Just a comment on animal behaviour. I am not an ethologist, but we have a
herd of 18 horses. I don't see animal behaviour as being such a simple
matter of dominance and hierarchy as people are supposing.
The most aggressive animal in our herd is the shortest, a 13.2 hh pony
gelding (with a very massive frame). However, he never bothers the old herd
leader, who at age 30 spends most of his time dozing in the sun and just
growls a bit if the "kids" in the herd crowd in when he goes to the feeder.
Curiously the very aggressive pony can be totally cowed by a certain small
mare, two inches taller than him but much slighter. In turn a usually gentle
Arab gelding succeeds in bullying the small mare, but the Arab is totally
intimidated by the pony, so we have a strange dominance triangle. The
biggest animal in the herd--my 16.1 thoroughbred gelding which I use for
long distance competitive riding--is also the biggest wimp of all. All the
males are gelded, so I presume that testosterone levels are about equal.
My point is that if a simple model of dominance does not apply very well to
equine behaviour, it's certainly a mistake to extend it to human behaviour.
Live long and prosper
Victor Milne & Pat Gottlieb
FIGHT THE BASTARDS! An anti-neoconservative website
at http://www3.sympatico.ca/pat-vic/pat-vic/
LONESOME ACRES RIDING STABLE
at http://www3.sympatico.ca/pat-vic/
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Kurtz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: list futurework <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: February 25, 1999 6:02 PM
Subject: Re: Democracy & sociocybernetics
>Eva Durant wrote:
>
>> The bully tend to be the biggest puppy, the one with
>> the most expendable energy. Even in dogs,
>> aggressivity is "taught" by the human
>> who replaced the role of the alpha.
>
>Above is another example of internal inconsistency. The bully pup is
>aggressive independently of human interaction; and aggressiveness,
>dominance, & hierarchy exist apart from domestication.
>
>> Even bull-terriers in a strong-controlled
>> but peaceful environment tend to grow up
>> docile.
>
>I've no data, but my personal experience agrees - within a range, of
>course.
>
>> You say we should not attempt democracy because
>> no animals live that way?
>
>Strawman.
>I never said or implied that. I argue, like Ed does, that hierarchies and
>ranges of human (& other) behavior have always existed and will most likely
>continue to do so despite any structural changes invented & applied. It
>makes democracy somewhat irregular at best. But I'm not advocating
>dictatorship, just realistic expectations if humans plan to peacefully
>narrow the gap between rich & poor.
>
[snip]
