The ethological concept of animal and human behaviour. An attempt at methodological analysis

Authors

  • Eugeniusz Kośmicki Instytut Nauk Społeczno-Politycznych AR, Zakład Filozofii i Socjologii, Poznań

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1898-6773.46.2.17

Abstract

The paper presents a methodological analysis of the structure of the ethological theory aimed at explanation of behaviour. Ethology proposes a theoretical concept being ‘the most recent attempt at explaining both animal and human behaviour. The concept is based on an assumption that behavioural patterns, similarly to morphological structures and physiological processes, are species-specific and related to a species phylogeny. Therefore ethology is rooted in the theory of biological evolution. Behavioural pattern emerges as a result of selective pressures of an environment thus ensuring to the highest possible degree survival of a species under given environmental conditions. Ome of the basic ethological ideas is distinction between inborn and acquired behaviour. Inborn behavioural pattern is formed by a „mechanism” of mutation and selection. Hence it emerges by the way of phylogenetic processes, while acquired behaviour is due to interactions between an individual and environment. Ethology has considerable accomplishments in explaining inborn behaviour. According to its concept such a behavioural pattern consists of four parts: apetention — search for «clue stimulators in environment, operation of relasing mechanism in response to occurrence of a clue stimulator, cours of action — a constant „rigid” sequence of movements executed by effectors (inherited coordination), calming down after the action. The author reconstructs three laws accepted by ethologists: the law of inborn behaviour, the law of learning and the law of protocultural behaviour. The first law is the basic one for ethology, the other two are its derivatives (concretizations). In lower animals (worms and lower forms) only inborn. behavioural patterns are present, later on there appears individual accumulation of information — learning. Phenomena of protoculture are mainly characteristic for birds and mammals, although its scope is limited. Protoculture consists of behaviours learned socially from other individuals of the same species. Human ethology occupies a separate position. Man, like other species, has acquired his properties on an evolutionary way. For instance, behaviour of infants is mainly determined by inborn factors, In adults inborn elements of behaviour occur as parts of particular actions (first of all sexual, aggressive and child care practices), Ethology also holds that potential for creation of (culture has arisen during anthropogenesis as a specific human adaptive function. Special place of man among living beings is related to the mew principle of evolution that is called the cultural evolution.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ardrey R., 1969, Adam kam aus Afrika. Auf der Suche nach unseren Vorfahren, München.

Audrey R., 1971, Der Gesellschaftsvertrag, Wien—München—Zürich.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt I., 1971, Liebe und Hass. Zur Naturgeschichte elementarer Verhaltensweisen, Münichen.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt I., 1972, Grundriss der vergleichenden Verhaltensforschung. Ethologie, München.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt I., 1975a, Krieg und Frieden aus der Sicht der Verhaltensforschung, München—Zürich.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt I., 1975b, Stammesgeschichtliche und kulturelle Anpassungen im menschlichen Verhalten, [w:] Hominisation und Verhalten [wyd. G. Kurth, I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt] Stuttgart.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt I., K. Lorenz, 1974, Die stammesgeschichtlichen Grundlagen menschlichen Verhaltens, [w:] Die Evolution der Organismen [wyd. G. Heberer], Bd. III, Stuttgart.

Ewer R. F., 1976, Ethologie der Säugetiere, Berlin—Hamburg.

Hebb D. O., 1953, Heredity and Environment in Mammalian Behavior, British Journal of Animal Behawiour, 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5601(53)80053-5

Hinde R. A., 1966, Animal Behaviour. A Synthesis of Ethology and Comparative. Psychology, New York —London.

Kawai M., 1975, Precultural Behavior of the Japanese Monkey, [w:] Hominisation und Verhalten, [wyd. G. Kurth, I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt], Stuttgart.

Klix F., 1973, Information und Verhalten. Kybernetische Aspekte der organismischen Informationsverarbeitung, Berlin.

Klopfer P. H., 1974, An Introduction to Animal Behavior: Ethology's First Century, Englewood Cliffs N. J. Kroeber A. L. 1973, Istota kultury, Warszawa.

Lehrman D. S., 1958, A Critique of Lorenz's Theory of Instinctive Behavior, Quarterly Review of Biology, 28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/399858

Lorenz K., 1943, Die angeborenen Formen möglicher Erfahrung, Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1943.tb00655.x

Lorenz K., 1971, Phylogenetische Anpassung und adaptive Modifikation des Verhaltens, [w:] K. Lorenz, Über tierisches und menschliches Verhalten, Bd. II, München.

Lorenz K., 1975, Tak zwane zło, Warszawa.

Lorenz K., 1977, Odwrotna strona zwierciadła. Próba historii maturalnej ludzkiego poznania, Warszawa.

Manning A. 1976, Wstęp do etologii zwierząt, Warszawa.

Marler P., W. J. Hamilton III, 1972, Tierisches Verhalten, Mechanismen des Verhaltens, Berlin.

Mayr E., 1974, Populacje, gatunki i ewolucja, Warszawa.

Rensc R. B., 1965, Homo sapiens. Vom Tier zum Halbgott, Göttingen.

Rensch B., 1977, Das universale Weltbild. Evolution und Naturphilosophie, Frankfurt am Main.

Ruse M., 1973, The Philosophy of Biology, London.

Strzałko J., M. Henneberg, J. Piontek, 1976, Wstęp do ekologii populacyjnej człowieka, Poznań.

Tinbergen N., 1976, Badania nad instynktem, Warszawa.

Ullrich W., 1973, Zoopsychologia, Warszawa.

Ullrich W., 1978, Wörterbücher der Biologie. Verhaltensbiologie unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Physiologie des Verhaltens, 1978, [wyd. G. Tembrock], Jena.

Wernecke A., 1976, Biologismus und ideologischer Klassenkampf, Berlin.

Downloads

Published

30-12-1980

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Kośmicki, Eugeniusz. 1980. “The Ethological Concept of Animal and Human Behaviour. An Attempt at Methodological Analysis”. Anthropological Review 46 (2): 383-404. https://doi.org/10.18778/1898-6773.46.2.17.

Most read articles by the same author(s)