The Struggle For Acceptance

THE STRUGGLE FOR ACCEPTANCE EMILY A. GATLIN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY 305 DR. RANDALL SMALL 31 MARCH 2009 “The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.” –Albert Einstein, Nobel Prize for Physics in 1921

For the vast majority of my adolescence, all I wanted was to have blonde hair. Growing up as an adopted Asian-American girl in a southern all-Caucasian family, the dream to “fit-in” even within my immediate family was short-lived. My dark hair and dark eyes greatly contrasted my mom’s fair skin, blonde-hair, and green eyes; likewise, my dad’s light-brown hair and blue eyes provided no source of alikeness either. Going to school within Cleveland, TN failed to provide any cultural diversity. I eventually learned to cope with my physical appearance from nature amidst the adopted environment randomly chosen for me. Despite my obvious “different” features, I managed to escape the perils of childhood trauma from being an “outsider.” Shockingly, my blunt openness as a fiveyear-old child about embracing my “differences” allowed me to gain a large enough network of friends to appear “just like everyone else.” However, fifteen-years later, I still find myself constantly attempting to blend-in seamlessly. To my surprise, at 22-years-old, I finally realize that I am not the only one trying to fit-in and my lifelong struggle might just be biology or more specifically, due to the theory of evolution. As humans, we often try to trick ourselves into thinking that evolution is concept in biology, not an important factor within our own lives. However, the desire to “fit-in” itself demonstrates a core evolutionary concept regarding sociality. A key element of sociality is the simple ability “to distinguish group members from nonmembers” (Tsutsui et al. 2003: 1078). For instance, within ant populations, Neil D. Tsutsui, Andrew V. Suarez and Richard K, Grosberg (2003: 1078) discuss how 1|Page

EMILY A. GATLIN

THE STRUGGLE FOR ACCEPTANCE

31 MARCH 2009

the invasion of the Argentine ants into California demonstrate that even small creatures demonstrate the discernment between individuals that belong and do not belong. The “individuals with rare labels should be rejected more often than individuals with common labels; they will also incur the costs associated with rejection [like] energetic costs, injury, or death” (Tsutsui et al. 2003: 1078). Although many might argue, well, humans possess no similarity to ants at all. However, the social framework described within the complex social framework among the ants possesses uncanny parallels to human society. For example, the “phenotypic label” to cue the ants about a possible intruder seems reminiscent of racial relations in the United States.1 Within the U.S., we often ascribe physical attributes to convey a deeper meaning about the individual—from skin color to body type; we use these “labels” to interpret specific data to apply toward massive groups of people. Sadly, cultural examples provide ample data2 showing the human tendency toward violent aggression to the “different” much like the response elicited from the native Californian ants to the Argentinean ants (Tsutsui et al. 2003). Clearly, we are not as far away from the animal world as we presume to believe. Thus, the ingrained desire to be similar to those around us is natural and we still falter under its persuasive power. The desire to conform allows the formation of complex culture through the process of imitated behavior (Poirer & Hussey 1982: 134). These social adaptations allow us to adapt to the multitude of environments that exist around the world. It follows that to understand the development of human complex cultures, first it is necessary to understand the basics behind possible origins of how we learn. Simon M. Reader and Kevin N. Laland (2002:4437) designed an experiment to test if social and asocial learning evolved together or separate by using a computer simulation to map across phylogenic species’ lineages the graphs of “contrasts for tool use frequency vs. contrasts for In particular, the South To save time, I chose not to list the examples of racial injustices in the paper, but some examples are (and NOT limited to African-Americans alone) Civil Rights Era, Jim Crow Laws, Tuskegee syphilis experiment, etc. However, even today within the U.S., the prejudices against ethnicities, sexual orientation, etc continue and still provoke violence, i.e. Matthew Shepherd 1 2

2|Page

EMILY A. GATLIN

THE STRUGGLE FOR ACCEPTANCE

31 MARCH 2009

innovation frequency.” Reader & Laland (2002:4439) reported a positive correlation between the instances of innovation and brain ratio. This implies either that within the primate species, the highly creative individual possesses a selective advantage over their less talented counterparts due to this correlation between technical and social behaviors, or primates merely possess a large brain in order to adapt to the selective pressures differently. Thus, the evolution of the large brain within primates is an adaptation arising from multiple sources of selective factors (Reader & Laland 2002:4440). However, the evolution of the large brain ultimately leads to the development of complex cultures through learning from imitation. The definition for a cultural meme is “an element of culture which can be passed on by imitation” (Higgs 2000: 1355). Children learn to follow elders’ behavior in order to survive within human society. These elders whether genetically related to the child or not, still act as cultural parents to the child and transmit memes (Higgs 2000: 1356). Here, adoptees like me, still completely embrace our adopted parents as cultural sources. Although born in South Korea, U.S. Southern culture is the only culture I know from this type of cultural transmittance. Given my social context, it is easy to see that memes help ensure that the child will gain social acceptance. However, despite the implementation of negative memes, the ability for imitation possesses a much stronger positive effect overall than any potentially negative blindly imitated meme. In contrast, Laureano Castro and Miguel A. Toro (2004: 10235-10236) contend that the origin of complex human cultures also requires the ability to discern between behaviors. Castro & Toro (2004: 10236) argue that primates adapt through learning by imitation through “(1) to discover and to learn a behavior, (2) to test and to evaluate the learned behavior, (3) to reject or to incorporate the behavior into the behavioral repertory.” Imitation allows the discovery of new behaviors without the complete reinvention (Castro & Toro 2004: 10236). Therefore, the human-selection of cultural behaviors allows us to continue the development of our species based on in-situ cultural knowledge.

3|Page

EMILY A. GATLIN

THE STRUGGLE FOR ACCEPTANCE

31 MARCH 2009

According to Mesoudi et al., (2004: 2) culture is “acquired information such as knowledge, beliefs, and values that is inherited through social learning, and expressed in behavior and artifacts.” Upon the construction of a cultural framework, it follows that there is the tendency for culture to try to mold to limit the “different” or “weird” individuals in order to maintain social cohesion. Many studies have looked instances like eyewitness testimony to show the fallibility of humans to discern cultural bias from fact (Mesoudi et al. 2004: 3). In these studies, the human subjects often allowed cultural prejudices to influence their account (Mesoudi et al. 2004: 3). However, it is crucial to realize that variation enables the propagation of the human species as heterogeneous groups “outperform individuals in tasks of problem-solving or decision-making” (Mesoudi et al. 2004: 3). As a result, variation within a population enables selective forces to act upon the variation to produce a more prolific culture (Mesoudi et al. 2004: 3). Thus, the concept of cultural evolution is the idea that culture changes or evolves much like other physical traits—“the selective retention of favorable cultural variants” (Mesoudi, Whiten & Laland, 2004: 2). Many anthropologists and social scientists throughout the years apply this biological theoretical framework to explain culture and its selective impact on humanity. Anthropologist Leslie White viewed culture as the learned behavior developed as an evolutionary adaptation consisting of technological, sociological, ideological and “sentimental or attitudinal” (White 2004/1959a:183) systems. Culture is not an innate quality, but a learned behavior system. It is a “suprabiological character [that]…exists and behaves and is related to man as if it were non-biological in character” (White 2004/1959a:182, emphasis in original) and is hence subjected to natural selection. Humans need “basic energy requirements, to be protected from the elements and defend themselves from enemies” (Moore 2004:184). In accordance to White, selection favors culture due to technological developments allowing an easier procurement of basic needs. As a result, technology defines culture. White explains “culture as an elaborate thermodynamic, mechanical system…[the] functioning determined by the amount of energy harnessed and by the way 4|Page

EMILY A. GATLIN

THE STRUGGLE FOR ACCEPTANCE

31 MARCH 2009

it is put to work” (White 2004/1949:185). The mathematical formula

E T  C if E  Energy,T  Efficiency, C  Cultural Development indicates the direct proportional relationship between cultural complexity and the product of quantity of efficient thermodynamic energy consumed times the technological efficiency (White 2004/1949:186). Thus, the benefit of a big brain within primate is obvious. In summation, White like his predecessor, Edward Tylor who saw “the order of technological change is obvious: one innovation leads to another” (Moore 2004: 13), views progression as vital element to understanding culture. Anthropology grabbed my attention for the past 4-years due to its emphasis on the collective background of all humans. Look at an artifact, archaeologists explain where it is from and how it got there. Discover a random bone, a forensic anthropologist will tell you which side of the body along with age, race, height, etc3. This fascinated me to the core. As an adoptee, I have never known my biological parents. Every doctor visit elicits a secret envy as few people around me put huge question marks along the entire “family history” portion. With that said, the theory of evolution never fails to encapsulate my complete attention. Upon entering college, I realized that the origins of humankind and even animal life served as the “missing link” that I felt was robbed from me through not knowing my own biological history. However, while the biological nature plays a crucial element to many definitive features, I know from experience that it is not everything. Culture influences individuals, and in turn, the evolution of a population. Humans are complex—evolved from both nature and culture. Therefore, as humans, it is crucial that we understand culture as a governing force that affects our lives every day. Despite the fallacies within culture, we are heavily reliant on it. For that reason, we should continue to strive to improve it, build upon it, and add our testament to the cultural history of humankind.

3

Depending on the type of bone found—this clearly does not hold true if it is a single phalanx, for example.

5|Page

EMILY A. GATLIN

THE STRUGGLE FOR ACCEPTANCE

31 MARCH 2009

BIBLIOGRAPHY Beals, K.L. and Kelso, A.J. (1975) 'Genetic Variation and Cultural Evolution', American Anthropologist, vol. 77, no. 3, Septemeber, pp. 566-579. Castro, L. and Toro, M.A. (2004) 'The evolution of culture: From primate social learning to human culture', Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Madrid, Spain, 10235-10240. Chibnik, M. (1981) 'The evolution of cultural rules', Journal of Anthropological Research, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 256-268. Enquist, M., Arak, A., Ghirlanda, S. and Wachtmeister, C.-A. (2002) 'Spectacular Phenomena and Limits to Rationality in Genetic and Cultural Evolution', Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, vol. 357, no. 1427, Ocotober, pp. 1585-1594. Higgs, P.G. (2000) 'The mimetic transition: a simulation study of the evolution of learning by imitation', Proceedings: Biological Sciences, Manchester, UK, 1355-1361. Leimar, O. and Hammerstein, P. (2000) 'Evolution of cooperation through indirect reciprocity', Proceedings: Biological Sciences, Berlin, Germany, 745-753. Mesoudi, A., Whiten, A. and Laland, K.N. (2004) 'Perspective: is human cultural evolution Darwinian? Evidence reviewed from the perspective of Origin of Species', Evolution, vol. 58, no. 1, January, pp. 1-11. Moore, J.D. (2004) 'Leslie White: Evolution Emergent', in Moore, J.D. Visions of Culture: An Introduction to Anthropological Theories & Theorists, 2nd edition, Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press. Poirer, F.E. and Hussey, L.K. (1982) 'Nonhuman primate learning: the importance of learning from an evolutionary perspective', Anthropology & Education Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 2, Summer, pp. 133-148. Reader, S.M. and Laland, K.N. (2002) 'Social intelligence, innovation, and enhanced brain size in primates', Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Cambridge, UK, 4436-4441. Tsutsui, N.D., Suarez, A.V. and Grosbery, R.K. (2003) 'Genetic diversity, asymmetrical aggression, and recognition in a widespread invasive species', Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Berkeley, CA, 1078-1083.

6|Page