old papers: culture

                            
  “…Life is a grotesque practical joke constantly pulling away chairs from under [human] dignity. Nothing is sane, reality is a hall of distorting mirrors reflecting the grimness of our own pretensions.”--Milton Shulman

    From a somber décor of gray monochrome, an intransigent stranger emerges almost inaudible. Without false modesty, she attempts to escape the game of the rules. Stipulating absolute conditions doesn’t interest her, she simply wants to be; she wishes to know herself, her limits, and what similarities the world around her shares. She pitilessly expels air in a vulgar attempt to communicate, to understand, but her words seem to fall into veritable voids (deaf ears). She integrates and disintegrates concepts, she both sees likenesses and differences; she does not fear “chaos” nor “order”, she more so is afraid of peoples tendency to: “have the word goodness in their mouths, and a bloody knife between their teeth”(Ionesco).

    The alienists and their alienated… In this essay, I will question where we draw the line between the two; and, more importantly I will explore whether or not monkey and apes have culture. The definition of culture that I’ll be using comes from Webster’s Dictionary and states: “[Culture is]… Social and intellectual formation.” by placing this meaning on the word, I begin with the pre-notion that all living things in one way or another possess culture.

    To facilitate my work let us merely suppose that there are three simultaneous modes of world which characterize the existence of each of our being in the world. (This concept is from Biswanger.) the first aspect of the world in this hypothetical situation will be Umwelt (“world around“), the next will be Mitwelt (“with world”), and the third final world will be Eigenwelt (“own world”). The Umwelt is what is taken in general parlance as world; it is the world of objects, the natural environment that includes biological needs, drives, and instincts. This world has natural laws (hierarchies, imposing wills) and cycles (desire/ relief, sleep/ wake, life/ death), which each of us is thrust into and must adjust to. Because this objective world is too large for any being to fully know, we reduce it to a smaller, more subjective reality, of things which impact us directly or things which we lend meaning to (the world can not be purely objective, but it is also not limited to our imaginative participation-- strange concept, a bit confusing!). Regardless, as living beings we are tied to an immediate concrete reality.

    The significance of Umwelt in showing culture in primates is overwhelming. Primates are extremely efficient at maintaining life (because they are communal animals). They use tools (I.e. termite fishing and nut cracking) to help them easily meet (and perhaps even surpass) their basic biological needs. This demonstrates an elevated mental capacity implying better thinking and learning patterns among their species.

    Although moral intransigence and dogmatic application of law and order tends to defy change, gliding like a ghost, I shall move on with my attempt to explain the mysterious fusion of world and life and culture. As this procession of thought continues, I begin to think of the importance of commitment. Most human seem to be caught up in this encompassing notion that the evils which befoul human relationships and, even the freedom to interact openly for more than tangible reasons, is limited solely to Homo Sapiens. Men have carried this point (to what seems to be) savage caricature. The lame idea that the chatter of animals (primates) is composed of purely irrational assemblages of sounds, denuded of all sense, has sufficed as an explanation as the result of infinitesimal sluggishness. Primates not only bond together to learn basic survival skills, and ensure protective measures for long term species survival from predators and the elements, monkeys not only have a hierarchy to ensure survival of the group from individuals within their own group (aka law/ order)… but primates also speak a complex language of sounds, postures and facial alterations… they also have managed to evolve and learn human sign language. And language is core to human evolution and our sense of culture. Without reservation, I find the egocentrism of humans denying monkey linguistics as viable evidence of their community and intelligence, dubious at best. This highbrow, forbidding thinking is superfluous and most likely the product of insecurity in the minds of its creators/ believers. This type of belief has a deep desire to conquer and gain power over nature, and results in the estrangement of mankind from our world (something that I don’t believe our primate counter-parts are tormented by, to such an extreme degree). As someone who is opposed to conformism and accepted mores which conflict with my sense of self, I tend to lean towards an ontological approach of seeking a relation to reality which cuts between the subject/ object dichotomy (not complete idealism, not complete materialism).

    Mitwelt is the world of interrelationships. Its not the “group on the individual” or the “collective mind” nor even the herd instinct (which seeks an environmental constant). It is, however, a complex interaction where the meaning of the others in a group, are partially determined by ones own relationship to them (the meaning of the group for me depends on how I place myself into it-- personal decision and commitment are key). Mitwelt is a “true” relationship (versus the Umwelt adaptation/ herd deal) which involves give/ take (compromise) and mutual awareness. This is seen in primates to an almost profound level. Chimpanzees and other primates, create bonds/ friendships which surpass the necessary survival pairing. When engaging in play, primates demonstrate signs of happiness; and, when someone dies or is absent from their immediate presence, they appear to be sad. Their culture can be noticed by observing the physical and verbal expressions they use to interact with each other by various levels of intimacy.

    At this point I’ve approached the physical world, and the world of interpersonal relationships. Nowhere is the profound realization of the contingency of life (the “thrownness” as the Existentialists use to say) more evident than in the solitary world of primates. In the beginning of this essay, I mentioned that man alienates, but now the question arises, who is the alienated? Man suffers an inner, harrowing conviction of being estranges. It is this awesome presence of “alone-ness” which palpably pervades mans being. I do not intend to be deluded by hope or dragged down by hopelessness through this, my inquiry of man and monkey’s condition, my endeavor is rather to show how Eigenwelt lends depth and verve to despair (and perhaps cyclically gives rebirth to despair itself).

    Eigenwelt is the world of self-awareness, self-relatedness, and self-knowledge; it gives insight into the meaning of an event for oneself. It is not merely the inner experience, but rather the basis on which we see the “real” world in her “true” light (the basis of our relation to the world, our perspective). The vast array of deterministic influences which operate on me (from the outside world) are only significant in how I relate to them, how I carry them with me, and how I allow myself to be molded (or built) by them; and, this is the job of my Eigenwelt.

  Eigenwelt is the home of insight, of my inner Gestalt and reform in general. The presence of this third world implies higher thinking and higher being. To recognize oneself as an individual is a trait that primates and humans alone seem to share. Primates show the presence of this through mirror-recognition, speech involving words like “I want” or “I feel” (when they are taught human sign language), and even through their interpersonal relationships of the Mitwelt. I believe that it is only a matter of the extent to which mankind feels his sense of self that truly separates us from the monkeys.

    When a monkey is wronged, it can express righteous indignation, a trait usually considered reserved for a complex culturally advanced species. Monkeys have also been caught doing extreme acts of altruism and self sacrifice. These complex features of Self in relationship to other, lead me to believe monkeys are not only highly intelligent but also have culture.

    Mans struggle for self-assertion in all sectors of life has made him more aware that reality constitutes more than a mechanical sum of its parts. Man is the Idealist; the sole being to have the capability to project wants and hopes into a distant future. From animalistic vigor, or perhaps even sheer necessity, amn lends meaning and purpose to his own life and all that he encounters (somewhat cathartic talent, isn’t it?). It is the distinctive capacity of humans to abstract, to use symbols and to go beyond immediate limits and think in terms of the possible. The German word Augenblick (blinking of an eye, pregnant moment, or epiphany) indicates something which I believe is beyond primates (or machines for that matter). Man can make commitments and understand that the self has made a promise, which must be fulfilled, in order to maintain “values”. Man also has the unusual capacity to cast bridges across time and know/ understand things that a personal individual has never experienced (or bared witness to, but the person can identify, such as a threat). The final trait that I’ll mention that separates man from other primate relatives is mans ability to jeopardize the self by questioning the self (introspection or skepticism can prompt man to alienate himself from his worlds), which can in turn lead to suicide.

    The world of biological drives/ cycles and determinism (Umwelt), the world of responsibility to fellow beings (Mitwelt), and the world in which the individual can be aware of the fate he alone entertains at that moment (Eigenwelt)… all of these worlds theoretically are running parallel and simultaneously. As conscious beings, humans and primates alike are engaged in the process of forming and designing our reality. Because we (mankind and monkeys) are both constantly growing/ changing, then I believe that this fact alone constitutes a: “Social and intellectual formation”. In this essay I have attempted to avoid the arid intellectualism or cold loss of self that is prevalent in our current academic environment. I attempted to show that all primates have culture.

   To conclude, I would like to say that though each of us is ultimately alone, each of us is ultimately also in relationship to other. This paradox describes the situation of both man and monkey.

   And the lewd gleams in her eyes will become a devouring flame in the end, her voice has transformed from a whisper to a scream, but will it be enough?-- Will anyone notice? Will anyone see or hear her pleas from the deepest reaches of her being? She presents an unsparing indictment of barbaric thought, which is immediately countered by her idealistic assessment of what things should be; does her cry die unheard? Is she right or is she wrong, and does either exist anywhere outside of the individuals mind? Confusion. She once again fades into the gray monochrome, blending with her surroundings… immobile and inaudible. The acceptance is her light the rest the obscurity of art…the lost.