Showing posts with label Psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Psychology. Show all posts

Tuesday, 4 February 2025

Refuting Creationism - How Bonobos Help Us Find Something When They Know We Don't Know Where It Is


Nyota
Image: Ape Initiative
Don't know something? Apes can tell | Hub

The thing about Creationists is that, whilst they can't make testable predictions and their claims are non-falsifiable, they nevertheless make claims, based not on what the evidence shows, but on what they would like to be true to be as important as they like to imagine they are.

For example, they claim that there are certain features of humans that distinguish us from all the other species (ignoring that all species have unique features, which is what makes them distinct species). Most of these claims will be about our intelligence, social interactions and ethics and our artistic and aesthetic abilities.

Curiously, because they reject the idea that our ability to empathise is the basis of our social ethics, preferring to claim they get their morals from their god because that makes them feel superior to people with a different religion or none, they nevertheless will assert that compassion is one of those uniquely human characteristics that sets us apart from the other animals, so is evidence of our special creation by a magic creator who created everything just for us.

But like so many of their claims, this one turns out to be not only not unique to humans but evidence of common ancestry with the other apes - in this case bonobos, our closest relative. Bonobos have the ability to realise when there is something we don't know and to understand when we need to be educated - something that psychologists beleved was a uniquely human ability.

What information do you have concerning bonobos and their ability to empathise? Bonobos (Pan paniscus) are known for their remarkable capacity for empathy, which has been widely studied by primatologists and psychologists. Their social behaviour demonstrates strong emotional intelligence, cooperation, and conflict resolution skills, making them one of the most empathetic of non-human animals.

Key Evidence for Bonobo Empathy
  1. Consolation Behaviour
    • Bonobos console distressed individuals by embracing, touching, and grooming them. Studies, such as those by Frans de Waal and Zanna Clay, show that bonobos, especially juveniles, frequently comfort upset group members.
    • Unlike some other primates, bonobos will console unrelated individuals, suggesting a form of empathy that extends beyond kinship or direct social bonds.
  2. Yawn Contagion
    • Bonobos exhibit contagious yawning, particularly when observing familiar individuals yawn. This behaviour is thought to reflect an ability to emotionally resonate with others. Studies indicate that the stronger the social bond, the more likely an individual is to "catch" a yawn.
  3. Altruism and Helping Behaviour
    • Bonobos display spontaneous helping behaviour, even in non-reciprocal situations. Research has shown that they will help strangers obtain food without expecting immediate rewards.
    • Experiments at Lola ya Bonobo sanctuary demonstrated that bonobos would unselfishly share food with unfamiliar individuals rather than hoarding it.
  4. Cooperative Problem Solving
    • In contrast to chimpanzees, who often engage in competitive strategies, bonobos are more likely to cooperate when solving tasks. Studies show they work together harmoniously to retrieve food, even when dominant individuals could monopolize resources.
  5. Emotional Sensitivity and Social Bonds
    • Bonobos are highly sensitive to emotional cues in their group members. Their facial expressions, vocalizations, and body language communicate distress, pleasure, or reassurance.
    • They engage in socio-sexual behaviours (such as genital rubbing) to diffuse tension and maintain social harmony, which may be an expression of empathetic bonding.
Comparisons with Other Primates
  • While chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) also display some empathy, their social structure is more hierarchical and aggressive, often limiting empathetic behaviours to kin or allies.
  • Bonobos, in contrast, live in matriarchal societies where social bonds are maintained through affection and non-aggressive conflict resolution, reinforcing their empathetic tendencies.
Neuroscientific Basis
  • Studies of bonobo brains suggest that their limbic system (including the amygdala and anterior cingulate cortex) is more developed than in chimpanzees, which may enhance their capacity for emotional processing and empathy.
Conclusion
Bonobos are among the most empathetic primates, capable of understanding and responding to the emotions of others. Their ability to console, cooperate, and help even strangers suggests a deep-rooted evolutionary foundation for empathy, which may shed light on the development of human social emotions.
This was demonstrated by two researchers with Johns Hopkins University's Social and Cognitive Origins Group, published yesterday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Don't know something? Apes can tell
To get treats, apes eagerly pointed them out to humans who didn't know where they were, a seemingly simple experiment that demonstrated for the first time that apes will communicate unknown information in the name of teamwork. The study also provides the clearest evidence to date that apes can intuit another's ignorance, an ability thought to be uniquely human.
Key Takeaways
  • Apes can intuit another’s ignorance, an ability thought to be uniquely human.
  • When apes know their partners are ignorant, they will point them toward missing information.

The ability to sense gaps in one another's knowledge is at the heart of our most sophisticated social behaviors, central to the ways we cooperate, communicate, and work together strategically. Because this so-called theory of mind supports many of the capacities that make humans unique, like teaching and language, many believe it is absent from animals. But this work demonstrates the rich mental foundations that humans and other apes share—and suggests that these abilities evolved millions of years ago in our common ancestors.

Professor Christopher Krupenye, co-author Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.


Krupenye and co-author Luke Townrow, a Johns Hopkins PhD student, worked with three male bonobos—Nyota, 25; Kanzi, 43; and Teco, 13, all living at Ape Initiative, a research and education nonprofit. During the experiment one of the bonobos would sit with Townrow, facing each other across a table, the ape on the other side of metal gate. The bonobo would watch as a second person placed a treat, a grape or a Cheerio, under one of three cups. Sometimes Townrow could see where the treat was going, sometimes he couldn't. The bonobo could have the treat if Townrow could find it.

Whether or not Townrow saw where the treat was hidden, he'd say, "Where's the grape?" and then wait 10 seconds. If he'd seen the treat being hidden, during the 10 seconds the ape would usually sit still and wait for the treat. But when Townrow hadn't seen where the treat was hidden, the ape would quickly point to the right cup—sometimes quite demonstratively.

Their fingers would point right through the mesh—it was clear what they were trying to communicate. One, Kanzi, who was very food motivated, would point repeatedly in certain phases of the experiment—he'd tap several times to get our attention and was quite insistent about it.

We predicted that if apes are really tracking ignorance, when their partners lacked knowledge they would be pointing more often and more quickly and that's exactly what they did. The results also suggest apes can simultaneously hold two conflicting world views in their mind. They know exactly where the food is, and at the same time, they know that their partner's view of the same situation is missing that information.

Professor Christopher Krupenye.
The work is the first to replicate in a controlled setting similar findings from the wild that suggest chimpanzees will vocalize to warn groupmates ignorant to potential threats, such as a snake.

The team was thrilled to further confirm apes' mental sophistication.

There are debates in the field about the capabilities of primates, and for us it was exciting to confirm that they really do have these rich capacities that some people have denied them.

Professor Christopher Krupenye.

What we've shown here is that apes will communicate with a partner to change their behavior, but a key open question for further research is whether apes are also pointing to change their partner's mental state or their beliefs.

Luke A. Townrow, first author. Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

This work demonstrates the rich mental foundations that humans and other apes share—and suggests that these abilities evolved millions of years ago in our common ancestors.

Professor Christopher Krupenye.

Next the team will work to more deeply explore the apes' motivations and how they think about other individuals' minds.

Abstract
Numerous uniquely human phenomena, from teaching to our most complex forms of cooperation, depend on our ability to tailor our communication to the knowledge and ignorance states of our social partners. Despite four decades of research into the “theory of mind” capacities of nonhuman primates, there remains no evidence that primates can communicate on the basis of their mental state attributions, to enable feats of coordination. Moreover, recent reevaluation of the experimental literature has questioned whether primates can represent others’ ignorance at all. The present preregistered study investigated whether bonobos are capable of attributing knowledge or ignorance about the location of a hidden food reward to a cooperative human partner, and utilizing this attribution to modify their communicative behavior in the service of coordination. Bonobos could receive a reward that they had watched being hidden under one of several cups, if their human partner could locate the reward. If bonobos can represent a partner’s ignorance and are motivated to communicate based on this mental state attribution, they should point more frequently, and more quickly, to the hidden food’s location when their partner is ignorant about that location than when he is knowledgeable. Bonobos indeed flexibly adapted the frequency and speed of their communication to their partner’s mental state. These findings suggest that apes can represent (and act on) others’ ignorance in some form, strategically and appropriately communicating to effectively coordinate with an ignorant partner and change his behavior.

A growing body of work suggests that monkeys and apes share with humans rich precursors of theory of mind, the ability to infer the mental states that guide others’ actions (13). However, major debates concern what distinguishes human theory of mind in terms of both its functions and its underlying representations. Regarding function, various scholars have argued for decades that what makes humans special is a remarkable propensity for cooperation and that the underlying mechanism is a unique capacity to harness theory of mind to communicate in service of coordination (4). For example, we readily adapt our communication to the knowledge and ignorance states of our partners to change their mental states (5), and behavior, and enable cooperative acquisition of goals. While no research has addressed this ability in nonhuman great apes, two studies shed light on its precursors. First, Grueneisen et al. (6) found that chimpanzees and bonobos can facilitate coordination by adjusting the visibility of their actions for a cooperative partner relative to a competitive one, though their task did not involve communication or experimentally isolate theory of mind. Second, Crockford et al. (7) found that wild chimpanzees may be able to communicate based on a recipient’s mental state: Chimpanzees produced more warning vocalizations in the presence of groupmates who were ignorant about a nearby snake, compared to those who were knowledgeable. However, experiments in controlled and nonthreatening settings are needed to eliminate alternative explanations (e.g., that chimpanzees simply responded to others’ behavior, or were driven by arousal) and to clarify whether this capacity can be deployed flexibly in other contexts and via other communicative modalities. Paradigms with greater control are also essential for isolating the particular cues subjects are sensitive to and constraining the hypotheses about the underlying mechanisms driving this pattern of communication, especially following contradictory findings in captivity (8).

Regarding the underlying representations, a reevaluation of the literature has compellingly shown that controlled studies testing primates’ capacity to represent others’ knowledge or ignorance could be explained by attributing only knowledge-like states called awareness relations (9). This is because past paradigms make positive predictions only about how subjects should act if they have attributed knowledge (e.g., avoid food known to a competitor) but not ignorance (i.e., refs. 1, 3, and 1012). Thus, no controlled studies have directly tested for primates’ capacity to represent others’ ignorance. One central prediction that distinguishes ignorance representation from deflationary accounts is that only primates who can represent others’ ignorance should be able to act on those representations, for example, through communication.

To clarify the unique functions and representations underlying human theory of mind, we tested whether our closest relatives, bonobos (Pan paniscus), can identify a partner’s ignorance and adapt communication to enable coordination. In a highly controlled preregistered study, captive bonobos could point and remedy a partner’s ignorance. Bonobos could receive a reward that they had watched being hidden under one of several cups, if their human partner could locate the reward. If bonobos can represent a partner’s ignorance and are motivated to communicate based on this mental state attribution, they should point more frequently, and more quickly, to the hidden food’s location when their partner is ignorant about that location than when he is knowledgeable.

Once again, something proclaimed by creationists as proof of the special creation of humans turns out to be evidence for our common ancestry with the other African apes. This is how you can tell that creationists claims are not based on evidence so are not worth paying attention to.

Saturday, 30 December 2023

Creationism in Crisis - Tears Evolved To Manipulate The Behaviour Of Men, So Where Is The Free Will


Sniffing women’s' tears reduces aggression in men.
Tears without Fears: Sniffing Women’s Tears Reduces Aggression in Men | Weizmann USA

Research by Israeli scientists has shown that sniffing tears can reduce male aggression by almost 44% by lowering the level of testosterone.

The problem for Christianity here is that the entire rationale for the religion is that human free will allowed the mythical founder couple, who were magically created without ancestors, to choose to disobey their magic creator in the so-called 'Fall'.

Because the magic, omnipotent creator has never managed to get over this exercise of the free will it gave them, we need Jesus (the magic creator personified) to help him forgive us, because he had himself sacrificed in a blood sacrifice that everyone knows satiates irascible gods, especially when it's them being sacrificed. (I'm not making this up! Just ask any Christian who Jesus was and what he was born for.)

But, if behaviour is mediated by physiology in the form of hormones and if the levels of those hormones can be mediated by external influences, then external influences can modify behaviour, so where does that leave the notion of free will?

Obviously, the authors of that tale in the Bible knew nothing of hormones and pheromones and how they can modify and influence behaviour.

The research is explained in a press release from the American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science:

Monday, 20 November 2023

Superstition News - Why Religions Are Mass Superstitions


Aztec human sacrifice ritual
(cf. the Christian blood sacrifice, or crucifixion)
3 Reasons Why Superstitions Work | Psychology Today

In an article in Psychology Today, as part of a series on magical thinking, American psychologist, Dr Mark Travers, PhD, explains why people are superstitious. It's clear from his explanations that religions perfectly fit the definition of superstition and the reasons people are superstitious also explains why people are religious.

I've précised his article below and added my own commentary to show how his definition and explanation of superstition fits the definition of religion and explains religious rituals.

Key points:
  • There are deep psychological reasons why many people engage in superstitions.
  • Superstitions can give people a sense of control or comfort.
  • They can also serve as personalized coping mechanisms.

First, his definition of superstition:
Superstition is the belief in supernatural causality, where certain actions, objects, or rituals are believed to bring about specific outcomes, whether good or bad. While some may dismiss superstitions as irrational, there are deep psychological reasons why many engage in such beliefs. The enduring allure of superstitions transcends time and culture, offering insights into our desire for control and order in a chaotic world.

Friday, 27 October 2023

Creationism in Crisis - Pigeons Can Solve Complex Problems More Quickly Than Humans


‘Dim-witted’ pigeons use the same principles as AI to solve tasks
The feral pigeon, Columba livia domestica. Dimwit or genius?
In yet another casual and unintentional refutation of creationist dogma, two psychology professors, one from Ohio State University and the other from the University of Iowa, have shown that humans were not created as the species with the highest intelligence, which creationists argue shows we were specially created, different to the other animals.

The researchers have shown that pigeons can solve complex problems that would be difficult for humans because pigeons use the same principles as artificial intelligence to crunch through the available options. The difference being that unlike humans who can extrapolate from solving one problem to general problem-solving similar problem, pigeons don't extrapolate from the particular to the general.

It appears then that the natural process of evolution produced a form of AI, long before humans developed machine learning and AI.

As explained in an Ohio State University news release by Jeff Grabmeier:

Friday, 6 October 2023

Creationism in Crisis - More Evidence of The Positive Psychological Benefits of Awe-Inspiring Science - No Religion Required


Awe-inspiring science can have a positive effect on mental wellbeing, new research finds - Press Releases

Creationists and other religious fundamentalists claim a monopoly on 'spirituality', for example this article on a Jehovah's Witness (aka, liars for Jesus) website which claims you can't be spiritual without believing in their god.

Unbelievably, they cite the Bible in support of that claim, not any real-world observations, experiments or surveys.

However, many scientists, not the least of which are Richard Dawkins, Albert Einstein and Carl Sagan, cite an understanding of science as a source of deep spirituality, a sense of awe and wonder, of oneness with the world and a genuine perspective and appreciation of being alive.

Indeed, my book, What Makes You So Special: From the Big Bang to You is intended to give the reader this sense of awe and wonder from a basic understanding of the scientific processes that led from the Big Bang to the reader's existence here and now, and concludes with the following:
Your journey through space and time has been an adventure of disasters, adaptation, survival and recovery, many, many times you will have been on the brink of extinction - the fate of 99% of all known ancient species - yet your ancestors survived and because they were good at surviving you are here and now. You will live for a mere flash in the time-scale of the Universe but in the vast darkness of the cosmos there can surely be few flashes as bright as your bright spark of consciousness.

Be proud. Be very proud. But at the same time be humbled by the enormity of the events which produced you and the fragility of it all.

Stars died and because they died, you live. You are made by stars out of stardust and in a very real sense; because you are made of the same stuff the Universe is made of and are a part of it, there is something even more wonderful about you. Through you, though not just through you, and maybe not just here on this small planet, the Universe has gained self–awareness and can begin to understand itself.

Through you it can stand on the surface of this beautiful little jewel in the cosmos, can look up in awe at itself and think "Wow!"

You are special. You are unique and you were nearly 14 billion years in the making.

That is your story. Enjoy it while it lasts.

And perhaps Carl Sagan said it better and more succinctly with:
When we recognize our place in an immensity of light years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual.

And of course, as Albert Einstein famously said in a letter to J. Dispentier, when refuting false claims that he was a theist or even a Christian:
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
Albert Einstein. Letter to J. Dispentiere, March 24, 1954 Source: Wikipedia - Albert Einstein's Religious Views.
And now we have experimental evidence from psychologists that science can be a source of spiritual experience, with all the psychological benefits, as some people claim religion to be. The paper, reporting on three linked studies, by researchers at the Department of Psychology at the University of Warwick, UK, is published open access in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, and is explained in a Warwick University press release:

Wednesday, 24 May 2023

Creationism in Crisis - The Beginnings of Empathy May Have Evolved in a Dinosaur!

Creationism in Crisis

The Beginnings of Empathy May Have Evolved in a Dinosaur!
Photo: Michael Rosskothen/MostPhotos

Artists impression of an early feathered theropod dinosaur

Credit: Daniel Eskridge Getty Images
Dinosaurs were the first to take the perspectives of others | Lund University

More evidence today that creationism is a fallacy. Scientists at Lund University, Sweden, have shown that what creationists proclaim to be the unique ability of humans, thus proving special design by their putative designer god - the ability to empathise - may have its origins, not even in ancestral mammals, but in common ancestors of both mammals and birds, i.e., dinosaurs.

Creationists normally get themselves in a terrible muddle over empathy, preferring to ignore it as an evolved source of morality in favour of their supposedly God-given morals, and yet their holy book, in which they claim their designer god wrote down these morals includes an assumption that empathy is a human trait.
So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Matthew 7:12


Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Luke 6:31
But creationists, while arguing that humans have this unique ability, argue that they, like a sociopath, can't work out how their actions might affect others, so need a handbook to look it up in.

The evidence that this trait first arose in a common ancestor of birds and mammals comes in the form of a paper in Science Advances by three researchers from Lund University, Sweden.

A Lund University press release explains the research:

Friday, 7 April 2023

Creationism in Crisis - How Elephants Are Helping Us Understand Human Evolution

Creationism in Crisis

How Elephants Are Helping Us Understand Human Evolution
Creationism in Crisis

How Elephants Are Helping Us Understand Human Evolution
Creationism in Crisis

How Elephants Are Helping Us Understand Human Evolution
Creationism in Crisis

How Elephants Are Helping Us Understand Human Evolution
Creationism in Crisis

How Elephants Are Helping Us Understand Human Evolution

Elephants as a new model for understanding human evolution | Max Planck Institute

More very bad news for Creationists today. It comes in the form of a paper which depends on the Theory of Evolution by Natural selection to explain not only our own social evolution but why behaviour such as empathy, concern for the welfare of others, and ability to communicate are not the uniquely human characteristics Creationists claim them to be, as evidence of our special creation by a magic creator.

I've recently written about 'Domestication Syndrome' , how it can be seen in several of our domesticated animals, and how it probably played a part in our own evolution by a process of self-domestication.

Now a group of researchers led by Limor Ravi of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, have found that elephants also appear to have self-domesticated and have proposed that they could form a model for understanding how prosocial behaviour evolved.
Domestication Syndrome refers to a suite of physical and behavioral changes observed in domesticated animals as a result of artificial selection by humans. These changes can include reduced brain size, smaller teeth and jaws, reduced aggressiveness, and changes in coat color and texture.

The concept of Domestication Syndrome was first proposed by Russian geneticist Dmitri Belyaev in the mid-20th century. Belyaev conducted an experiment in which he selectively bred silver foxes for tameness, based on their willingness to approach humans without showing fear or aggression. Over several generations, the foxes developed a range of physical and behavioral changes that resembled those seen in domesticated dogs, including floppy ears, curly tails, and a greater tolerance for human interaction.

Since then, studies have shown that similar changes occur in many other domesticated species, including dogs, cats, pigs, cattle, and chickens. These changes are thought to result from a combination of genetic and environmental factors, with genetic changes driving physical traits and behavioral changes resulting from the animals' exposure to human environments.

References:
  • Trut, L. N. (1999). Early canid domestication: The farm-fox experiment. American Scientist, 87(2), 160-169.
  • Wilkins, A. S. (2014). Wrangling over domestication syndrome. BioScience, 64(11), 1021-1028.
  • Driscoll, C. A., Macdonald, D. W., & O'Brien, S. J. (2009). From wild animals to domestic pets, an evolutionary view of domestication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(Supplement 1), 9971-9978.

ChatGPT. (2023, April 6). Tell me about "Domestication Syndrome", with references, please.
Retrieved from https://chat.openai.com/chat

The process of self-domestication refers to the theory that humans have undergone a form of self-domestication over the course of our evolutionary history, in which we have become more cooperative, less aggressive, and more tolerant of each other. This process is thought to have led to the development of complex social structures and the ability to work together to achieve common goals.

One of the key researchers in this area is Richard Wrangham, a biological anthropologist at Harvard University. Wrangham has argued that the process of self-domestication in humans was driven by the selection for less aggressive and more cooperative individuals. This selection was likely driven by a number of factors, including the need to work together to secure food and defend against predators, as well as the benefits of cooperation in social groups.

Other researchers have supported the idea of self-domestication in humans, and have proposed various genetic and neurological mechanisms to explain the process. For example, some researchers have suggested that self-domestication may have been driven by changes in genes associated with the regulation of the neurotransmitter serotonin, which is involved in regulating mood, social behavior, and aggression.

References:
  • Hare, B., & Wrangham, R. W. (2017). The self-domestication hypothesis: Evolution of bonobo psychology is due to selection against aggression. Animal Behavior and Cognition, 4(3), 307-318.
  • Jensen, P. (2010). The self-domestication hypothesis: evolution of humane behavior. Current Zoology, 56(3), 338-346.
  • Wrangham, R. W. (2018). Two types of self-domestication, and what they tell us about humanity. Current Anthropology, 59(2), 151-162.
  • Wrangham, R. W. (2018). How cooking made us human. In H. LeVine (Ed.), Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology (pp. 139-156). Wiley.

ChatGPT. (2023, April 7). Tell me more about the process of self-domestication, with references, please.
Retrieved from https://chat.openai.com/chat
'Domestication syndrome' includes behaviour that is less aggressive and more prosocial, such as playfulness and other behaviour which encourages group cohesion. Limor Raviv's team which included researchers from the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA, the University at Buffalo The State University of New York (SUNY), Buffalo, NY, USA and The University of Seville, Seville, Spain, have identified elephants as another species, in addition to humans and bonobos that have self-domesticated in their evolutionary history and so show evidence of 'domestication syndrome'.

They therefore conclude that elephants may be a model species for the study of the evolution of prosociality.

As the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics news release explains:

Wednesday, 5 April 2023

Creationism in Crisis - Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have So Much in Common

Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus
Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus
Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus
Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus
Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus
Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus
Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus
Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus
Creationism in Crisis

Evolution Explains Why Humans, Chimpanzees and Bonobos Have Much in Common
Bonobo, Pan paniscus

Bonobos and chimps: what our closest relatives tell us about humans

Common chimpanzee, <i>Pan troglodytes</i>
Common chimpanzee, Pan troglodytes
Evolution not only explains why humans share 98.7% of our DNA with chimpanzees and bonobos, it also explains why so much of our basic culture has its counterpart in those two species, and why so much of what we once wrongly thought was unique to our species is to be found in those species too.

For example, we were once believed to be the only species able to construct and use tools, or devise solutions to problems, but chimpanzees, as well as many other unrelated species) are capable of those things too; we once thought we were the only ape that routinely gathered food then shared it with others, but bonobos do that too. Bonobos even offer food to strangers in a form of hospitality that has its counterpart in the way we offer food and drink to visitors in our homes. Captive bonobos have been shown to prefer to share their food with another bonobo who has none, than to eat alone.

Saturday, 14 January 2023

Trumpanzee News - What Causes People to Fall For Conspiracy Theories?

Bullying, power and control: why people believe in conspiracy theories and how to respond
QAnon conspiracists in the failed insurrection
A supporter of President Donald Trump, seen wearing a QAnon shirt, is confronted by Capitol Police officers outside the Senate Chamber during the invasion of the U.S. Capitol
Credit: AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta
It's probably hard for rationl people to understand why some people fall for such ludicrous conspiracy theories as the QAnon hoax that Donald Trump was fighting the Satanic cannibalistic paedophile ring led by Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama that is secretly running the 'deep state', or that the 2020 election was stolen (apparently without leaving a trace of evidence that would stand up in court). The same fruit loops have also been convinced that the odious liar, crook, serial adulterer, and incompetent narcissist, Trump was send by God to fight Satan and that God had told various self-appointed 'prophets' that Trump would win by a landslide in 2020, so he must have done really.

As it became more and more apparent just how badly Trump lost, being the only presidential candidate in American political history to lose the popular vote twice and that Joe Biden had won it by a record margin, so the conspiracy theories became more and more lurid.

So why do some credulous fools fall for these unlikely theories, usually involving vast secret conspiracies such as the entire scientific community together with all their technical and administrative staff and everyone involved in publishing scientific books, periodicals and papers, or senior military leaders and heads of government of even hostile states, together with their advisors and civil service?

In the following article, reprinted from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license, Daniel Jolley, Assistant Professor in Social Psychology, University of Nottingham, UK and Anthony, Lantian, Associate Professor in Psychology, Université Paris Nanterre – Université Paris Lumières, France, explain the psychology and the social causes of this gullibility and readiness to believe the patently absurd. The article, the original of which can be read here, is reformatted for stylistic consistence.

Tuesday, 30 August 2022

Donald Trump's Narcisistic Personality Disorder Should Disqualify Him from Public Office

Is narcissism a mental health problem? And can you really diagnose it online?

There are very real fears in the civilised world that Donald Trump could stand and even win again in 2024. The fear is that his behaviour is dangerously unpredictable because he is given to bouts of paranoid anger and a desire for revenge for imagined wrongs, or even for failure to acknowledge his expertise on everything.

He is psychologically incapable of accepting that he isn't the best at everything and that there really are people who know more than he does and understand things better than he does, and whose advise he should be listening to.

This manifested early on in his presidency when he obsessively undid everything his predecessor, Barak Obama, had achieved, including the measures to combat climate change, the 'nuclear' deal with Iran, the Affordable Care Act, the disastrous dismantling of the provisions for a possible pandemic, and later, in his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. He not only rejected the advice of the scientists but launched a campaign of abuse and vilification of those who tried to give him advice on the handling of it because it wasn’t the advice he wanted. Instead, he encourages the view that the virus was a hoax and not very serious, as he advocated untried and dangerous quack medicine he had heard about from far-right fruitloop sources, and even suggested drinking bleach to kill the virus.
But is that a symptom of an all-controlling narcissistic personality disorder?

According to the symptoms of narcissism described in this article by Paula Ross, a psychology lecturer at the Australian Catholic University and Nicole Lee, a professor at the National Drug Research Institute (Melbourne), Curtin University, Australia, he might well have. The article is reproduced here under a Creative Commons license and has been reformatted for stylistic consistency. The original can be read here.

Is narcissism a mental health problem? And can you really diagnose it online?


Paula Ross, Australian Catholic University and Nicole Lee, Curtin University

It’s not uncommon these days to hear someone – such as an ex romantic partner or a politician – described as a “narcissist”.

Singer Robbie Williams recently told an interviewer he took an online test to see if he was one. He revealed the test suggested a “mild indication of narcissistic personality disorder”.

But what is narcissism, when is it a problem and can an online test really provide a reliable diagnosis?

A fixation on oneself

According to the Greek myth, a beautiful young man called Narcissus fell in love with his own reflection in a pool of water. He stayed staring at it for the rest of his life. His name gave rise to the term “narcissism”, characterised by a fixation on oneself.

Narcissism is a cluster of traits along a range of severity. At one end of the spectrum, people may be confident, charming and well-adapted.

In the middle of the spectrum, people may be overly focused on seeking out status, success and admiration at work or in their social lives. They can have a need to appear perfect, special or superior to others in order to feel OK about themselves.

At the very extreme end, it may become a disorder in which people can be self-centred, grandiose and destructive.

painting of young man looking at his own reflection
Narcissus as painted by the Italian Baroque master Caravaggio, circa 1597–1599.
Source: Wikiart

Read more:
Narcissists: there's more than one type – and our research reveals what makes each tick

What’s ‘narcissistic personality disorder’?

“Narcissistic personality disorder” is a mental health diagnosis given to people with extremely narcissistic traits. These traits have reached the point where they start to impact on the person’s ability to function at work or socially.

Narcissistic personality disorder is relatively rare. It is estimated around 1% of the population has a diagnosable form of the condition.

Men tend to be more narcissistic than women. There is no evidence that young people are more narcissistic than previous generations at the same age.

Their symptoms are described as “pervasive”, meaning they are obvious across all of a person’s activities, not just in specific situations. So, on the face of it, pop star Robbie William’s insistence his score on the quiz reflected only his narcissistic personality on stage is not quite accurate.

People with narcissistic personality disorder tend to overestimate their abilities and exaggerate their achievements. And they are surprised or angry when others don’t notice their accomplishments.

They need constant confirmation of their value, specialness or importance. They may have fantasies about power, success, having perfect lives or relationships, believing these are not only achievable but deserved.
Specialness by association

People with narcissistic personality disorder might talk a lot about how people in their lives are extra special in some way – such as being the very best at something or leaders in a particular field – because it increases their own sense of specialness by association.

When their status or superiority is challenged they can respond with extreme anger, rage or belittling the person and their opinion. They find it difficult to tolerate the thought they may be flawed or vulnerable in some way.

In relationships, they can have exceedingly high expectations of devotion from partners and friends, but may themselves be low in empathy and lack of awareness of others’ needs. They may be envious of and unable to celebrate the success of others, and respond by devaluing them.

They are often unaware of the impact of their behaviours on others.

Read more:
'Impulsive psychopaths like crypto': research shows how 'dark' personality traits affect Bitcoin enthusiasm

How is it diagnosed?

Diagnosis should only be made by a mental health professional. Trying to diagnose yourself or someone else with an online quiz may give you results that are misleading and unhelpful.

Narcissistic personality disorder is a cluster of symptoms on a continuum and many diagnoses share similar symptoms. For a proper diagnosis, a clinician needs to assess which cluster of symptoms is present, how far along the continuum they are, and which other diagnoses to exclude.

But a symptom checklist might help you work out whether you should consider seeing a mental health professional for further assessment or support.

person holds phone with break up messages
People with extreme narcissism can be demanding and destructive.
Credit:Pexels, CC BY


Read more:
Before you judge personality tests, consider what they don't judge

How do people get this way?

We don’t know exactly what causes narcissistic personality disorder.

There is probably a genetic component. Traits such as aggression, poor emotional regulation and low tolerance to distress tend to be high in people diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder.

Certain experiences in childhood are also more likely to lead to narcissistic personality disorder. These might be either particularly negative, such as trauma or rejection, or overly positive, such as excessive praise or being constantly told you have extraordinary abilities. Parenting styles that are either very neglectful or overly protective are also associated with the development of narcissism.

People with narcissistic personality disorder often have other mental health conditions, particularly mood disorders. They also have a high rate of suicide. These conditions may have a common cause or they may be a result of the difficulties people with narcissistic personality disorder have with social interactions.

Can it be treated?

Narcissistic personality disorder is a lifelong condition that is considered manageable but not curable. There is no standard medicine or psychological treatment for narcissistic personality disorder.

Psychological treatment aims to reduce the severity of symptoms, improve mood, manage impulses, and build communication and relationship skills. One of the main goals of therapy is to develop more realistic expectations of others.

Medicines that help with other mental health problems like anxiety, depression and bipolar disorder may also help reduce some symptoms.

People are more likely to seek help for another mental health condition, such as depression. Getting treatment for these conditions can also positively impact on personality disorder symptoms.

The Conversation Paula Ross, Sessional psychology lecturer, Australian Catholic University and Nicole Lee, Professor at the National Drug Research Institute (Melbourne), Curtin University

That then is a general description of narcissistic personality disorder. The help judge whether this is what causes Donald Trump's bizarre behaviour in (and out) of office, this is another article from The Conversation, originally published on January 5, 2021, the day before he officially left office, having lost to Joe Biden and updated on January 7, 2021, the day after Trump had incited an attempted coup d’état to reverse the election result. The article is by Steven H. Appelbaum, Professor of Management, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada. It is reproduced here under a Creative Commons license. The original article may be read here.

Trump’s dangerous narcissism may have changed leadership forever

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a rally protesting the electoral college certification of Joe as president on Jan. 6, 2021, in which he successfully incited a mob to storm Congress.
Creadit: AP Photo/Evan Vucci
Steven H. Appelbaum, Concordia University

Donald Trump and his narcissistic style of leadership will soon vacate the political stage, despite his recent attempt to cajole elected officials into illegally changing the outcome of November’s presidential election and inciting a mob of supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol.

But what about those who aspire to key leadership positions who have been inspired by Trump? Will they perpetuate this new model of dangerous leadership without understanding that the potential fallout could be viral and spread to their organizations and employees?

American psychologist and author John Gartner, formerly of Johns Hopkins University, sounded the alarm about Trump three years ago, calling on him to be removed from office because he was “psychologically incapable of competently discharging the duties of president.” The petition garnered thousands of signatures.

Narcissism can be described as a grandiose sense of self-importance. A healthy dose of narcissism can be an integral part of a mature adult’s psyche. It can foster positive traits such as confidence, creativity, humour and wisdom.

These are of course important qualities that many of the world’s genius artists, business people and scientists possess.

But there’s a flip side to this coin, since pathological narcissism may leave people extremely isolated, distrustful and lacking in empathy. Perceived threats can easily cause pathological narcissists to fall into fits of rage.

How narcissism affects leadership styles

Their confidence and larger-than-life attitude, after all, have propelled them to the top. Narcissistic leaders often emerge during times of crisis where followers seek the leadership of a charismatic, confident and creative chief.

To the outside world, narcissists appear self-assured, charming and likeable upon first glance. For this reason, they often emerge as leaders. However, important research has shown the thin veneer of these qualities becomes apparent over time, and there’s often a stark contrast between a narcissist’s perceived leadership abilities and their actual abilities. The narcissistic leader’s weaknesses come to the surface.

Trump stands in the Oval Office
Trump stands in the Oval Office in December 2020.
Credit: AP Photo/Evan Vucci
While their hunger for power and admiration may yield positive results in the beginning, in the long run, narcissistic leaders are bound to leave damaged systems and relationships in their wake.

Identifiable negative traits of narcissists include sensitivity to criticism, poor listening skills, lack of empathy, intense desire to compete, arrogance, feelings of inferiority, need for recognition and superiority, hypersensitivity, anger, amorality, irrationality, inflexibility and paranoia. Some of these traits seem to fit Trump.

‘Destructive tyrant’

A leader who was perhaps once seen as a visionary slowly but surely transforming into a destructive tyrant can have grave consequences for organizations that are helmed by narcissists. Narcissistic leadership can negatively affect job satisfaction and morale while fuelling chaos of the type we saw at the U.S. Capitol as well as employee turnover.

As time goes on, their insecurities, domineering nature and disregard for the feelings and needs of others lead to employees’ emotional exhaustion, burnout and withdrawal from the organization. In essence, only the leader’s beliefs, experiences and knowledge count. This was evident when Trump publicly stated he knew more than his generals and even in his recently revealed phone call to Georgia officials, when he attempted to browbeat and threaten them to “find” more than 11,000 votes.

Indeed, there is no more relevant or obvious example of the damaging effects of excessive narcissism on leadership ability than Trump. His chaotic leadership style is useful to study since very few of us are trained to deal with this type of behaviour and this type of person.

Before he was elected president, Trump had made a name for himself in the mainstream media and turned his public persona into a lucrative brand. His 1988 book, The Art of the Deal, and later his NBC show, The Apprentice, garnered a large following of admirers, many in leadership positions.

A Trump supporter carrying a Trump 2020 sign stands near the president's vandalized star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.
A Trump supporter stands near the president’s vandalized star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame in July 2018.
Source: AP Photo/Reed Saxon
Of course, Trump floundered at times, declaring bankruptcy six times, but he always managed to save himself and threaten his naysayers until they disappeared.

We’ve experienced signs of the destructiveness of his behaviour on the world stage. Rather than knowing the “art of a deal,” a president and any other leader should know the art of diplomacy, empathy and service. Unfortunately, these are words that aren’t part of Trump’s vocabulary.

What’s more, his erratic behaviour seems to have had a detrimental effect on his team members, who can never seem to control his outbursts. This should serve as a warning to organizational leaders flirting with this type of leader.

Can the narcissist be managed?

In today’s uncertain market, more and more companies are becoming comfortable with this type of unpredictable and chaotic leadership style, hoping for big gains and magic.

It’s critical to understand that it’s possible for businesses to reap the benefits of a narcissistic leader as long there’s a trusted sidekick or No. 2 who can anchor their grandiose ideas and help control them. This is tricky to do and not common in contemporary organizations as they attempt to eradicate any perceived competition or control.

Any type of controlling influence has been absent in the Trump administration as he operates without guardrails, creating great fallout.

The issue for followers is it never ends well. We have seen this real-time case study play out for the past four years of the Trump presidency.

The challenge is: How will current and future organizational leaders accept or reject the type of narcissistic and damaging leader who is determined to win at any cost? The Conversation Steven H. Appelbaum, Professor of Management, Concordia University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

There is little doubt in Professor Appelbaum's mind that Trump does have a narcissistic personality disorder, or that this was the cause of the chaos during his presidency as he made policy in response to the fake news in the far right news media, encouraged the wildest conspiracy theories, sacked anyone who dared to disagree with him, or even failed to admire him sufficiently, made an international laughing stock of the USA, attacked and tried to undermine American democracy because it didn't deliver the result he demanded, and in the end came to personify a lying, corrupt, incompetent would be dictator that all reasonable people who hadn't been suckered into his personality cult, were glad to see the back of.

It would probably be the end of American democracy if he is re-elected in 2024. It would certainly be dangerous for the rest of the world. Having one paranoid , psychotic narcissist with nuclear weapons, in the shape of Vladimir Putin of a resurgent Russia, who is almost a clone of Donald Trump, is dangerous enough, without adding another one to the mix.

Saturday, 20 August 2022

Why Scientific Evidence Doesn't Change a Fundamentalist's or Conspiracist's Mind

Fig. 2. Belief networks and development of interdependence over measurements.
The networks are shown for GM food (A) and childhood vaccines (B) and include moral beliefs (orange nodes) and social beliefs (green nodes). The ties represent the partial correlations between two beliefs controlled for all other beliefs. Blue (red) ties represent positive (negative) correlations, and the widths of the ties correspond to the strength of the correlations. The strength of the ties ranged from 0.02 (between the beliefs “Chi” and “Fam”) to 0.30 (between the beliefs “Med” and “Sci”) for GM food and from 0.02 (between the beliefs “Com” and “Jou”) to 0.28 (between the beliefs “OnE” and “OnC”), N = 979.
Study: new model for predicting belief change | Santa Fe Institute

Two reserchers at the Santa Fe Institute, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA, postdoctoral Fellows Jonas Dalege and Tamara van der Does, have developed a model to predict whether a person is likely to change his/her beliefs when presented with evidence-based information.

Those who have ever tried debating in the social media with Creationists, Antivaxxers, QAnon cultists or people who believe Donald Trump won the 2020 presidential election, will be aware that people with these counter-factual beliefs are almost impossible to shift from those positions, no matter how strong the evidence presented to them.

The problem is our old friend, cognitive dissonance. Briefly, cognitive dissonance is the conflict or dissonance that is generated when firmly held belief meets contrary evidence. The result is emotional discomfort, sometimes amounting to a perceived threat, which needs to be resolved one way or another.

Thursday, 18 August 2022

Why Religious Fundamentalists Won't Change Their Minds

Everyone, even scientists are prone to trying to cling to cherished beliefs, but this is especially noticeable with people who are wedded to extremist cult beliefs such as Creationism, Fundamentalist religions, and/or wackadoodle conspiracy theories such as the belief that the 2020 US presidential election was 'stollen', COVID-19 is a hoax or that 9/11 was a 'inside job', as anyone who tries to engage these deluded fools in the social media will quickly discover.

Reinforce that natural resistance to change with the paranoid idea that there is a mind-reading, invisible sky man who will punish you with unimaginable horrors for eternity for even thinking of doing so, and you have the explanation for this intellectual cowardice and scientific bankruptcy.

In this article reproduced from The Conversation, reprinted under a Creative Commons license and reformatted for stylistic consistency, Professor Keith M. Bellizzi, Professor of Human Development and Family Sciences, University of Connecticut, USA, explains this basic aspect of human psychology. The original article can be read here.

Wednesday, 13 July 2022

Why People Are Anti-Science - And What We Can Do About It.

The growth of the anti-vaccine movement is one prominent example of how politics has helped lead to more people rejecting science.

Photo: Ivan Radic, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons
The 4 bases of anti-science beliefs – and what to do about them.

Under the influence of his scientific illiteracy and political incompetence during the COVID-19 pandemic, former President Donald Trump's lasting legacy is likely to be a large and growing number of Americans who now distrust science and so represent a danger to the rest of us.

The result is a growing resistance to measures to combat climate change and vaccination campaigns to eradicate or control pandemic such as the current coronavirus pandemic or life-threatening epidemics such as measles, mumps and rubella.

This level of anti-science attitude in a major country is a clear danger to the world as a whole, since climate change and viruses are not limited by national borders.

Now three researchers at Ohio State University who study attitudes and persuasion, have published a paper in Proceeding of the National Academy of Science (PNAS) which explain the rise in anti-science beliefs today and outlines what can be done about it. Sadly, the paper itself is behind an expensive paywall, but the abstract is available, open access, under a Creative Commons licence.

Monday, 11 July 2022

Cult News - Religious Lies, Conmen and Coercive Control

With fundamentalist religions operating as cults, especially, but not exclusively, in the USA and parts of Africa, they represent a danger to democratic society by handing control over to the cult leaders. Cults are invariably highly autocratic and usually male-dominated, with female members often having an inferior, subordinate and submissive role.

A single leader, such as a charismatic head of a megachurch or shadowy leaders of cults such as QAnon, can manipulate and control their followers to behave in wildly antisocial ways and advocate extreme fringe policies, such as we are seeing in the USA today with white supremacism and Christian Nationalism emerging from under the rocks to influence mainstream politicians, the judiciary and the Republican Party.

Cults are parasitic on democratic society where it is difficult to strike a balance between freedom of religion and measures to protect the young and vulnerable from the predation of extremist cults. Ironically, they thrive in liberal democracies which, if they ever had the power they crave, they would immediately abolish. It is a basic law of religion that fundamentalists support freedom of religion until they acquire the power to abolish it.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Reformatted for stylistic consistency. Read the original article. It was written from an Australian perspective but has wider applications.

Saturday, 25 June 2022

Fake News - Why People Believe False Stories and Disinformation

Why We Fall for Disinformation | Psychology Today

In a report published recently by the US Center for Naval Analysis (CNA) a team of psychologists analysed the reasons why so many people are falling for disinformation. The problem us due to the way we have evolved to deal with information and the fact that this has ill-prepared us to deal with the vast amount of information now being directed at us by modern technology.

In fact, some of the time-tested tools make us dangerously vulnerable to disinformation, especially disinformation designed to mislead and garner support for extremist groups for whom the truth would be toxic. We see this today in the form of disinformation about, for example, COVID-19, the measures to reduce its spread and the vaccines designed to protect us from it. We also see it in relation to politics, political movements and parties, international affairs, religious fundamentalism and anti-science propaganda, such as climate change and evolution, and especially conspiracy theories such as those promulgated by QAnon and former President, Donald Trump's supporters, intended to radicalise, undermine confidence in institutions, and garner support for extreme solutions to non-existent problems.

In other words, disinformation campaigns are designed to benefit those whom the report calls 'malign actors', for whom the truth would be dangerous and who know they need their target marks to believe falsehoods and mistrust the evidence.

In the abstract to their report, the psychologists, Heather Wolters, Kasey Stricklin, Neil Carey, and Megan K. McBride, say:

Monday, 10 January 2022

Covidiocy, Conspiracism and Creationist Self-Deception Explained

Why people deceive themselves - Newsportal - Ruhr-Universität Bochum

Hard though it can be to understand, the reason people such as antivaxx covidiots, conspiracy theorists and Creationists, hold onto patently idiotic and counter-factual opinions has been explained as a process of self-deception by two researchers from Ruhr-Universität Bochum (RUB), Germany and the University of Antwerp, Belgium.

In a paper published on 6 January, 2022, in the journal Philosophical Psychology, Dr. Francesco Marchi and Professor Albert Newen describe four strategies used to stabilise and shield the positive self-image. According to their theory, self-deception helps people to stay motivated in difficult situations. Of course, self-deception is common to all people and not confined to those who hold wackadoodle opinions, but the way they hold doggedly to those patently wrong beliefs is understandable as a strategy for coping with cognitive dissonance.

Thursday, 4 November 2021

Evolution News - Kind and Caring Bonobos Show us How Morality Evolved

Esake, photographed at the Lola ya Bonobo sanctuary in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2019, was rescued from a hunter who killed her mom.
Credit: Ley Uwera for NPR. Source.
Bonobo Mothers Adopt Babies That Look Different | Psychology Today

Baby bonobos are so cute! Wouldn't you just love to hold one and give it a loving cuddle, and protect and care for it? And not just because it looks so human with forward-looking eyes, but because it looks so vulnerable! Just adorable! No?

But why that response rather than treating it as a threat who'll take your food and give nothing back, or even as potential food?

The answer is because we share a great deal in common with bonobos, having evolved from a common ancestor.

Just in case there a still a few Creationists left who believe that the TOE is a theory in crisis that is about to be abandoned by science, or are still under the impression that humans were given their morals by a god, and didn't evolve them as their cultures evolved, here is an article in Psychology Today by Temma Ehrenfeld, which explains how we appear to have inherited at least some of our basic morality, the kinder, nicer side, from a common ancestor with the bonobo.

Web Analytics