
Gorillas have developed humanlike social structure, controversial study suggests - laurex
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/07/gorillas-have-developed-humanlike-social-structure-controversial-study-suggests
======
jillesvangurp
Why is this controversial? If you buy into evolution (which one would assume
is the case with an evolutionary anthropologist), then most of what we do and
are did not appear out of the blue and probably existed or exists in some form
or another in species that are close to us; including all sorts of aspects of
our social behavior. So, not knowing this you would expect to find stuff like
this with species like gorilla's rather than being surprised by it.

~~~
sametmax
Exactly, give it a few millennia, and some specie probably will end up like us
in their own way.

We had to have bases for our current behaviors, and it's only logical we find
it in other species.

I don't understand how people can imagine animals don't have feelings,
thoughts, logic or a sense of existing. There is little in us that is so
unique. It's like life on other planets, or additional dimensions we can't
see. Yes we can't prove it now, but it would be disproving it that would
really catch me by surprise given what we know now. The universe kinda like
repeating patterns and continuity.

~~~
ajuc
> Exactly, give it a few millennia, and some specie probably will end up like
> us in their own way.

I'm all for evolution, and I think animals have feelings and emotions and are
smarter than they are often considered. But "they will end up like us" is
highly unlikely as we know of no other such development in last few billion
years.

~~~
ceejayoz
Sure we do. Neanderthals look to have been far more sophisticated than
previously thought, for example.

~~~
zeven7
Neanderthals not only developed along the same evolutionary path as us...
they're full blown homo sapiens. There's a high likelihood you have
Neanderthal DNA yourself. That's not an example of something else being able
to develop like us independently in 5,000 years.

If all humans were wiped out today, _maybe_ over _100,000 years to 1,000,000
years_ the great apes would be able to evolve into creatures as intelligent as
modern humans. But if all apes were wiped out today, it wouldn't be surprising
if Earth never saw another species go to the moon. Don't forget lots of
species thrived for hundred of millions of years without leaving any trace
approaching even simple tool making.

~~~
ceejayoz
> Don't forget lots of species thrived for hundred of millions of years
> without leaving any trace approaching even simple tool making.

Apes are hardly the only tool makers, though.

[https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/10/crow-that-
be...](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/10/crow-that-bent-wire-to-
retrieve-food-was-acting-naturally-scientists-discover)

------
swebs
>Kim Hill, an evolutionary anthropologist at Arizona State University in
Tempe, rejects such parallels to humans. “[T]he extreme social brain
hypothesis doesn’t claim other primates don’t form hierarchically increasing
groupings,” Hill wrote in an email to Science.

I don't see how that makes the study itself controversial. He was simply
answering an unseen, possibly leading question from the person writing this
story.

~~~
mockingbirdy
> rejects such parallels to humans

The author clearly misunderstands the statement she directly quotes. It's
grotesque.

Here's a SMBC Comic that illustrates the conversation that will follow with
that scientist: [https://smbc-comics.com/comic/2009-08-30](https://smbc-
comics.com/comic/2009-08-30)

------
debatem1
I'm not sure what to take from this. It would be surprising if animals'
internal lives were simpler than we thought, right? So further study should
generally suggest that it is more complex than previously known, but not as
complex as human social behavior, which seems pretty obvious. Does this say
anything else?

~~~
xkcd-sucks
I don't necessarily disbelieve that human social behavior is more complicated
than gorilla behavior; but should we compare gorilla social behavior to e.g.
21st century American social behavior, or "uncontacted tribe" social behavior?

And, if there is a difference in the relative (perceived!) complexity of
social behavior between "modern" and "undeveloped" humans -- Does that imply
undeveloped humans are to modern humans what gorillas are to humans? The
notion isn't necessarily incorrect, but historically it's been interpreted in
service of the ugliest human social behaviors

~~~
danans
> but should we compare gorilla social behavior to e.g. 21st century American
> social behavior, or "uncontacted tribe" social behavior?

The differences between the social behavior of these types of human societies
only look big in a vacuum. For example, all human societies use complex verbal
language. No other ape society we know of uses anything like it. There is
still a huge gulf between human and other apes' individual and social
behavior.

> if there is a difference in the relative (perceived!) complexity of social
> behavior between "modern" and "undeveloped" humans

The fact that over a few short centuries, many "undeveloped" humans have
become "21st century humans" suggests that those groups aren't fundamentally
different in their inherent ability to operate within a given social context,
whether it is described as "simple" or "complex". A key human trait is social
adaptability, especially earlier in life.

> Does that imply undeveloped humans are to modern humans what gorillas are to
> humans

Absolutely not, for all the aforementioned reasons. What would motivate one to
believe such an analogy?

------
seanhandley
Surely that should be "Humans have developed gorilla-like social structure."

------
fjfaase
I guess that the people considering this controversial, must consider the book
"Mama's Last Hug" by Frans de Waal highly controversial.

------
macieklaskus
I don't understand why the article does not link to the paper it discusses.
Here is the paper:
[https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2019.068...](https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2019.0681)

~~~
swebs
They do in the second paragraph

~~~
macieklaskus
True, my bad.

------
OptionX
I wonder why despite bonobos being closer to us genetically than gorillas,
gorillas seem to be the more human like. Maybe its just a a false-bias of mine
since these type of news seem to always be about gorillas.

~~~
laretluval
There are more gorillas out there and they are easier to access and study

------
k__
I find it entertaining to learn about things that distinguish humans from
other mammals, other primates, or birds.

Humans can throw good.

Humans can run long.

Humans can pen themselves up in masses without killing each other.

~~~
lonelappde
Humans can run long, but birds can fly far and fish can swim far, so human
running doesn't look especially special.

~~~
buzzerbetrayed
Except we can out run nearly every animal on earth at distance. I’d consider
the species of bird that can fly the farthest special. Why not humans?

------
dgzl
Every once in a while I'll ask people this question: assuming evolution is
true, which species do you think will evolve next?

~~~
ChrisGranger
All species are evolving at the same time, so this question doesn't make sense
as written. I assume you mean to ask which species will be the next to attain
humanlike self-awareness.

I find it an interesting thought experiment. [Weasel words ahead!] I think our
behavior (damaging the ecosystem, causing habitat loss and so forth) might be
putting evolutionary pressure on other species in a way that could lead to an
increase in intelligence and self-awareness. But I also fear that we're doing
it too much, too quickly, and that extinction is easily as likely.

~~~
rjf72
I think this sounds reasonable until you really consider Earth's history.
We've gone through far more radical changes in environment - not only in terms
of temperature shifts from ice ages to worldwide saunas but also in terms of
geographic change as what was presumably one land mass gradually divided into
many, land bridges between the newformed continents disappearing, even things
such as the oxidation of our planet which resulted in the extinction of nearly
all life. Yet, through it all - only one species managed to evolve anything
like our cognitive and developmental ability. Quite peculiar in many ways.

~~~
acollins1331
There were lots of cognitive human like species. I.e. neanderthals etc.
They're just dead now.

~~~
rjf72
The Neanderthals lived hundreds of thousands of years longer than the entire
existence of _homo sapien_. Their peak technological development was stone
age, which sounds even nicer than what it is. Pound two rocks together, notice
sharp pieces fall off, use them -> you're now in the stone age. And, contrary
to misinformation driven by mass media - there is no clear evidence they
engaged in any form of art, adornment, or generally symbolic behavior. [1]
Extremely high rates of traumatic injury among the discovered remains also
implies that in their hundreds of thousands of years of existence they failed
to even refine their hunting technique.

[1] -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Culture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal#Culture)

