“Humans_Have_Evolved_to_Be_Fundamentally_Distinct_from_Other_Animals.”

This essay considers issues concerning language and sex that could be suggested to show distinctiveness between humans and non-humans. Primarily the focus will be from an evolutionary perspective, in which conclusions can be formed to suggest that although language has evolved, it does not necessarily determine distinctiveness, whereas the evolution of sex (more specifically gender) suggests distinctiveness in humans because of the society we live in. Although speech is considered unique to humans, the art of communicating is apparent in all creatures. From an evolutionary concept, to evolve is to adapt to better survive in an individual’s environment. It could be suggested that humans have developed speech as a necessity to better survive in the societies we live in, as it is a more relevant method for humans, rather than it being a distinction between humans and non-humans. This complements themes found in social constructionist’s view that language was derived for the purpose of better interaction between individuals, resulting in a more hospitable, co-operative environment to live in. Animals have found there own effective methods of communicating suited to their lifestyle. For example Cooper and Kaye (2007) illustrate studies by Karl Von-Frisch (1950) on honey bees and the way they dance to let other bees know where more food is; a round dance represents food within a close region, while a waggle dance represents a further distance to journey. Another example is Vervet monkeys, who raise alarms to warn the others of an oncoming predator. They perform different acts depending on the kind of predator; to look up towards the sky to represent an eagle, to look down when a snake was sighted and to run to the trees in the case of a leopard Seyfarth et al. (1980) as cited in Cooper and Kaye (2007). Humans on the other hand have evolved to develop a verbal means of communication, namely language. Living in modern day societies, humans require a form of communication that allows them to not only pass on information such as warnings through their social groups like Velvet monkeys, but to also be able to communicate about events that have happened in another time or place (Pinker 1994, as cited in Cooper and Kaye 2007). Language is more aptly suited to humans’ lifestyle and the societies they live in, as they are often required to simultaneously perform various other tasks during communicating, or having to communicate with multiple individuals. Language can be seen as constructing and interpreting the lives around individuals as Cooper and Kaye (2007) illustrate with a study by Wieder (1974), on behaviour been based on an informal set of rules rather than the formal ones when institutionalized. This suggests that the evolution of language plays a part in social conduct and people’s identities; this bears distinction to that of the social roles of animals. Animals on the other hand, as has been suggested, have successfully created their own means of communication that is uniquely suited to their existence. This could suggest that language does not necessarily make us distinctive from other animals, but that it could be a means of allowing humans at better adapting to their given environment, with reference to their social lives in particular. From an evolutionary context, sex is required to (in most animal cases) reproduce. Humans are one of the only species of animal that use sex for pleasure, (this is excepting the case of certain kinds of monkeys). This suggests a distinction between humans and animals, despite the same been found in certain monkeys, but after all primates are the closest relation to humans in the animal world. Studies have been done to show the differences between men and women such as performances in intelligence (Maccoby and Jacklin 1974 p.133 as cited in Holloway et al) however; from an evolutionary perspective there are few consistent differences, excepting in behaviours and attitudes, specifically in sexual behaviour. This is because males and females require a different strategy in order to continue the existence of their genes in future offspring. For males, the best chance is to mate with as many partners as possible to enable a higher possibility of offspring, whereas a female would be required to conceive, carry and care for their offspring to ensure its survival. The other way in which both males and females attempt to raise the likelihood off successful offspring is sexual selection, in which they choose characteristics or behaviours that are more likely to result in producing children. This could be signs of strength or power in the male, or a nurturing behaviour in the female. One distinction between human females and non-human females could be from the concept of sexual selection, as Holloway et al (2007) discusses Gregor (1985) in his suggestion of females’ preference of male mates who are taller and more powerful than themselves. In evolutionary terms this would be because not only would they be able to protect their family but they would make it more likely of passing on their genes to the females’ offspring. This can be relevant to modern human females who have shown an inclination to males who have resource power or a higher status in society as these traits would provide the same security and protection as strength and power would have to our ancestors. The social constructionist perspective suggests that the way an individual is brought up and the society they live in can influence their ideas on gender. They suggest that people can be identified as being masculine or feminine regardless of their sex. This contrasts the biological perspectives theory that the sex of a person is not the essence of being a man or a woman. A distinction can be found between humans and non-humans when referring to how humans can use the term gender to describe personality differences, rather than just as a biological description of their sex. This essay began with a reference to the evolution of language and suggesting a lack of distinctiveness between humans and animals in relation to this. It went on to discuss sex and gender and how although there is distinctiveness with regards to gender from a social constructionists perspective, there were complementary themes in relation to sex from a biological and evolutionary perspective. In summary distinctiveness appears more to be less apparent in terms of evolution, but could be suggested to be more evident when looking at humans’ social influences. References Cooper,. T, and Kaye,. K, DSE212, Challenging Psychological Issues, 2007, The Open University, Milton Keyes Holloway et al, DSE212, Challenging Psychological Issues, 2007, The Open University, Milton Keyes