Recent hcs_MACT items

SOCIALITY IN E. O. WILSON’S GENESIS: EXPANDING THE PAST, IMAGINING THE FUTURE

Thu, 6 May 2021 00:00:00 +0000

In this article, I critique Edward O. Wilson’s (2019) Genesis: The Deep Origin of Societies from a perspective provided by David Christian’s (2016) Big History. Genesis is a slender, narrowly focused recapitulation and summation of Wilson’s lifelong research on altruism, eusociality, the biological bases of kinship, and related aspects of sociality among insects and humans. Wilson considers it to be among the most important of his 35+ published books, one of which created the controversial discipline of sociobiology and two of which won Pulitzer Prizes. Big History is Christian’s recent attempt to graphically depict the history of the universe in a massive, sprawling, well-documented volume that opens with the Big Bang and terminates now, about 13.8 billion years later.

I take four disparate approaches to enhance the strengths of Wilson’s and Christian’s important books. Part 1. Expanding the past examines 1. contextual data for numerous transitions in sociality in the...

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE / MACHINE LEARNING RESEARCH USING THE AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL ALYAWARRA KINSHIP DATASET: PARTIAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 2004-2020

Tue, 4 May 2021 00:00:00 +0000

This paper describes methods used at the interface between anthropology and machine learning research. Charles Kemp, a graduate student at MIT in 2004, discovered my numerically coded Alyawarra kinship term applications data (Denham 1973; Denham, McDaniel and Atkins 1979; Denham and White 2005) and received my permission to use the data in his machine learning research. Since then, his co-authored papers (Kemp et al. 2004, 2006, 2010), and other works that cite his papers and mine, have played significant roles in the development of unsupervised pattern detection and machine learning technology as subsets of Artificial Intelligence research. Part 1 of the paper outlines how I produced the Alyawarra (Alyawara) kinship term applications dataset and introduces the structure and content of the dataset and supporting files. Part 2 briefly describes some simple ways to analyze the dataset either manually or with machine learning technology. Minimally these examples demonstrate some...

Aboriginal Men Coming of Age in Central Australia

Tue, 7 May 2019 00:00:00 +0000

This is a quantitative analysis of the replication of Dreamtime traditions among the Alyawarra of Central Australia in 1971-72. A narrative summary presents observational data recorded during the enactment of a 108-hours long tone poem that embodied oral traditions, songs, dances and visual arts as aides-mémoire that facilitated the synthesis and persistence of a reliable society comprised of unreliable people. The tone poem, presented by 69 men and women, marked the beginning of one young man’s lifelong education in the all-encompassing Aboriginal Dreamtime. A tabular summary follows the narrative summary and describes demographic, genealogical, kinship and other quantified relations that were embedded in the narrative and that young men were required to learn before they could marry and sire children. The paper ends with a discussion of the two summaries that together shaped the education of young Aboriginal men. Instantaneous scan sampling and unsupervised pattern detection...

THE GENERATIVE LOGIC OF CROW-OMAHA TERMINOLOGIES: THE THONGA-RONGA KINSHIP TERMINOLOGY AS A CASE STUDY

Wed, 18 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

The goal of the paper is to show how the generative logic approach to kinship terminology structures sheds light on the basis for the skewing that characterizes the Crow-Omaha terminologies. The generative logic of the Omaha terminology of the Thonga-Ronga of southern Africa is examined in detail and the skewing in this terminology is found to occur as a consequence of having a set of male generating terms for the male kin terms, but only female self for the female kin terms. This contrasts sharply with the Omaha terminology of the Fox Indians for which the skewing is the result of a deleting the cross-cousin kin terms from an Iroquois terminology. The results obtained here underscore the need to consider the skewing associated with the Crow-Omaha terminologies from the perspective of the generative logic of kinship terminologies.

HAMBERGER’sCOMMENT ON D. READ “GENERATIVE CROW-OMAHA TERMINOLOGIES”

Wed, 18 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

This is the latest of a series of papers on the generative deep structures of kinship terminologies by Dwight Read, which considerably widens the spectrum of methods and concepts employed hitherto. I will therefore discuss it in the context of Read’s more general project to develop a theory and typology of kinship terminologies based on the process of their generation, by concentrating on three main arguments: (1) the newly introduced difference between symmetric and asymmetric deep structures; (2) the use of cross-sex kin terms as gender-switch operators; and (3) the interpretation of generational skewing as an effect of generative asymmetry.

COMMENT ON VAZ’ RELATIVES, MOLECULES AND PARTICLES

Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

COMMENT ON VAZ’ RELATIVES, MOLECULES AND PARTICLES

READ’S REPLY TO COMMENTS ONTHE GENERATIVE LOGIC OF CROW-OMAHA TERMINOLOGIES: THE THONGA-RONGA KINSHIP TERMINOLOGY AS A CASE STUDY

Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

The seven commentators, Thomas Trautmann, Peter Whiteley, Patrick McConvell, Patrick Heady, Franklin Tjon Sie Fat, Klaus Hamberger, and Mauro Barbosa de Almeida, have provided wide-ranging and important observations that go beyond the specifics of my text and bring to the discussion important issues that relate to our understanding of the Crow-Omaha terminologies. Their comments alone provide a major contribution to the discourse on the Crow-Omaha terminologies. Accordingly, my response to their comments focuses on ways that the structural analysis I presented of the Thongan kinship terminology relates to this broader discussion.

I have divided my reply into seven parts: (1) Relationship of Abstract Algebras to Kinship Terminologies, (2) Other Methodologies: Thick Description, Equivalence Rules, Description and Extension, (3) Ethnographic Issues Relating to The Algebraic Representation, (4) Comments by Patrick McConvell, Patrick Heady, and Franklin Tjon Sie Fat, (5) The...

PATRICK MCCONVELL’sCOMMENT ON D. READ “GENERATIVE CROW-OMAHA TERMINOLOGIES”

Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

This is a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate about Crow-Omaha and the overall approach to analysis of kinship systems.

That Omaha patterns can arise for different reasons in different societies is certainly a possibility, and it is good that Read presents here a comparison which claims to show that. I do agree with Read that a formal analysis is a necessary first step before continuing with an explanation of the causes of the specific form of kinship structure in a specific group. The key dichotomy proposed is that between Crow-Omaha as a direct consequence of an inherent generative logic and as resulting from a transformation of the terminology.The idea that there is a major difference between the causes of the two types is attractive but this conceptualisation of it is problematic. It implies that the Thonga-Ronga system is not due to a transformation, so perhaps has remained the same from a very ancient time. But no evidence bearing on this is offered,...

TJON SIE FAT’sCOMMENT ON D. READ “GENERATIVE CROW-OMAHA TERMINOLOGIES”

Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

It is always a pleasure to read any of the ongoing elaborations of Dwight Read’s framework for the formal analysis of kinship terminologies. This exploratory case study of the Thonga-Ronga terminological system raises a number of important issues concerning the specificities of skewing as well as the encompassing methodology of Read’s generative logic program for kinship analysis. I first comment on Read’s framework for the analysis of a kinship terminology’s generative logic. I then argue (as other respondents have) for embedding the analysis of Thonga-Ronga skewing within the context of a more locally constrained field of comparison. I conclude with specific suggestions for comparing kinship models and their underlying generative logics as variants and transitions situated within an abstract morphospace.

TRAUTMANN AND WHITELEY’sCOMMENT ON D. READ “GENERATIVE CROW-OMAHA TERMINOLOGIES”

Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

Read’s formal analysis of kinship terminologies is well known and widely respected, as is his leadership in promoting the formal analysis of kinship through the formation of panels and conferences, and his role in this journal. As in all his work the paper is strongly reasoned and draws upon a knowledge of the literature that is long and deep. All of these are reasons we welcome the piece before us. On the other hand, the spirit of this work is somewhat different from that of our book, engendering in us some reservations. Taking the strengths for granted, we will confine our comment to a couple of things in Read’s article with which we take issue.

ALMEIDA’sCOMMENT ON D. READ “GENERATIVE CROW-OMAHA TERMINOLOGIES”

Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

Read´s research program for describing the “generative logic” of distinct kinship terminologies in a homogeneous framework has proved its fruitfulness in different ethnographic domains, ranging from North American kinship to Dravidian terminologies, and more. Applied now to the so-called Omaha systems, the framework suggests a new taxonomy of kinship terminologies, in which Thonga kinship terminology – until now a type specimen for the Omaha terminology, based on Junod´s ethnography – is separated from Fox kinship terminology, another type specimen of the Omaha, as described by Dorsey, and Morgan before him. Read´s thesis, therefore, subverts Lounsbury´s subdivision of “Omaha” taxon in four varieties, among which “Type I” was instanced by the Fox terminology, while Type III had Thonga data as a standard representative. It is not my intention to refute Read´s representation of the logic underlying Thong kinship terminology, expressed in diagrammatic form, but, rather, to suggest...

HEADY’S COMMENT ON D. READ “GENERATIVE CROW-OMAHA TERMINOLOGIES”

Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0000

Read’s work on the generative logic of kinship terminologies constitutes one of the most distinctive and stimulating series of publications in the contemporary anthropology of kinship. His intention to produce a universally valid explanatory (i.e. causal) theory of kinship terminology is highly ambitious – but also appropriate and intellectually refreshing. An important feature of his theoretical framework is that it allows for an interaction between universal cognitive processes and local cultural ideas. Another distinctive feature is that Read usually models whole terminologies – and specific features, such as crossness and generational skewing, are understood in the light of the terminological system as a whole. Read has been continually testing and refining his conceptual apparatus, and in this paper he brings it to bear for the first time on Crow-Omaha systems – offering us an exploratory case study that is intended both to show the insight that the generative logic approach...

Reflections on the Algebraic Representation of Kinship Structure

Sat, 30 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

The reflections here are on work done in 1976 and abandoned in 1980. Nonetheless, after forty years the author may have forgotten the ethnography, but he could not help but reflect on the algebraic aspects, despite himself.

Residential Group Composition Among the Alyawarra

Sat, 19 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0000

This is the third of three papers I have written recently that challenge and seek to supplant the presumption of closure, rigidity and simplicity in anthropological analyses of Australian Aboriginal social organization. The first dealt with generational closure in canonical Kariera and Aranda kinship models; the second dealt with societal closure, endogamy and the small-world problem; this one examines closure, rigidity and simplicity in residential group compositions. I argue that these three problematic applications of the concept of closure converted European folk beliefs into a scientific theory based more on assumptions and conjectures than on observations of Aboriginal behavior. This paper and the two that preceded it constitute a systematic argument that emphasizes the importance of openness, flexibility and complexity in analyzing Australian Aboriginal social organization.

The current paper is a commentary on theoretical issues associated with diversity in residential...

COMMENT ON: DENHAM, “ALYAWARRA KINSHIP, INFANT CARRYING, AND ALLOPARENTING”

Fri, 5 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0000

Arising from an initial inquiry about the distribution of levels of inbreeding in Aboriginal Australian (Denham, 2012) societies and subsequent analysis of some small datasets with Dr Denham, I have come to read the paper “Alyawarra kinship, infant carrying, and alloparenting”. It contains interesting observations about patterns of interaction within- and between-social and kinship groups studied by Dr Denham, which have prompted for me some questions and speculations. I should stress that my perspective on the material covered in the paper is a combination of quantitative genetic analysis, coupled with a broader interest in evolutionary processes, in this case as they may have applied in both the genetic and social or cultural senses of evolution. I share these questions and speculations simply to extend the discussion which I am sure will be prompted by the paper. And I stress in advance my extremely limited knowledge of the fields of research covered by this journal.

ALYAWARRA KINSHIP, INFANT CARRYING, AND ALLOPARENTING

Fri, 5 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0000

In recent decades, fieldwork with 20th century hunter-gatherers has led to a “paradigm shift” away from emphasis on child care by the mother alone, toward alloparental care in which parents and their children benefit from help provided by children’s older siblings, mother’s siblings, mother’s mother and more distantly related or unrelated others. This paper emphasizes the importance of alloparental care among the Alyawarra-speaking people of Central Australia in 1971-72. It reports on 1439 numerically coded behavioral observations of infant and child carrying, in combination with extensive kinship, genealogical, demographic and census data that reveal previously undetected patterns in child care, including the extreme rarity of carrying by parents (2.85% of carries by mothers, 0.28% by fathers). I suggest that Alyawarra infants and children were treated as part of the Commons, deeply analogous to all shared resources including kangaroos, waterholes and sacred sites. Everyone ultimately...

RESPONSE TO MACT COMMENTS ON DENHAM’S “ALYAWARRA KINSHIP, INFANT CARRYING, AND ALLOPARENTING”

Fri, 5 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0000

I am delighted with the broad range of Comments submitted to MACT concerning my paper on kinship, infant carrying and alloparenting among the Alyawarra. I thank all of the authors for their contributions. Although some topics were addressed by only one author, several were addressed by most or all of them, so I have directed my responses to selected topics rather than to individual Comments. I have not attempted to respond to all of the issues addressed in the Comments, but have chosen a representative sample for special attention.

ALLOMATERNAL CARE AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF NATURALISTIC OBSERVATIONS AMONG CONTEMPORARY FORAGERS: A COMMENTARY ON DENHAM’S “ALYAWARRA KINSHIP, INFANT CARRYING, AND ALLOPARENTING”

Fri, 5 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0000

In this substantive work, Denham presents quantitative data on approximately 200 hours of observational research on infant and child carrying among the Alyawarra of Australia. His aim was to “demonstrate ways in which observational data collected with a hunter-gatherer society almost half a century ago can contribute to an understanding of our species”. He does just this. While his data, at first sight, may appear to be out of date (being collected from 1971-1972), that interpretation would be misguided. These are valuable and timely data, given the current climate of research on cooperative care matrices and their significance for understanding the evolution of human behavior and reproduction. Denham’s data represents thoughtful and detailed ethnographic and behavioral data collection.

COMMENTS on W. Denham’s “Alyawarra kinship, infant carrying, and alloparenting” **and the review of it by Herlosky et al., “Allomaternal care and the significance of naturalistic observations among contemporary foragers”**

Fri, 5 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0000

Regarding a possible theory about the distribution of alloparenting, which is what Denham’s ethnographic paper is at least implicitly dealing with and which is nicely addressed by the Herlosky et al review of Denham, especially the broad range of the relevant literature, something more needs to be addressed. Most of all Denham’s paper and the literature cited in the review seem concerned with what appears to be a sort of bio-evolutionary basis for alloparenting; a perspective that hardly considers the importance of larger scale socio-cultural factors at all directly, factors which do not lend themselves simply to bio-evolutionary analysis. What I want to do here is address the latter factors more directly without disputing the bio-evolutionary analysis.

COMMENT ON: DENHAM, “ALYAWARRA KINSHIP, INFANT CARRYING, AND ALLOPARENTING”

Fri, 5 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0000

The thought-provoking review of Denham by Dr. Robert Banks points out some very important parts of cultural analysis, unfortunately seldom discussed. Some of the questions posed by Banks are in part answered by two citations in Denham’s original paper: those of Hirshleifer (1977) and Gammage (2011). While Denham discusses Gammage in a bit more depth (pages 82 and 83), he cites Hirshleifer for more narrow reasons. Hirshleifer, a micro-economist, was one of the original modern thinkers on how biological and cultural evolution can be treated as one subject. Had Hrdy not treated the subject, Denham could have proposed his study showing that Hirshleifer predicted much of what Denham found.

COMMENT ON VAZ’ RELATIVES, MOLECULES AND PARTICLES

Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0000

COMMENT ON VAZ’ RELATIVES, MOLECULES AND PARTICLES

Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0000

COMMENT ON VAZ’ RELATIVES, MOLECULES AND PARTICLES

RELATIVES, MOLECULES AND PARTICLES

Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0000

The logical nature of kinship terminologies has been argued for from the beginning of kinship studies, starting with Morgan, and more recently, analysts have begun to appreciate the “mathematical beauty” of kin terminological systems. Application of insights from fields such as archaeology, linguistics and molecular genetics is taking kinship studies to levels never before reached. This paper on the kinship system of a Dravidian tribe, the Hill Madia of central India, may be seen as following a similar approach, and the reason being the advantages it gives in understanding this central Dravidian kinship. Most of the ideas and concepts used in the analysis of the Madia data are standard and conventional in the study of human kinship systems, but a few such as complementation, unification and supersymmetry are taken from the natural sciences. Using these concepts as key analytical tools has proven helpful in describing some vital aspects of the Madia kinship.

We propose...

Comment on Denham's 'Beyond Fictions of Closure in Australian Aboriginal Kinship'