Sociobiology / Evolutionary Psychology|
[Most Recent Entries]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
Sociobiology / Evolutionary Psychology's LiveJournal:
[ << Previous 20 ]
[ << Previous 20 ]
|Wednesday, July 13th, 2011|
Sociobiology in the Anime Blood+
Hello, I'm new to this community and come bearing a review and commentary on the vampire anime, Blood+
, with an emphasis on its impressive sociobiological discourse of vampirism. I was interested to see that there is already vampire discussion in progress in this community:)Sociobiology in Blood+
|Thursday, March 11th, 2010|
I'm moving to Germany in a couple of weeks and won't be able to look for a job until I'm there. Does anyone know of any groups in or around Germany that does conservation/environmental/ethology work?
|Sunday, June 7th, 2009|
Vampires Today...: A Study Of The Subculture (New Academic Book)
If you're interested in various subcultural or community studies, the Vampirism & Energy Work Research Study (VEWRS/AVEWRS), sanguinarian and/or psychic vampirism, or the vampire community in general you will want to purchase a copy of this book. There hasn't been anything quite like this published before... a very different kind of text/approach than that of Ramsland, Guiley, Guinn, and others.
The academic and sociological significance of this work can't be underscored enough. Laycock offers a sweeping scholarly examination of the vampire community and the process of self-identification as a vampire. He counters many of the negative stereotypes of the vampire community and posits thought-provoking arguments regarding ontological diversity. Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Vampires-Today-Truth-Modern-Vampirism/dp/0313364729/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230149021&sr=1-1 Praeger Publishers: http://www.greenwood.com/catalog/C36472.aspx
Religion Dispatches Article: http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/rdbook/1438/modern_vampires%3A_your_neighbors_and_spouses/?page=1
Vampires Today: The Truth About Modern Vampirism Additional Notes:
Chapter 1: What Is a Vampire? or, The Varieties of Vampiric Experience
Chapter 2: Why Vampires?
Chapter 3: The Vampire Milieu
Chapter 4: Initiatory Vampire Groups: Vampirism as Apotheosis
Chapter 5: The Vampire Community
Chapter 6: Vampirism and Religion, a Dialogue
Chapter 7: Out of the Shadows
Chapter 8: Vampires and the Modern
Bibliography & Index
Vampires are not just the stuff of folklore and fiction. This book explores the modern world of vampirism in all its variety.
Around the globe, untold numbers of people are identifying as "vampires" and following the ways of "vampirism." But what does it mean to be a vampire? Is vampirism a religion? Is it a fantasy? Is it a medical condition? Based upon extensive interviews with members of the Atlanta Vampire Alliance and others within vampire communities throughout the United States, Vampires Today looks at the many expressions of vampirism.
In the past two decades, modern vampirism has come under increased study, yet most scholarship has portrayed the vampire community as a cultural phenomenon or, at worst, as a religious cult. Having interviewed many vampires across the country, both "lifestylers" and "real," even those "reluctants" who try not to be vampires, Laycock argues that today's vampires are best understood as an identity group and that vampirism has caused a profound change in how individuals choose to define themselves. As vampires come "out of the closet," either as followers of a "religion" or "lifestyle" or as people biologically distinct from other humans, their confrontation with mainstream society will raise questions about the definition of "normal" and what it means to be human.
In this book, readers will meet "lifestyle vampires," who adopt a culture and a gothic ascetic associated with the vampires of art and legend. They will be introduced to "real" vampires, who feel that they must actually consume blood and/or psychic energy for their well being. They will hear from members of the Atlanta Vampire Alliance, and they will learn about the Order of the Vampyre, the Ordo Strigoi Vii, and the Temple of the Vampire.
There is no doubt that anyone who reads this book will find the details of real vampire life--including vampire role-playing games, grimoires, "vampyre" balls, vampire houses like House Sahjaza and House Kheperu, the vampire "caste" system, and other details--utterly fascinating.
The author holds a Masters of Divinity from Harvard University, a recipient of a grant from the Pluralism Project, and currently enrolled in the Division of Religious and Theological Studies at Boston University where he's working on his PhD. He has presented on the topic of vampirism at the American Academy of Religion Conference in San Diego where he argued that "vampirism" should not be classified as a new religious movement (NRM) and to faculty at the University of Michigan and other institutional bodies on the sociological and emergent scientific aspects of vampirism.
|Friday, February 27th, 2009|
"In your face" - male perception of female facial attractiveness
"In your face"
is a study forming part of the research of Laura J Brown, a 3rd year BSc Biological Anthropology student at the University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
The aim of the study is to examine male perception of female facial attractiveness.
The only requirements of this study are that you are male and heterosexual (if you are female, feel free to pass the study site on to any suitable male friends!).
The online questionnaire shouldn't take more than 30mins
to complete. Please note that some of the questions are of a sexual nature, so only take part if you are happy to answer questions of this kind. You may withdraw at any point should you no longer wish to participate, by simply exiting the website.
The questionnaire will involve you being shown a series of female facial photographs (there are 45 in total) and answering a set of corresponding questions. Please answer them honestly. Your responses will be kept confidential.
You can take part by clicking the banner below:
Many thanks to those who participate!
If you have any questions, please email me at email@example.com.
Thanks for your time,
Laura J Brown
Dr Sarah Johns - S.E.Johns@kent.ac.uk
Department of Anthropology.
Marlowe Building. University of Kent.
Canterbury, Kent. CT2 7NR.
United Kingdom Current Mood: contemplative
|Friday, December 26th, 2008|
|Monday, August 4th, 2008|
|Tuesday, October 23rd, 2007|
Evolutionary psychology of fundamental intent
The following webpage describes the contrasting evolutionary psychological origins of different types of fundamental intent. It describes the effect of climates and other environmental traits, the secondary effects that result from different gender ratios, specific beliefs and ideals that stem from such evolved fundamental intent, and specific geographical areas and human subspecies that demonstrate those principles.the webpage
|Tuesday, October 16th, 2007|
VEWRS & AVEWRS - A Sociological & Phenomenological Research Study
If the research study located at the web site listed below personally resonates with you or you wish to be a part of a control group (those who do not personally identify with the focus groups or phenomena outlined in this study), please take a moment over the next few hours or days to sit down and complete the VEWRS and AVEWRS research surveys and submit to us via e-mail. These surveys cover a diversity of topics including but not limited to: psychic and sanguinarian vampirism, energy work and manipulation, paranormal activities, psi-related experiences, magick, occult, spirituality, therianthropy, otherkin, and awakenings (you do NOT have to identify with modern vampirism to participate in this study). Any information contained within the surveys that aren’t applicable feel free to choose “Not Applicable” or leave blank when this choice is not given. The AVEWRS (Part 2) covers the topics outlined above in considerable more detail than the VEWRS (Part 1), therefore, if possible please complete both surveys (in order); submitting individually as they are completed. If you have any questions (please read the FAQ first) we’re available to answer them via the e-mail address given below. We thank you for your participation and support of this important research study!
Vampirism & Energy Work Research Study (VEWRS & AVEWRS)
A Detailed Sociological & Phenomenological Examination Of
The Real Vampire & Energy Worker Community
With Secondary Focus On Therianthropy, Otherkin,
& "Awakened" Individuals
NOTICE: EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 31, 2007; NO FURTHER NOTIFICATIONS
OR UPDATES WILL BE MADE ON LJ REGARDING THE VEWRS & AVEWRS.
IF YOU HAVE YET TO COMPLETE THE SURVEYS PLEASE DO SO ASAP!
VEWRS & AVEWRS Research Study Duration & Response Statistics:
VEWRS = 589 Days || AVEWRS = 457 Days || Combined Response Total: 925+
Background On Study:
VEWRS & AVEWRS FAQ: http://www.suscitatio.com/research/faq.html
This study is a mixed methodological study of specific subcultural social group(s) (or independents) linked by an association with specific reported phenomena and is directed towards both an online and offline audience via quantitative and qualitative dual anonymous surveys. For the detailed purpose, definition and precedent background, ethical and privacy procedures, and all other information regarding this privately funded study please refer to the surveys themselves or the web site listed above.
Focus Group: Those who identify themselves as practitioners of modern psychic (psi) or sanguinarian (blood) vampi(y)rism with a joint focus on energy workers or practitioners (psions, energetic healers, or others who manipulate psi/pranic energy). Additionally those who identify with therianthropy, otherkin, and as being "awakened" individuals are sub-branched in the overall classification.
Format: Two surveys (both structured to be independent or linked with one another, with first being an introductory examination and the second an advanced examination), anonymous participation requirement, embedded random+intentional response indicators, available in MSWord, HTML Text Format, or Printed Distributed Format. VEWRS (Survey 1) = Questions 1 - 379 (11 Categories); AVEWRS (Survey 2) = Questions 380 - 988 (5 Categories)
Analysis: SPSS w/Correlative Analysis, AMOS / Comparisons Of Qualitative Responses In Applicable Sections (Micro-Essays); Resulting Format = Book Publication(s) & Papers
Download VEWRS & AVEWRS Research Surveys: http://www.suscitatio.com
E-Mail Completed Submissions (By 10.31.07) To: firstname.lastname@example.org
Statistical & Analysis Updates: http://www.suscitatio.com
Correspondence Or Inquiry: email@example.com
|Thursday, October 4th, 2007|
|Tuesday, May 16th, 2006|
|Saturday, February 25th, 2006|
Here's something I was always curious about....
"Tonal Language for Tone Deaf", April Holladay.
Q: How do tone-deaf Chinese communicate? (L.A., Sandia Park, New Mexico)
A: Tone-deaf Chinese talk just like other Chinese. Their profound musical disability makes no real difference in understanding and talking a tonal language.
You'd think it would. Tone deaf means a person cannot hear the difference between two successive tones. The two tones are indistinguishable. In a tonal language, like Chinese, different tones give words different meanings.
So, you'd think that a tone-deaf Chinese would be stuck. How can he tell the difference in speech between, say, "woman" and "horse" with only their distinct tones to distinguish the meanings? ( Read More...Collapse )Original page.
|Tuesday, January 24th, 2006|
development of culture
I find this article very very interesting - but I am not too sure of the validity of the data shown here. Do you think the facts here are accurate and is consistent with what you gather from socibiology somewhere else? And can you pls give me links (or books) that have similar content... links that contain only 'raw factual data' would be much better. Thanks.
oh my gosh this is tooo long...
" The development of culture
A.ramidus was an ape with feet instead of another set of hands. He brought his behavior from the trees. That behavior was then modified because of his feet. The species just before ramidus had hands on both ends since it was before both the ape and the hominid, and the apelike tree dweller was the father of both. Its behavior would be transferred directly to Ramapithicus, the ape that was contemporary with ramidus, since Ramapithicus retained all four hands and did not require behavioral change. ramidus, however, had suffered physical change and was by that compelled to develop new behavior. Primates do not tend to large groups, foraging is much easier if the group is small. Primates do not tend to cooperative defense patterns against predators. The trees are always a quick retreat from danger. Primates do not tend to have groups of males who will rally to the defense of the young and female (an exception is the baboon). ramidus lived on the ground and was a poor climber, even if he happened to be close to a tree. He had no choice but to develop strategies that would allow him to survive. Otherwise, his tribe would have perished. For the same reason, ramidus was forced to develop larger tribes for defense. Still, ramidus did not develop the new cultural patterns. It was evolution by way of instinctive and intellectual changes to ramidus.
So ramidus developed a different culture from that of ramapithicus. That difference was caused by a physical change. The new culture was not a product of intelligence. Ramidus had a small brain. He was almost entirely instinctive. He did not say to himself one day: "You know, I've got to be more protective of my mate and the kids, otherwise my species is in danger of extinction." The new behavior was a product of evolution. New coding on his DNA dictated social change in ramidus. The more pugnacious, protective and cooperative male could raise more children. The more males that stuck together and fought off predators, the more children they collectively had. The male that picked up a stick and used it to drive off a predator became a better protector and could raise more children. New intellectual capacity allowed him to form larger groups and collectively protect the young and female. It was as simple as that, and that is the way a culture is formed.
The ramidus brain lives to this day, buried deep within our own (evolution patches over and adds to, it does not houseclean), and, in fact, handles most of our instinctual chores. It is the part that makes one jump at a loud noise. It causes a mother to love her children. It turns you on when you see cute buns. It further handles the chores of transmitting the things that we reason (the few that are reasoned) to the motor centers that translate thought into action. It acts as a filter, where instinct says to reason on the way through, "Are you sure you want to do this?" If you are working in an objective area, such as with a piece of iron, it cares less what you are up to. Yet let it catch a thought about food, sex, social interaction or survival, and it becomes very interested. This is why we are so good at building airplanes and yet so poor in providing a rational culture in which to live.
Ramidus moved out on the plains and became a herd herbivore. Then came aferensis, followed by africanus. Two million years proves that the ancient hominid and his resulting culture were successful. By then, evolution had given him a modest increase in his brain size to handle the complexities of some needed improvements in his culture (they came after the brain increase and were the result of the increase). When mutations provided a slight increase in brain power (either instinctive or rational) the recipients improved in their ability to handle cultural complexity and were by that able to raise more children. A successful animal tends to increase in population. Increased populations bring competition for food and space. Africanus had learned about basic weapons in defending his tribes from predators. The stage was set for the competition of man with man.
When a group of animals forage, the small group is more efficient than the large. This is caused by the overrun of an already foraged area. If one is behind others foraging, he will come upon a foraged over area and must walk through the others to find a fresh area. If only a dozen are in the foraging party, the walk-through is swift. If a couple of hundred are foraging, the walk through uses up time needed for feeding This is especially critical for herbivores. Herbivores eat low energy food, so they must eat all day. The time lost in walking effects how much food is gathered. While small groups are more efficient in feeding, they are vulnerable to predators. A small child would have little chance with a pack of wild dogs, for example, if his only protectors were his parents. Larger groups can pool their protection resources. A conflict exists between the two requirements (obtaining food and avoiding predation) and different animals use different herd sizes and other strategies.
The strategies adopted by the early hominid were successful. They survived. Their population grew. When a hominid tribe became too large, part of the tribe separated and went to the other end of the valley. The valley now contained two tribes. As long as the valley was big compared with the number in each tribe, there was no problem. Still, both tribes grew, the valley was not big enough for four tribes, and no one knew what was on the other side of the mountain. Each tribe thought the whole valley should belong to them. There was no fraternizing between the tribes. Every time a male stole a woman from another tribe, he brought home the flu or something worse. Strict rules had to be made. The tribe that had to make do with a trickle of water out of a spring was jealous of the neighboring tribe that had a lake. There was always that competition over foraging territory. The tribes became militantly isolated.
Homo habilis came, with a larger brain and a more complex society. He invented the use of fire. He was now able to tenderize some of his food. He could roast roots and tubers. Meat could now be cooked so that he could eat it. He no longer had to wait for a carcass to get half rotten before he could treat himself to some real protein. He could now kill his own and have fresh meat, medium rare, right off the spit.
Homo erectus made the big jump in culture. A confirmed meat eater, he did not need to forage all day. He could eat a couple of pounds off a kill, make a sling out of the skin, throw twenty pounds of his kill over his shoulder, take his family and friends and go traveling. There was no longer any need for tribal confinement. If it became too crowded anywhere, the tribe packed up and went somewhere else. Wherever erectus went, he formed new tribes The cultures of today are the modern versions of these ancient tribes. In search of food and safety, ancient hominid tribes would travel to the next valley and set up shop. Isolated from other hominid tribes, each developed an ever more differing set of behaviors, dress and language. There was little friendship between tribes, mainly because of the competition for the same food source. Tribal isolation also acted as a deterrent to contagious diseases. As each tribe grew, it encroached on the domain of the other. Often there was trouble. Mostly it would be killings in the ground between the two tribes, but friction could easily develop into open warfare, and it often did. Two million years of hominid tribal life preceded the last ten thousand or less in the open structure of the modern world. Ten thousand years ago (an instant in the hominid history), the world wide occupation of all man was hunter-gatherer. That is a tribal occupation. Man is a tribal animal. He is born that way. It will be another million years before it could possibly be bred out of him. A good tribal man thinks that his tribe is the only one. Those other tribes are at the least a nuisance and quite possibly a real danger. Since the people in the other tribe thought in the same way, it was always a powder keg waiting for a match. One does not love that neighboring tribe, especially when food is scarce. It became time to grab a spear and chase them off. If no one wanted to move on, then the tribe with the most members alive after the battle took over the whole territory. It was a matter of survival. Evolution loved it. Evolution reinforced it by selecting on a stronger and stronger coding for tribalism. Very recently in time, as far as evolution goes, the tribes coalesced into countries or major parts of countries, each with its own unique ethnic culture.
Conclusion: Man needs one central worldwide culture with as much commonality as possible.
Multiculturalism is well meaning and compassionate. Both terms are instinctive. Our instincts no longer fit well with our environment. They were constructed during a four million-year period to be tribal in nature. The tribal instinct is to be militant toward all who are not members of your own tribe. Multiculturalism is irrational. Promoting multiculturalism and diversity makes things worse.
To cram a bunch of people into the same city, they must be made to believe that they belong to the same tribe. That is called integration. Integration is a rational solution to this problem with this instinct. That same relationship can be extended to cover the world. This is not a reasoning problem. It is a problem with an instinct (tribalism), one that cannot be solved by using another instinct (compassion). That tribal instinct has been in the inner brain for at least two million years, possibly four. Only evolution can root it out. That will take a bunch of time, like perhaps millions of years. Don't think for a minute that this problem can be solved by teaching reason (tolerance). The tribal instinct was embedded in the brain first, big and strong, long before reason came. " http://onelife.com/psy/culhist.html
|Wednesday, December 7th, 2005|
|Friday, October 28th, 2005|
*tap, tap*... is this thing on...?
This community is surprisingly dead...
How about some discussion on costly signaling theory or parent-offspring conflict? Or whatever... Let's get some discussion going, ya?
Anyone familiar with adoption-studies and the associated literature? Current Mood: curious
|Monday, September 26th, 2005|
|Tuesday, August 2nd, 2005|
Check out this new ANTHROPOLOGY WEBSITE. You can create a BLOG to post, create an account, read news and NETWORK with like-minded people:http://anthropology.net
|Saturday, July 30th, 2005|
Im selling a super informative book that I used last year in my zoology class....actually the prof only had us read one excerpt which was disappointing cause I read the rest on my own (pleasure reading I know!) but anyways its good for inciting biology related debates and in class, an excellent source for research papers!
1. Name of textbook-The Nature of Life-Readings in Biology
2. Student or Instructor's book? student
3. Author(s) forward by Lynn Margulis and Dorian Sagan (its a compilation of bio essays)
4. Publisher Great Books Foundation
5. Edition n/a
6. ISBN # 1-880323-86-9
7. Condition of book new
8. Any supplimental materials (i.e., study guides, code cards, MyLab, CDs)n/a
9. Price I bought it for 80 but will sell it for 35 (price is negotiable)
10. Links to your auctions n/a
The cover of the book is green with a monkey on it.....
Any questions or offers please AIM me at doremimanda or email me at firstname.lastname@example.org or comment here
|Tuesday, June 14th, 2005|
how would a more polygamous society effect future evolution of the human species?
|Saturday, May 14th, 2005|
|Saturday, April 30th, 2005|
Hi, I'm looking for articles and websites for a research paper on homosexuality. Basically, any articles/websites with supporting evidence to homosexuality being determined at birth, such as the birth order of the baby, hormones, and genetics. I also need articles/websites supporting homosexuality as a learnt behavior. If you know of any books on the subject, that can help too. I'm also having trouble finding more well-informed science/gay communities on livejournal, any pointing fingers will help. Thanks to all those that comment.