=0]

Topics

• DACHER KELTNER: Role of Darwin in Human Emotion
• Principles of Expression / Serviceable Habits
• Principle of Antithesis
• Nature of the Startle Response
• Evolution of Emotions
• PAUL EKMAN: Misconceptions of Darwin’s Work
• Darwin’s ‘The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals’
• Heroic Compassion
• Global Compassion
• CONVERSATION: First Read of Darwin
• How Did Darwin ‘Always’ Get it Right?
• Disconfirming ‘Born to Be Good’
• Differing Expressions of Emotions
• Darwin, Spirituality and Compassion
• Compassionate Outliers and Evolution

Q & A

• Love
• Epigenetics
• Humor and Laughter
• Evolution of Heroic Compassion
• Explaining Bell’s Palsy or Autism
• Anger Towards Homeless People
• Cultural Variation
• Training Mind to Prevent Emotional Hijacking
• Nature vs. Nurture
• Is Darwin a Diest?
• Postpartum Depression
• Heroic Compassion and Emotional Aberration
• Does Darwin Illuminate Emotion and Spirituality?

Louann Brizendine, M.D. graduated from UC, Berkeley in Neurobiology, Yale University in Medicine and Harvard Medical School in Psychiatry.

She served on the faculty at Harvard Medical School from 1985-88 when she came to join the faculty at the University of California, San Francisco at the Langley Porter Psychiatric Institute. At UCSF, Dr. Brizendine pursues active clinical, teaching, writing and research activities.

[cft format=0]

In 1994, Dr. Brizendine founded the UCSF Women’s Mood and Hormone Clinic at LPPI, and continues to serve as it’s director. The Women’s Mood and Hormone Clinic is a unique psychiatric clinic designed to assess and treat women of all ages experiencing disruption of mood, energy, anxiety, sexual function and well-being due to hormonal influences on the brain. In addition Dr. Brizendine instructs and supervises residents, fellows, and medical students in this Clinic throughout the year helping young doctors learn more about this important area in women’s mental, sexual and physical health. She annually teaches courses to medical students and residents addressing the topics of the brain effects of hormones, mood disorders, anxiety problems and sexual interest changes due to hormones throughout the country. She is an expert on the effects of testosterone on sex drive in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women.

Topics

• History of Studying Sex Differences
• Comparing the Male and Female Brain
• History in the Field
• Differences in Little Boys and Girls
• The Boy Smell
• The Teenage Brain
• The Daddy Brain
• The Emotional Life of Men
• Sex, Love and the Male Brain
• The Mature Male Brain

Q & A

• Differences in Development of Single Men
• Social Construction of Gender
• Individual Differences
• The Gay Brain
• Males Using One Side of Their Brain
• Males Raised by Single Mothers
• Men’s Fear of Dancing
• Changes in the Brain During Pregnancy
• Hearing Differences
• The Brain in Love
• World Studies
• Older Men vs. Younger Men

[cft format=0]

Until recently, Professor Dawkins held the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. He is the author of many books, including The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design, and Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder. His first book, The Selfish Gene, was an instant international bestseller, and has become an established classic work of modern evolutionary biology.

[cft format=0]

Richard Dawkins is also the author of The Blind Watchmaker, River Out of Eden, Climbing Mount Improbable, Unweaving the Rainbow, A Devil’s Chaplain, The Ancestor’s Tale, The God Delusion, and most recently, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution.

Professor Dawkins’s awards have included the Silver Medal of the Zoological Society of London (1989), the Royal Society’s Michael Faraday Award (1990), the Nakayama Prize for Achievement in Human Science (1990), The International Cosmos Prize (1997) and the Kistler Prize (2001).

He has Honorary Doctorates in both literature and science, and is a Fellow of the Royal Society.

Hitchens, an always colorful and sometimes outrageous commentator, now takes aim at God. Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins have tried, but that hard-to-hit Fellow keeps popping back up. Worse still are the violent ways of his flock: waging religious warfare, keeping women enslaved, fomenting universal hatreds. Hitchens makes a powerful case for atheism – Politics and Prose

Christopher Hitchens was born in Portsmouth, England and worked in Britain as book reviewer for the Times, and chief foreign correspondent for the Daily Express. After emigrating to the United States in 1981, he wrote the “Minority Report” column for The Nation. Since 1992, he has been columnist and contributing editor at Vanity Fair and, at different times, Washington editor and columnist for Harper’s magazine, American columnist and correspondent for the Spectator, the New Statesman, the Times Literary Supplement, Sunday Today, and the Sunday Correspondent. Hitchens writes regularly for the Atlantic Monthly and Slate, and is the author of God is Not Great, Letters to a Young Contrarian and Why Orwell Matters.

[cft format=0]

Topics

• Hitchens Opening: American Citizenship
• Beginnings of Religion
• N. Korea
• Manmade Falsification
• Child Mutilation
• Crimes Committed in the Name of Faith
• Resistance

Q & A

• Waiting for Armageddon
• Any Good in Religion?
• Origin of Love
• Materialism
• Existence of Jesus
• Spiritual Experience
• Personal Belief System?
• In Defense of Atheism