Anima et Machina

Family level

Reciprocity itself may be structured differently at different levels of social complexity. In his construction of substantivist economics, Polanyi (1957) described reciprocity as the form of economic relationship particularly characteristic of egalitarian societies. Being equals, people exchange goods and services with trusted friends and relations in the manner that Mauss described. As much as these exchanges may have economic content and functions, they remain social because in these marketless societies the economy is fundamentally social.

Recipročná výmena, teda mechanizmus recipročného altruizmu, slúži na presdadenie vlastného genofondu. Preto je založený primárne na win-win stratégii. Od recipienta očakávam podporu môjho genofondu, nie jeho genofondu. Lenže ho k tomu potrebujem. Preto starostlivo rátam zisky a straty. To však nie je o nejakej vnútornej hodnote daru, ale o pocite adekvátnosti a ten závisí od mnohých faktorov. V tomto bode majú pravdu tí, čo odmietajú ekonomizmus v myslení jedincov a uznávajú, že každý má individuálne potreby a hodnotový rebríček.

Akákoľvek výmena, teda reciprocita, teda obchod, trh, atď, majú alfa mémy recipročného, alebo príbuzenského altruizmu.

Humans at all levels of social complexity are highly intelligent and continually creative. Ever pragmatic, they will find and evaluate the costs and benefits of the full range of foods within an environment. Of course, some foods may remain unattainable pending development of such specific technology as fishing gear or domesticated seed. But history proves that necessity is the mother of invention where provisioning the family is concerned; in the long run, humans can be expected to develop the technology to get the job done.

No ale tie technológie sa vyvíjali postupne, neboli zrazu. Núdza nič nenaučí.

The press of population on resources over a long enough time span, however, ultimately called forth intensified exploitation of existing environments. As envisioned by Kelly (1995), intensification takes different lines channeled by the opportunities and constraints of specific environments and technologies. The most general process is the widening of the diet in the “broad spectrum revolution” that took place at the end of the Pleistocene. Across much of the globe human groups exploited a large variety of species, especially plants, to meet the needs of expanding populations (Earle 198oa). These societies probably looked much like the classic family-level foragers described in Chapter 3. Under some conditions, however, intensification could result in adding domesticated plant and animal species to broaden the diet while allowing family-level groups to continue on largely unchanged (e.g., Machiguenga [Case 31 and Nganasan [Case 4]). Eventually, problems posed by the need for further intensification to support still greater populations would require the creation of new institutions that organized people above the family level.

Typický prípad horizontálnej speciácie mémplexov

Sahlins argued that foragers’ limited needs can be satisfied by a few days of work each week, leaving their remaining time free for noneconomic activities. A broad cross-cultural study by Hayden (1981a), which considers time spent processing food in addition to time spent procuring it, concludes that hunter-gatherers need expend only two to five hours per day in these activities.

Paráda. Podobne u delfínov. Veľký priestor pre mémy.

Any hunter has a good chance of coming home empty-handed, and the camp, consisting of a number of hunters, acts to average these high daily risks by sharing meat. Although the camp functions like the household in this regard, the sharing and cooperation are usually limited to meat and do not diminish the independence of the household, which can move from camp to camp.

Zdá sa, že lov nás donútil k väčšej sociálnosti a kooperatívnosti. Mäso ako zdroj evolučného „pokroku“.

Ceremonialism and leadership, two elements of group formation that we will track throughout the book, are ad hoc. They exist to resolve particular difficulties of group cohesion that occur only as long as the multifamily group is together. Both ceremonialism and leadership exist among foragers, but both are context-specific and comparatively unelaborated.

Je naozaj zrejmé, že tu vidíme niečo ako zákonitosť, že mémy, ktoré sú schopné zabezpečiť viac domestikácie musia súčasne zabezpečiť viac socializácie, a teda potrebujú väčšie skupiny sapientov.

For the !Kung, even more so than for the Shoshone, an organization above the family level is essential for the family’s survival. The two levels of suprafamily organization are the camp and the regional interfamily and intercamp network. Although these levels are highly flexible and informal, they are essential for handling problems of subsistence risk.

Občasné vznikanie mémov ktoré prekračujú bežné interakcie naráža zjavne na nízku frekvenciu týchto interakcií. Majú malú možnosť replikácie, a kedže sú vhodné iba pre nenormálne situácie, zanikajú. Neustále sa však objavujú podobným mechanizmom ako sú v evolučnej biológii mutačné tlaky, či ťahy.

Families with Domestication

In both cases domesticates serve as a dietary supplement to wild foods, which remain very important.

To by zodpovedalo dnešným predstavám o domestikácii, kde ide vlastne o dlhodobý proces sinantropizácie.

Ve společném typu lomítko-a-hořet zahradě se často nacházejí v méně intenzivních zahradnických systémech, kde divoké potraviny stále hrají důležitou roli ve výživě, několik různých druhů potravinářských provozů jsou intercropped. Jak Geertz poznámky, intercropped zahrady “napodobit” tropické lesy a daleko k ochraně integrity půdy. Pozemní-objímání plodiny, jako je dýně a tykve stanovit spodní kryt; nad těmito s intercropped matice sponky, jako kukuřice, maniok, yam a vyplnit střední pásmo; a nad těmi, strom plodiny, jako je banán, kešu, a guava tvoří baldachýn.

Napodobenie štruktúry pralesnej vegetácie je vlastne replikácia mémov.

Men may have their bows made by a better craftsman and repay him with favors, though not in a strictly calculated sense. Some young women who do not yet weave are looked down on and considered lazy for their dependence on more experienced women. But these differences are not institutionalized in any sense into occupations or classes.

Ekonomika recipročného altruizmu

However, most Machiguenga households run smoothly as units of generalized reciprocity. Food is constantly circulated among members. A woman passes an ear of roasted corn to her husband, who breaks it in half and returns half to her. He then breaks his half and gives part to his young daughter, who shares it with other children. Mother’s half of the corn is likewise divided, and the children soon pass bits of corn back to their parents. Food is seemingly enjoyed as much in the sharing as in the eating.

Opäť základ budúcej ekonomiky je v rôznych spôsoboch realizácie recipročného altruizmu pomocou mémov delenia potravy.

U Shoshonov a Nganasanov patrí majetok rodine, iba veľké veci, ako sú siete, ktoré je nevyhnutné užívať spoločne, vlastní skupina rodín. Je zrejme jasné, že majetok je pojem, mémplex, obsahujúci mém príslušnosti k telu. V momente, keď sa scudzuje, požičia, vymení a pod, tak sa stáva tento mém slobodnejší. Môže sa spojiť s inými mémami do mémplexov.
Spoločné vlastníctvo už je nadradené nad sapientov a podlieha vlastným ekologickým pravidlám. Napríklad pravidlu tzv. „tragédie spoločného pasienku“.

When two or more families share the same tent, one man and his wife are accepted as leaders of the tent and occupy the place of honor at the right of the entrance. Other residents of the tent inform the leaders about their own economic activities. Popov does not mention whether separate families keep separate larders, but it does seem that sharing a tent implies at least a degree of communal food supply.

• Mém pravej ruky, ako najpoužívanejšej ruky, je zrejme α-mém, preto sa prirodzene spája s inými mémami do hierarchizačných mémplexov. Napríklad pobočník ako pravá ruka, alebo ako v tomto príklade, kde muž a žena sediaci napravo od vchodu sú vodcami stanu.
• Je jasné, že kým vzťahy v rodine sú riadené α-mémami príbuzenského výberu a príbuzenského altruizmu, tak vzťahy medzi rodinami pre opicu už nie sú také jednoduché a musia byť riadené naučenými β-mémami, teda kultúrnymi mémami. Tie však už podliehajú prírodnému výberu, ktorý však závisí menej od fenotypu jedincov.

Where several families share a tent, each occupies its own portion of the tent, within which men, women, and children have their assigned places according to commonly accepted principles (e.g., the men are nearest the central hearth). The parking place for each member’s sleds is also established, indicating the degree to which individual behavior must be structured in the multifamily coresidential group.

• Vlastný priestor je pre rodinu vrodený fenotypový mémplex. Preto zrejme aj v spoločných stanoch je to prvá jednoduchá forma ekosystému.
• Kedže stan je fyzická ekosystémová danosť, tak sa v ňom vytvoria lokality rodín. A hierarchia, napríklad kto bol v stanoch skôr, kto neskôr, atď.