RE: virus: Transhuman (Body work)

From: Blunderov (squooker@mweb.co.za)
Date: Mon May 10 2004 - 04:38:50 MDT

  • Next message: Erik Aronesty: "Re: virus: Transhuman (Body work)"

    Jonathan Davis
    Sent: 10 May 2004 11:13 AM
     
    Hi Blunderlov,

    Regarding Neotony, did you even read The Eternal Child by Clive Bromhall?
    Very interesting book even if the main thesis is somewhat controversial.

    [Blunderov] No I never did read it but it looks tempting. I found a review
    at
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/bristol/content/readingroom/2004/01/12/eternalchild.sht
    ml
    <q>
    Are we all just big kids?
    Bristol University alumnus Dr Clive Bromhall is not one to shy away from
    controversy.

    In his new book, The Eternal Child, Bromhall advances a theory that:
    "explains mysteries like homosexuality, the difference between races, the
    need for religion and the true nature of relationships."
     
    Chimps and humans share a lot of the same DNA
       
    Bromhall's theory is that the human species has anatomically and
    behaviourally regressed into a state of permanent childhood.

    Humans are not mature primates - and by mature he means aggressive and
    sexually active.

    Instead, he says we are over-grown baby apes: we have been infantised
    because without infant-like co-operation we would never have survived when
    we came down from the trees during earlier stages of our evolution, and
    banded together.

    He told BBC Radio Bristol in a recent interview: "I am intrigued by the
    human species. There is so much about us that doesn't make sense."

    On this basis, Bromhall puts human beings into four types, depending on how
    developed we are.

    These range from the 'alpha' confrontational risk-taker to the 'ultra', the
    playful, sociable individual still attracted to the same sex, and thus
    homosexual.

    In between, there is the 'bureau' - the office worker, family-man - and the
    'neo', the insecure and childlike character.
    </q>

    similarly

    http://interconnected.org/home/2003_09_14_archive.shtml
    <q>
    The question is: why do teenage boys look like monkeys?

    The human species is highly neotenic. That is, a fully mature human is
    actually still immature compared to what the genes could do -- an adult
    person is much like a chimp child: hairless, playful. Like dogs are neotonic
    too: a fully grown modern dog has unfolded its genes as much only as a puppy
    wolf.

    This implies that during some period of humanity's evolution, the species'
    neoteny increased from nothing to where it is now. Say for example it took a
    thousand years, it doesn't matter what the evolutionary pressure was. During
    that thousand years, the mature adult of each generation would look more
    like a younger chimp than the mature adult of the generation before.

    Now. Consider that, to reproduce, men both young and old would prefer to
    mate with young women: Women bear children best when they're younger, are
    less likely to die and more likely to nourish the child properly, etc (the
    grandparents are more likely to be alive when the mother is young).

    Whereas women will prefer to go for older men: Having a child is a large
    investment for a woman, and an older man has proven survival skills: The
    fact that he's actually got older means he's intelligent, strong, canny and
    so on.

    So the older man has no trouble, but it's in the young man's interest to
    trick the woman. He can't just evolve to look older when younger -- or
    rather he can, but this isn't an evolutionarily stable state, because old
    men and young men will get in an arms race to look older, which the old man
    will always win, and so the race peters out.

    However, the young man can take advantage of the fact that older men are
    also of the generation before, who are less neotenic and look more like
    apes. This won't actually mean the young man will genuinely become more
    ape-like - this would leave him vulnerable to the evolutionary pressure
    which is promoting neoteny to begin with - but it means he will attempt to
    appear more like an ape.

    The old man - who is old and apish - and the young man - who simply appears
    apish - can now compete on equal ground to mate. As the young man gets
    older, he competes with those of his own generation, so the
    monkey-characteristics recede. Although the constant increase of neoteny has
    now ceased, we're left with its effects.

    That's why teenage boys look like monkeys. And what of the young woman?
    Having lost an important discriminator between old and young men, she moves
    on to secondary characteristics of age, such as: does he have a car, is he
    old enough to get served in pubs.
    </q>
    Best Regards

    ---
    To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 10 2004 - 04:40:13 MDT