Do humans have instincts? What is instinct?

[DavidOdden]

How does one know that animal instincts are innate knowledge and not learned early in their lives?

Here are some examples of animal instincts listed in this thread for reference, all by DavidOdden: african herd animals(zebras, wildebeeste, etc) bolt when they sight cheetahs, migratory patterns of birds and fish, the bowing of pups, cats eating grass to correct dietary problems, honeybee dance, the cuckoo's song.

You determine this the way you answer any scientific question: by observation and experimentation. For example, take a cuckoo egg and sneak it into a nest with other kinds of birds: what does it sing? Cuckoo song, not thrush song. Raise it by hand and what does it do? Sing cuckoo song. The bee dance is sub-species dependent (the rules differ for Austrian and Italian bees), and not only to hand-reared bees perform and interpret the dance according to their race the minute they are introduced into a hive, but in hybrid hives individual bees perform according to the dominant strain in their parents (the markings on the side go with the Italian / Austrian distinction). What's most significant is that the can learn each other's systems, and they fail to communicate distances correctly, no matter how much "learning" goes on. Etc. This refers of course to animal instincts, not all animal behavior. Dogs do not have an instinct to sit when you yell "Sit!".

[BaseballGenius]

Do you know of any specific studies that support your statements, or can I take your word for it?

[DavidOdden]

Do you know of any specific studies that support your statements, or can I take your word for it?

You could take my word for it if you want. The chapters on Animal Communication in the first three editions of the Akmajian, Demers, Harnish (& Farmer) book Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication (possibly the newest, I just haven't seen it) and I think especially the second edition. However, since I pack light, I don't have most of my books with me and this library isn't totally overstocked. One classic reference is Karl von Frisch's book Dancing Bees; the ADH book has a load of references to the primary research on bird language. I can give you more references when I get back, if you're a patient man, or I may get surprised and find that there's stuff in the local library.

[BaseballGenius]

What causes an instinct to be created by nature? If the entire species develops the same instinct at possibly almost identical times, there must be some simple, absolute guidelines that force this change. Then, what makes nature have some species lose their instincts over time? Is it if the instinct never gets called into action?

[DavidOdden]

What causes an instinct to be created by nature? If the entire species develops the same instinct at possibly almost identical times, there must be some simple, absolute guidelines that force this change. Then, what makes nature have some species lose their instincts over time? Is it if the instinct never gets called into action?

Roughly, it's because by random mutation, some individuals acquire a trait that draws them to lions, and maybe others have a trait that repels them from lions. The former individuals get eaten as young, and the latter tend to live longer, so pass on the trait to their offspring. Over generations, this genetic property becomes an essential part of the animal, and may result in speciation. If there were no lions (for example in the Arctic), there's no advantage to being afraid of lions (although being afraid of polar bears would be an advantage). And sometimes, an advantage is paired with a disadvantage, so it's an issue of net advantage, and a change in weather might change the overall equation.

[BaseballGenius]

Roughly, it's because by random mutation, some individuals acquire a trait that draws them to lions, and maybe others have a trait that repels them from lions. The former individuals get eaten as young, and the latter tend to live longer, so pass on the trait to their offspring. Over generations, this genetic property becomes an essential part of the animal, and may result in speciation. If there were no lions (for example in the Arctic), there's no advantage to being afraid of lions (although being afraid of polar bears would be an advantage). And sometimes, an advantage is paired with a disadvantage, so it's an issue of net advantage, and a change in weather might change the overall equation.

That makes sense then, how volition came about in humans. With our large brains and ability to conceptualize, having instincts would only hinder our learning growth because it restricts freewill.

Bees however, whom are unlike humans, would benefit from certain instincts such as their bee dance since they may not have the capability to produce a communication system as advanced. Do you know how the bee dance originated? Was it after some bees had already started doing it, or did the instinct create the dance on its own?

But is it correct to call them 'random mutations'? Can nature really act randomly? There must be a cause for its effect. As I understand it, nature only reacts to things, it doesnt create anything.

[DavidOdden]

Do you know how the bee dance originated?

Nah, and I wish I did. That's actually a fascinating area of potential research, but I've never heard of any such work.

But is it correct to call them 'random mutations'? Can nature really act randomly? There must be a cause for its effect.

Right, and by "random", in scientific terms, we really mean "caused by who knows what" or "caused by something, but exactly which something, we don't know". So for example, it's because of a cosmic ray striking the DNA of baby bee #21,348 at some moment, clipping off a hydrogen atom at one point, and then there's a price to pay.

[BaseballGenius]

I cant find anything on the Web explaining the cuckoo's song. What is it? And how does it help the cuckoo's survival?

[DavidOdden]

What is it? And how does it help the cuckoo's survival?

It is hard to find with all the online noise out here, but this is the song. It confers the advantage of species identification, so you know what to mate with. Since cuckoos are socialists, I mean, brood parasites (they often stick their eggs in the nests of other birds to raise), this is useful since cuckoos will often not be raised by cuckoos. (It's also the title of one of the funniest and best movies about language that I've ever seen).

[BaseballGenius]

Since cuckoos are socialists, I mean, brood parasites (they often stick their eggs in the nests of other birds to raise), this is useful since cuckoos will often not be raised by cuckoos.

I wonder what the reaction of the (non-cuckoo) mother is after she sees the cuckoo's egg hatch. "What the hell is this? You dont look a thing like me." They probably continue raising the baby though, although it doesnt support the survival of the non-cuckoos species. Maybe this will cause a change in the nature of some birds eggs which will help them identify what eggs are actually theirs. Eggs of a certain bird species could consist of distinct spots or color, because this could be very valuable for the survival of a species.

[aleph_0]

A reflex is analogous to inserting a floppy disk in the drive and the drive spinning up or pressing the eject button and the disk popping out... Like most reflexes, you can consciously override it with foreknowledge (the build up prior to some sneezes) but the process of sneezing and it’s related facial movements is strictly mechanical.

... The next step for a computer is an operating system (OS). It tells the computer how to use it’s basic peripherals as it’s most basic function. This is how animals know when they smell something specific, like food. Some extra programs can also be included with the OS that extend beyond this very basic functionality (such as a program to automatically run a CD). I think this is analogous to the higher animals instincts such as pack behavior.

So a reflex is an automatic, non-conceptual act while an instinct is an automatic conceptual state?

That some people don’t close their eyes when they sneeze simply means that they’re “broken” or the mechanism that produces the reflex doesn’t function in that individual.

Are there really such cases of people?

Computers aren’t volitional. Nor are wolves.

How do we know?

You determine this the way you answer any scientific question: by observation and experimentation. For example, take a cuckoo egg and sneak it into a nest with other kinds of birds: what does it sing? Cuckoo song, not thrush song. Raise it by hand and what does it do? Sing cuckoo song.

So is this reflex or instinct?

Do we yet know if humans have instincts?

[DavidOdden]

So is this reflex or instinct?

Instinct. Reflexes are neurologically different. Bring your knee over here and I can show you how reflexes work (I've got the hammer, I just need your knee). They are basically spinal chord reactions, and which makes them so lightening fast. BTW, their automatic nature doesn't preclude being pre-cancellable. Ordinarily, if you put your finger on a hot object, you're reflexively jerk it back by a signal that takes the short path from the finger to the spine and then back. You can suppress (drown out) the signal with a brain signal, for example if you plan to put your finger in a flame and hold it there for a minute, and you get yourself mentally prepared, probably by jiggling the finger muscles (I don't care to experiment, but if you are up to it, please do report back on your findings).

Do we yet know if humans have instincts?

Yeah: they don't.

[aleph_0]

Yeah: they don't.

Evidence? What of the cited instances that look like unlearned, non-reflexive behavior?

[DavidOdden]

Evidence? What of the cited instances that look like unlearned, non-reflexive behavior?

Do you mean respiration and digestion?

[aleph_0]

No, the studies done on infants. There might have been other examples mentioned, but that is the first that comes to mind.

[DavidOdden]

No, the studies done on infants. There might have been other examples mentioned, but that is the first that comes to mind.

Oh, you mean that fact that infants can breathe, or that they have reflexes? I don't know of any studies that show that infants have instincts, although they do have a number of reflexes that die out in a few months, like the rooting reflex.

[Onar Åm]

Oh, you mean that fact that infants can breathe, or that they have reflexes? I don't know of any studies that show that infants have instincts, although they do have a number of reflexes that die out in a few months, like the rooting reflex.

I would argue that perception acquisition is an instinct. Babies simply cannot help themselves from learning to sense.

[LaszloWalrus]

Isn't an instinct automatic knowledge, not an inability to "help oneself from learning" something?

[DavidOdden]

I would argue that perception acquisition is an instinct. Babies simply cannot help themselves from learning to sense.

I don't think there's any evidence that they learn it at all. There are things that happen to humans which are automatic. There are the various reflexes, which short-circuit the brain; there is breathing, digestion, heartbeat all of which are controlled by the autonomic nervous system and don't involve the mind (they do involve a part of the brain). Feeling pain, heat, pressure; seeing, smelling and hearing are all automatic in a similar manner.

Now let's consider migratory instincts: zebras, birds and fish have them, humans do not. Man does not instinctively know which fruits are poison and which are nutritious, even though animals may have this knowledge. Man does not instinctively know the difference between right and wrong, not does man instinctively discover decimal number systems. Geese have the "imprinting" instinct: man doesn't. Bears hibernate instinctively; men do not. Dolphins know how to swim instinctively, men do not.

I'm concluding that most of the problem in these discussions of instinct arise from mixed views of what an instinct is. In the context of Objectivist philosophy, let's recall that man must discover his means of survival, that unlike other animals, he does not have automatic knowledge of how to survive built in. The physical machinery for sight is something different -- you can't "discover" how to have eyes and to see. Visual perception, on the other hand, is learned. Or, for another example, man has the faculty of reason with which he learns thing: but that means that this faculty is not learned, it is there. You cannot use your faculty of reason to discover a faculty of reason.

Objectivism doesn't hold that man is born as an unstructured bag of meat and bones, it says that -- unlike bears, wolves and fish -- we don't come with advance knowledge. But we do come with the capacity to gain knowledge, which concretely means that we have sense organs that function a particular way, also that we have lungs and guts that work automatically.

I'm not ignoring the rather subtle point about an instinct for perceptual acquisition, I just think that the details of this mechanism are not well enough understood that I know what to say about it.

[miseleigh]

I think the 'studies done on infants' being referred to here might be the ones about recognizing emotions in faces. I'm surprised there haven't been any comments about that yet. I kinda expected comments after my last post. I still think that emotions are the closest thing we have to a human instinct - any reasons why they're not instinctual?

[DavidOdden]

I think the 'studies done on infants' being referred to here might be the ones about recognizing emotions in faces. I'm surprised there haven't been any comments about that yet. I kinda expected comments after my last post. I still think that emotions are the closest thing we have to a human instinct - any reasons why they're not instinctual?

I don't know these studies: can you give me a couple of best references, especially ones that do a decent job on the cross-cultural research and also test this for blind infants? I'm getting an annoying number of "We're sorry, you don't have permission to access..." messages. I'd be skeptical about a claim based on recognition, since I doubt that anybody has ever done the experiment where an infant is only exposed to people who smile when they are in pain, cry when they are happy, and vomit when they are surprised. Although I once had a dog that did that. But anyhow, I'd want to see how you can rule out learning -- which is why data from blind children would be essential.

[Adrian Hester]

You determine this the way you answer any scientific question: by observation and experimentation. For example, take a cuckoo egg and sneak it into a nest with other kinds of birds: what does it sing? Cuckoo song, not thrush song. Raise it by hand and what does it do? Sing cuckoo song.

And, interestingly enough, if you transplant the appropriate neural tissue from Japanese quail embryos into chicken embryos, the chickens grow up singing like quail, not crowing like chickens.

[DavidOdden]

And, interestingly enough, if you transplant the appropriate neural tissue from Japanese quail embryos into chicken embryos, the chickens grow up singing like quail, not crowing like chickens.

Thanks. That's extra cool. (I notice that the ESPN article tosses in a gratuitous extra about "maybe humans are just like that!", which isn't exactly mentioned in the scientific paper. Still, it's nice to have semi-science reporting on ESPN.)

[miseleigh]

Here is an article by Paul Ekman, one of the researchers cited in the article I read for my psych class. He talks about several cross-cultural studies he and others have done, what they mean, the criticisms from each, and more supporting evidence to refute the criticisms.

facial_expression.pdf

This article is more about heredity of individual differences in emotional expressions (exs. dimples or not when smiling), but the method used involved blind people and their families, with surveys to show that the blind people didn't learn their facial expressions by touching their family member's faces. The problem with this one is that it doesn't rule out learning through hearing what an emotion is supposed to look like.

Scientific American: Blind Relatives Prove Facial Expressions Are Inherited

Unfortunately both of these are just articles about studies and aren't actually links to the studies, but I never know how to find those and really don't have time to keep looking right now.

Another study that looks promising is entitled "Spontaneous Expressive Control in Blind and Sighted Children", by Pamela M. Cole, Peggy A. Jenkins, and Cora T. Shott, but I don't really want to pay to read it and can't find much more than the abstract.

[aleph_0]

I don't think there's any evidence that they learn it at all. There are things that happen to humans which are automatic. There are the various reflexes, which short-circuit the brain; there is breathing, digestion, heartbeat all of which are controlled by the autonomic nervous system and don't involve the mind (they do involve a part of the brain). Feeling pain, heat, pressure; seeing, smelling and hearing are all automatic in a similar manner.

... Visual perception, on the other hand, is learned...

I'm not ignoring the rather subtle point about an instinct for perceptual acquisition, I just think that the details of this mechanism are not well enough understood that I know what to say about it.

So which is it? You don't think there's evidence that they learn visual perception, you assert that it is learned, or you don't think there's enough information to know what to say about it?

From what little I've read in Scientific America, et. al., it seems to me there's a consensus in cognitive psychology that perceptual acquisition is learned. But I could be way off on that.

On the other hand, there is a much more distinct consensus that man instinctually knows these seven facial expressions and automatically knows that a smiley face means something good. I don't have enough information to say I hold the conviction that we have instincts, but I do suspect it.