Years of Poems and Spirits

I have seen/heard several reports on new discoveries of sophisticated social behaviors among animals. So sophisticated, one may say the beasts are playing “politics” (rhetorically, this is nothing new). For example, biologists found that some birds would willingly help a stronger individual of the same sex to attract a mate in order to get “promoted” to a higher position in the hierarchy. Or competing chimps would solicit support from others to upstage a rival.

Some scientists suggest there is a “selfishness” gene in every animal. If this is true, the implication is that we are born “social”–for if there is no “others”, there is no need to be “selfish”. This is quite a claim for it means that we are biophysically wired to be aware of others of the same species!

Regardless, I was really alarmed at the realization that playing politics is not an unique human behavior. This raises some fundamental question about ethics, morality and epistemology. In other words, if humans don’t have monopoly over politicking , is politicking still governed by ethics or morality? If someone (I mean humans here) still insists he lives by his principle, where does this principle come from? In other words, what is the justification of this principle? Of course, this discussion only makes sense in a rational and secular setting. One can always invoke religion and the divine, but he probably doesn’t even consider himself an animal anyway.

Another thought from this realization is how to differentiate from various “politics”. First of all, what is “politics”? In this context, my definition would be “one manipulates a social environment through non-violent means in order to gain advantage for oneself.” (In a boarder sense, violence can be part of politics, but that is another story altogether)

What distinquishes politics in this sense from basic collaborative behaviors as seen in ants and bees is that politics has complext cognitive abstraction (i.e. knowledge or belief–they are the same thing) and rich symbols. They constantly reinforce each other and commands great power in an advanced society.

For example, research found that “chimpanzees, who cannot swim, have drowned in zoo moats trying to save others. Given the chance to get food by pulling a chain that would also deliver an electric shock to a companion, rhesus monkeys will starve themselves for several days. ” Here we see a clear examples of “cognitive abstraction” and its power. Somehow the chimps have transcended random kindness toward each other and realized that his individual welfare is best secured by consciously initiating and reciprocating kindness.

Yet chimps don’t have symbols to remember fallen heros by. Although they are known to make tools now, it looks like manufacturing symbol is still an exclusive human expertise. It now looks like there is a progression chart for social behavior: from simplest labor division and collaboration to elaborated rituals. Isn’t this stuff fun??

Although materialistically speaking, the symbols are just reminders of certain knowledge, more than often, they take on a life of their own. Just read an New Yorker article on Benedictus PP. XVI (”The Pope and Islam” by Jane Kramer, Apr 2007). It seems that, more than any other recent Popes, Mr. Ratzinger is determined to pursue the morality issue as if it is the end, the purpose of his popeship.

Before, I was never much into the sanctity of ethics and morality. I always thought they were products of social-historical necessity. Knowing that animals can play politics too, I guess I have a even better explanation now: E&M are symbols to dress up our animal instinct!

I am implicitly agreeing with Karl Marx and his materialism: politics is built on a material infrastructure. Except that he deemed this infrastructure is only the modus of production at a given historical moment. What he missed, I posit, is Freud’s discovery of physiology of human consciousness. In other words, Marx, without the benefit of knowledge of psychology, didn’t realize that the so-called subjective matters–history, society, culture, tradition, morality–are just as material as machines and capital.