[HN Gopher] It's not just us: Other animals change their social ...
___________________________________________________________________
It's not just us: Other animals change their social habits in old
age
Author : Hooke
Score : 93 points
Date : 2024-07-28 04:28 UTC (3 days ago)
(HTM) web link (knowablemagazine.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (knowablemagazine.org)
| mouzogu wrote:
| good read. thanks.
|
| > "This [lack of movement] indicates there might be some kind of
| competitive exclusion going on: Perhaps more energetic, younger
| deer with offspring to feed are colonizing the best grazing
| patches."
|
| sounds like ageism in the job market (joking).
|
| i think there is always a simple thing behind motivation. hunger,
| violence, greed...humans just good at hiding the naked truth.
| HPsquared wrote:
| We're good at focusing on our long-term greed and hunger over
| short-term greed and hunger.
| xnavra50 wrote:
| Some of us aren't. Eating junk food, drinking alcohol, taking
| drugs and loans for new shiny things.
| HPsquared wrote:
| That's another thing with humans: massive diversity. Some
| are 10x stronger than others for example, or 10x better
| memory. There's such a wide variety. I wonder if any other
| species is as varied. I think this variation, combined with
| the ability to socially cooperate (language) makes us
| naturally evolved for the efficient division of labour. A
| group with diverse abilities has a few superstar
| specialists in each field who can lift the whole group via
| cooperation. The ability to cooperate shifts the
| risk:reward ratio of the species for this kind of risk-
| taking.
| drewcoo wrote:
| Disagree. We are much less diverse than many other
| species.
|
| We are a social species so we pay more attention to one
| another. We are also pattern-seekers. Combine these
| traits and we have humans seeing magnified differences in
| other humans.
| jhedwards wrote:
| Recently I was struck by the fact that some people have
| an internal monologue and others don't, and some people
| can see vivid images in their mind and some can't see
| anything at all. These seem like very dramatic
| differences to me.
|
| I'm skeptical that we are less diverse than other
| species. In a herd in nature, exposed to the wild,
| exposed to predators and food scarcity, there is not much
| room for diversity: you must be able to survive. In human
| society, on the other hand, we live in an artificial
| environment insulated from those risks, and where any
| number of skills are sufficient for survival: you can be
| funny, musical, logical, artistic, patient and caring,
| mathematical, strong, good at fighting etc.
| jajko wrote:
| Yeah but selective evolution lags behind right now by
| what, 10,000 years if not more? What I mean our selected
| traits are stil mostly from hunters/gatherers/early
| farming era.
|
| Those survival risk were and in some places still are
| present, stronger would simply have higher survival
| chances compared to weaker. Those skills you list wouldnt
| matter that much 4000 years ago in most cases, not on
| survival level.
| taneq wrote:
| Physiologically we seem to be fairly consistent
| (especially given our relative complexity to a lot of
| other animals). Mentally? There's an incredible variety
| of aptitudes both in direction and magnitude. I suspect
| part of this might just be that we're a relatively 'new'
| species, and neurologically we've evolved so fast that
| the results are still a little random.
| ahartmetz wrote:
| Regarding relative physiological complexity, I would
| argue that we are physiologically as complex as any other
| large, omnivorous mammal. There is nothing special about
| humans in that regard.
|
| Our randomness might actually be adaptive given the
| complexity of our societies. There is nothing close among
| other animals.
| ds_opseeker wrote:
| Humanity went through a genetic bottleneck about 70K
| years ago. As a result, there is more genetic diversity
| in a troop of chimpanzees than in all of the employees of
| Google.
|
| So it depends how you define "diversity". I can see how
| from your view (range of life choices) humans today are
| more diverse than most species. However, if you go back
| not so long ago, there are species of ants with more
| worker roles (40+)than your typical midieval village.
| keybored wrote:
| > That's another thing with humans: massive diversity.
| Some are 10x stronger than others for example, or 10x
| better memory.
|
| The sentiment variety on HN is, however, not so diverse.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| In most other species the weaker, less able individuals
| are brutally weeded out by predation or starvation.
| Humans don't do that anymore so you see a lot wider
| variation in strength, beauty, ability, etc.
| bumby wrote:
| There's definitely some research around "hyperbolic
| discounting" and "dynamic/time inconsistency" that would
| disagree with this conclusion. There are many examples where
| we prefer a lesser short term payoff.
| linearrust wrote:
| > We're good at focusing on our long-term greed and hunger
| over short-term greed and hunger.
|
| If that were true, the modern world centered around
| consumerism wouldn't exist. We wouldn't have the obesity
| epidemic, environmental degradation or the genocide of dozens
| of native nations. Feels like short-term thinking where it's
| at.
| exe34 wrote:
| > think there is always a simple thing behind motivation.
| hunger, violence, greed...humans just good at hiding the naked
| truth
|
| our very emotions, instead of being some ineffable magical
| thing, can be described as monomaniacal neural nets trained via
| a genetic algorithm to optimise for survival and reproduction
| based on a dataset from the palaeolithic and earlier. greed,
| jealousy, lust, even the beatified versions like love and
| grief, are explainable this way.
|
| people don't like it when you explain that sort of thing
| though. they prefer to believe it's all magical.
| meroes wrote:
| If we're neural nets, shouldn't 12,000 years of post
| paleolithic experience be enough to have more modern
| emotions?
|
| All you're doing is forcing people to choose something other
| than magic. You could name almost anything and they'd have to
| choose it over magic since magic doesn't exist.
|
| This is not convincing at all.
| exe34 wrote:
| > If we're neural nets, shouldn't 12,000 years of post
| paleolithic experience be enough to have more modern
| emotions
|
| does that mean you believe the Coelacanths should have
| evolved feet by now?
|
| evolution does not work that way. usually new structures
| are laid out on top, new behaviours come about that can
| override older ones at certain times and at other times,
| "instinct" takes over, and an old program is running again.
| meroes wrote:
| That's sounding much more biological than a neural net
| now. Neural nets are much quicker to adapt to new
| parameters. Coelacanths and humans aren't. Which was my
| point if 12,000 years isn't enough whereas neural nets
| are rapidly changeable, maybe we can't do this
| equivalence in calling humans neural nets.
| exe34 wrote:
| are you maybe mentally inserting "artificial" in front of
| "neural network"? if so, do you also see GPUs in biology?
| randomdata wrote:
| _> If we're neural nets, shouldn't 12,000 years of post
| paleolithic experience be enough to have more modern
| emotions?_
|
| As far as I can tell humans are already able to survive and
| reproduce to the limits of what the physical human form is
| capable of. Optimization can only optimize so much. Where
| do you see "paleolithic" emotions being a limiting factor
| that leaves room for further optimization? What "modern"
| emotions do you envision to improve on those metrics?
|
| Human emotions do not appear to be cohesive from person to
| person, so it seems the generic algorithm is still doing
| its thing, but if the mutations are no more effective than
| the "paleolithic" emotions with respect to survivability
| and reproduction, there isn't much evolutionary pressure to
| see them become dominant.
| meroes wrote:
| Well the parent was saying our emotions are 10k-2.5m+
| years old, but I claim society is exponentially more
| complex since agriculture. Either our emotions have kept
| pace or they haven't. If they have, then the Paleolithic
| nature of our emotions makes no sense. And if they
| haven't, it takes away from the neural net idea.
|
| Things like accepting a surgeon and anesthesiologist
| putting us into suspended animation and opening our
| hearts we have learned to not freak out about. Or that a
| single person could nuke the entire planet including our
| families and we go about our lives. I propose those are
| recent learned emotional responses. Nevethertheless, it
| still seems too slow to compare it to a neural net.
| unaindz wrote:
| We could even argue that we are good at thinking we are in
| control of our own thoughts.
|
| If you haven't looked into it already I recommend Blindsight
| by Peter Watts followed by the short story The Colonel and
| Echopraxia.
|
| They talk a lot about human consciousness and it's importance
| or lack thereof. With an actually original and scary alien
| contact (related to the topic at hand), scary non cringe hard
| scify vampires (also related), in my opinion really good
| prose and in general high density of interesting concepts per
| page. With bonus real life papers at the end that
| extrapolated could explain the ideas presented in the books.
|
| I'm gonna stop because I'm far past the point that Watts
| should pay me ad money.
|
| It's licenced under Creative Commons. You can get it for free
| here (epub link at the top or read it straight from the
| page): https://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm
|
| I would tell you to donate/buy it if you like it but maybe if
| he feels the pressure in his bank account he finally writes
| the next one. jk please pay him, he deserves it.
| exe34 wrote:
| loved blindsight. read it twice and both times it left me
| very shaken for several weeks after. brilliant masterpiece!
| unaindz wrote:
| Between blindsight and anihilation I recovered my passion
| for reading after years of not doing it.
|
| And It's been a year since I read it and I still think
| about it often. I have some backlog I wanna go through
| first but I feel a reread is due already.
| exe34 wrote:
| i take it you've read crystal society, diaspora and the
| metamorphosis of prime intellect?
| soothingspirit wrote:
| I would recommend Frans de Waal's books to people interested in
| this topic.
| jcfrei wrote:
| I believe (maybe someone has a study on this) one of the main
| drivers of changing social habits among humans is the ratio of
| dopamine / cortisol. When we're younger dopamine releases happen
| more frequently, we feel energized, ready to take risks and are
| optimistic. As we grow older the ratio of cortisol releases
| increases, making us anxious, risk averse and depressed in our
| outlook. Might be similar for these deer.
| bena wrote:
| As you get older things hurt. The wear and tear one has put on
| their bodies adds up.
|
| For an extreme example, look at professional athletes. Drew
| Brees still had the desire and drive to play, but his right
| shoulder had simply given out. The final result of an injury
| over a decade ago. He cannot throw right handed anymore.
|
| A lot of these guys require knee replacements after they
| retire. Permanently disfigured fingers and toes. Etc.
|
| And we all go through a version of that.
| jcfrei wrote:
| So would it be fair to say that the increase in cortisol is
| also a protection mechanism? Since older bodies are less able
| to heal injuries the cortisol increase acts to prevent
| behavior that might damage them?
| bena wrote:
| I'm saying that it's quite possible not related to cortisol
| at all. Or possibly you have the cause and effect
| backwards. Because of all the wear and tear, we become more
| cautious about certain activities, which causes more
| stress, which then causes us to produce cortisol.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| Even just the chronic pain of old age (as seen in humans
| and other animals) would seem sufficient to cause stress.
|
| There's a reason painkillers are such a nefarious
| addiction; chronic pain happens to everyone eventually
| and has a profound impact on quality of life.
| alan-hn wrote:
| Cortisol can actually act as a painkiller and reduces
| inflammation allowing us to work through injury
| apwell23 wrote:
| > A lot of these guys require knee replacements after they
| retire.
|
| Ppl usually getting knee replacements are couch potatoes. Its
| a not "wear and tear" disease like a lot of ppl belive it to
| be.
| bena wrote:
| No, spending your time running at full speed into other
| large people also running at full speed takes a toll on
| your body.
|
| https://footballplayershealth.harvard.edu/for-former-
| players...
| apwell23 wrote:
| We don't really know if its from "wear and tear" or from
| steroid abuse which weakens bones and ligaments,
| artificially high bodyweight, injuries during practice
| and in the gym.
| detoured299 wrote:
| to be fair, op is correct that the majority of people
| that get replacements fall in the sedentary demographic
| and don't have a history of intense physical activity.
| metabolic issues and pro-inflammatory factors, not
| mechanical stress, are for many people the primary driver
| of osteoarthritis and soft tissue issues more generally.
| bena wrote:
| But people who play professional sports do get joint
| replacement at a higher rate than even the general
| population.
|
| Just because there are more of the "general population"
| doesn't mean that the subset that are "professional
| athlete" isn't doing it at a higher percentage.
|
| And there are other, non-extreme, things that also wreck
| the body. Working in the trades: plumbers, electricians,
| HVAC, construction, etc. will often leave you with bad
| backs and bad joints.
|
| And yes, living your life at the extremes is going to
| have extreme effects on your body. Sedentary is the other
| extreme of professional athlete.
|
| But even still, as things hurt more, we will be more
| cautious about endangering ourselves. Or even wondering
| if we are capable. If I can't walk without a limp, I'm
| sure as hell not running from danger. That's not cortisol
| driving our behavior, that's our behavior driving our
| cortisol.
| detoured299 wrote:
| I don't think anyone disputes that high-level sport can
| make you more vulnerable to particular msk issues than
| people who have led a less physically extreme existence.
| Overuse is a real thing! The relationship between
| cumulative load and tissue health is more complicated
| than you acknowledge, however. High cumulative load over
| life can be protective. Professional marathoners
| frequently have better knee health than sedentary people,
| yes, but also age-matched recreational runners, which is
| not what you'd expect if extreme load was
| straightforwardly harmful in the way you seem to think it
| is.
|
| Regarding your comment on cortisol. Plausibly the
| relationship between cortisol and behaviour here is bi-
| directional, as is common with hormones. High
| testosterone influences me to go to the gym and my
| workout influences my testosterone, etc.
| inglor_cz wrote:
| N == 1, but when I bought a Garmin watch and started
| doing 10 000 steps every day, all my lower limb joint
| problems disappeared in two months or so. Nowadays I
| don't even know which knee used to hurt worse (I am 45).
|
| Mind you, I wasn't completely sedentary before, but I
| guess that Garmin made me move about 40 per cent more.
| hooverd wrote:
| there's a happy medium between sedentary and an NFL
| linebacker
| resource_waste wrote:
| I have stomach issues and its really hard to mentally deal
| with life when you are in pain.
|
| If I just got laid by a 10/10 hottie, I'd probably not care
| much about my kid intentionally dropping food on the ground.
|
| If I just had a stomach issue that has me tired, out of
| breath, and mentally struggling, my kid dropping food makes
| me angry.
|
| Its really easy to say 'let it go', 'be a stoic'. But its
| much harder when you are in so much physical pain, you can't
| even work on your life's goals.
| aitchnyu wrote:
| Is there any hack for maintaining the d/c ratio as we get
| older?
| azemetre wrote:
| Maybe there's a reason why you want a lower d/c ratio when
| you're old.
|
| If you have a life of lived experiences it can be risky to
| continue to collect them when you're less physically fit.
| sebastiansm wrote:
| The "hack" is pretty simple, but few implement it:
|
| -Sleep -Nutrition -Exercise -Relationships
| apwell23 wrote:
| > depressed in our outlook.
|
| I always read that older ppl get happier as they age
|
| https://socialecology.uci.edu/news/better-age
| djeastm wrote:
| I think it's more nuanced than the article headline suggests.
| People get happier into middle adulthood, but after that it's
| more variable
|
| From the study linked
| (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36848104/):
|
| >Yet, longitudinal findings vary across younger, middle-aged,
| and older adults. Psychological distress decreases over time
| among younger adults (although only until age 33 for weekly
| reports), remains stable in midlife, and is stable (monthly)
| or slightly increases (daily and weekly) among older adults.
| For negative affect, levels decrease over time for younger
| and middle-aged adults, and only increase for the oldest
| adults for daily and monthly affect
| bbarnett wrote:
| I'd be curious for aged males and sex enhancement drugs.
| That's obviously a reward missing as men age, so would
| happiness improve?
| et-al wrote:
| Young people are told they can do anything, which
| actually leads to unhappiness as experience their
| limitations through trial and error. By the time one is
| in their mid-thirties, you know your limits, know what
| you're good at, and what brings you joy, so you stop
| wasting your time on the unnecessary (* excluding the
| super-genius VC masters of the universe growth mindset
| hackers among us).
|
| tl;dr self actualization brings happiness
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Well I'm nearly 60 and I don't think I know what I'm good
| at.
|
| I know what I'm good at of the things I've tried, but
| there's so much I haven't tried.
|
| I'm pretty sure there are things I'd be better at than
| what I do, but I'm good enough at what I do to earn a
| pretty good living so that is what I do. I also realize
| that I'm in a field where even mediocre ability is
| outlandishly well rewarded, and I try to keep that in
| mind. There are a lot of people working harder than I do
| and better and what they do than I am but who are earning
| a lot less.
|
| I've also accepted that I'll never be able to try
| everything, and there are some roads I didn't take when I
| had the chance that are now permanently closed off.
| themerone wrote:
| I've seen this change in cats who lose their fear of strangers
| and become more sociable in old age.
| furyofantares wrote:
| It's been dramatic when I've seen that with cats. Years of
| hiding from strangers, then one day they just come out and
| start sitting on laps.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| In my experience it's also typical for cats to get less
| interested in interacting with other cats.
| MisterTea wrote:
| Indeed. My cats used to religiously hang out in the basement
| on top of shelving that sits by two ground level windows.
| Those windows gave them the opportunity to interact with
| neighborhood cats walking around and there were smudges all
| over them from trying to fight them through the glass.
| Nowadays I rarely see them down there anymore as they prefer
| to simply lounge on upper floor window sills.
| rurp wrote:
| Interesting, I hadn't read this before but it's exactly what I
| have observed with my cats. They have gotten dramatically more
| comfortable with people as they have gotten older. I have often
| wondered what spurred such a significant change, and didn't
| realize it was the aging itself.
| lucideer wrote:
| I understand that even the most intuitive & seemingly "self-
| evident" truths need scientific research studies to be conducted
| to solidify our understanding & prove our assumptions, but I'm
| still always a little taken aback by the way science journalism
| presents these obvious (albeit valuable) confirmations as if
| they're surprising discoveries.
| alsetmusic wrote:
| I assume a lot of this has to do with the deterioration of
| health. When I adopted kittens, the shelter paid to have them
| "fixed" (sterilized) for free but one was slightly too young for
| the procedure. A couple of weeks later, he got the surgery and
| his personality changed drastically for about a week or less. I
| was afraid it would be a permanent change, but he clearly just
| didn't feel good and that cleared up with time. I assume aging is
| a slower version of that just based on observation of older
| family members and the limited decades that I've experienced
| firsthand. If you feel physically bad, of course your attitude
| will change.
| EncomLab wrote:
| My own little proof of this is that my dog has gone from sleeping
| on the stairway landing, to sleeping by the bedroom door, to
| sleeping next to the bed, to sleeping under my side of the bed.
| As he has aged and lost flexibility and sensory acuity he looks
| to me more and more for comfort and direction. Still loves to
| chase a ball - just takes a bit longer to bring it back :)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-07-31 23:01 UTC)