I encourage you to keep this also. To comment on the biology of mammals and group interactions I will try to keep it simple.
Many mammalian species do live in groups (some are referred to as herds), and there are some evolutionary reasons for sometimes enacting a herd-like mentality. An example would be: a herd of wildebeasts in Africa are grazing in a field, one of them sensing the presence of a predator and begins to run, so the rest of the herd follows. This could keep more of them alive in the long run, because it only takes one of them to realize a present danger to get the whole herd moving. It would be a lot more likely that predators would kill many more of them if they all just stood there til each one realized the danger personally. This is simply a survival mechanism. All animals have a vested interest in survival and ultimately reproduction. Humans will react similarly in situations where survival is threatened. However, there are mammals that do not follow this group lifestyle. An example would be of a leopard. These are solitary mammals and only really interact with each other for mating purposes and territory defense. This may be partly due to their carnivous eating habits. Catching prey is much more difficult that grazing on sedentary plantlife. It may be evolutionarily advantageous for these cats to have their own territory to hunt on and keep claims on food sources separate. This in combination with occassional mating can ensure that the leopard continues on through reproduction and ultimating through their offsrping’s survival.
All sexually reproducing animals are going to have some sort of social structure because you need the opportunity to mate if you are going to have your species continue to exist. Humans are slightly more complex because of their awareness of their existence and ability to contemplate that. I personally think you see a increase in the herd mentality when there is danger or lack of intelligence in humans. This is just a personal observation, which I cannot back up with research at this moment (I’d have to look, if there is even any): The bigger a population gets (of a species) the bigger the percentage of not so great genetics will exist. Some of these will inevitably never make it because of critical physiological issues, but having subaverage intelligence will not hurt you too much when you live in a huge society that can “protect” you. You still see deaths, which are usually brought on by stupid actions (and then posted on the internet somewhere, haha). My definition of stupid actions is simply making decisions withou the appropriate risk assessment of th situation. This means you can take risk, but only if you assess the risks in a meaningful way. These people are the ones that are the most suceptible to the herd mentality in all aspects of their lives and not just in situations of danger. The do not retain the adequate mental capabilities to make decisions on their own and look to a group for guidance. These people can be created from genetics, environmental factors, or a combination of both.
Humans are however very capable of critical thought and could survive on their own without group input if necessary. They have a little bit of both the wildebeast and the leopard mentality in them. This balance is what I think does affect successful survival. Humans do need to have a strong social network for several reasons including reproductive opportunities and in my opinion, just so they don’t drive themselves crazy (this is particular to humans and their development of cultures and other brain driven activities). They also need solitary time for several reaons including reflection and inegration of outside stimuli, which they will then make inferences about when applicable.
The main thing to remember is that there isn’t a single thing that any living organism does that doesn’t influence its fitness (ability to survive and procreate successfully, meaning offspring survive) at one point or another. I always try to look at things as if there was an endpoint to the behavior or action. What is it accomplishing in reference to survival? Is it overall beneficial to survival or detrimental and what other factors may influence this outcome?
This long winded statement is sadly, a very simplistic overview of natural selection and basic evolutionary concepts. If you ever want to know more or have a question to pose feel free to bug me with one. It is like you said, rarely are things as simple as balck and white. There are always multiple angles of a situation. Evolution and living organisms are no different.
I encourage you to keep this also. To comment on the biology of mammals and group interactions I will try to keep it simple.
Many mammalian species do live in groups (some are referred to as herds), and there are some evolutionary reasons for sometimes enacting a herd-like mentality. An example would be: a herd of wildebeasts in Africa are grazing in a field, one of them sensing the presence of a predator and begins to run, so the rest of the herd follows. This could keep more of them alive in the long run, because it only takes one of them to realize a present danger to get the whole herd moving. It would be a lot more likely that predators would kill many more of them if they all just stood there til each one realized the danger personally. This is simply a survival mechanism. All animals have a vested interest in survival and ultimately reproduction. Humans will react similarly in situations where survival is threatened. However, there are mammals that do not follow this group lifestyle. An example would be of a leopard. These are solitary mammals and only really interact with each other for mating purposes and territory defense. This may be partly due to their carnivous eating habits. Catching prey is much more difficult that grazing on sedentary plantlife. It may be evolutionarily advantageous for these cats to have their own territory to hunt on and keep claims on food sources separate. This in combination with occassional mating can ensure that the leopard continues on through reproduction and ultimating through their offsrping’s survival.
All sexually reproducing animals are going to have some sort of social structure because you need the opportunity to mate if you are going to have your species continue to exist. Humans are slightly more complex because of their awareness of their existence and ability to contemplate that. I personally think you see a increase in the herd mentality when there is danger or lack of intelligence in humans. This is just a personal observation, which I cannot back up with research at this moment (I’d have to look, if there is even any): The bigger a population gets (of a species) the bigger the percentage of not so great genetics will exist. Some of these will inevitably never make it because of critical physiological issues, but having subaverage intelligence will not hurt you too much when you live in a huge society that can “protect” you. You still see deaths, which are usually brought on by stupid actions (and then posted on the internet somewhere, haha). My definition of stupid actions is simply making decisions withou the appropriate risk assessment of th situation. This means you can take risk, but only if you assess the risks in a meaningful way. These people are the ones that are the most suceptible to the herd mentality in all aspects of their lives and not just in situations of danger. The do not retain the adequate mental capabilities to make decisions on their own and look to a group for guidance. These people can be created from genetics, environmental factors, or a combination of both.
Humans are however very capable of critical thought and could survive on their own without group input if necessary. They have a little bit of both the wildebeast and the leopard mentality in them. This balance is what I think does affect successful survival. Humans do need to have a strong social network for several reasons including reproductive opportunities and in my opinion, just so they don’t drive themselves crazy (this is particular to humans and their development of cultures and other brain driven activities). They also need solitary time for several reaons including reflection and inegration of outside stimuli, which they will then make inferences about when applicable.
The main thing to remember is that there isn’t a single thing that any living organism does that doesn’t influence its fitness (ability to survive and procreate successfully, meaning offspring survive) at one point or another. I always try to look at things as if there was an endpoint to the behavior or action. What is it accomplishing in reference to survival? Is it overall beneficial to survival or detrimental and what other factors may influence this outcome?
This long winded statement is sadly, a very simplistic overview of natural selection and basic evolutionary concepts. If you ever want to know more or have a question to pose feel free to bug me with one. It is like you said, rarely are things as simple as balck and white. There are always multiple angles of a situation. Evolution and living organisms are no different.
By: Jennifer on October 14, 2009
at 11:12 pm