Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
kaggle-ho-010932House Oversight

Anthropology symposium recollections with no actionable political or financial leads

Anthropology symposium recollections with no actionable political or financial leads The passage consists of personal memories about anthropologists and evolutionary theory, lacking any mention of influential actors, transactions, or misconduct. It offers no investigative value. Key insights: References to various anthropologists and their work; Discussion of Hamilton's rule and evolutionary biology; Personal reflections from a 1974 symposium

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
kaggle-ho-010932
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Anthropology symposium recollections with no actionable political or financial leads The passage consists of personal memories about anthropologists and evolutionary theory, lacking any mention of influential actors, transactions, or misconduct. It offers no investigative value. Key insights: References to various anthropologists and their work; Discussion of Hamilton's rule and evolutionary biology; Personal reflections from a 1974 symposium

Tags

kagglehouse-oversightanthropologyevolutionary-biologyhistorical-recollection

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
chimpanzee compound near the linear reaction at Stanford. Clark Howell briefed us on his work at Torralba and Ambrona in Spain, where our ancestors half our size had hunted elephants twice the size of modern ones. (Elephants go back at least as far as mammoths and mastodons.) Desmond Clark covered African archaeology in general and his discoveries at Kalambo Falls in particular. Sherry Washburn showed the way in which our DNA is 98% the same as a chimp’s. All were my close friends. It was at a symposium in 1974, in Washington | believe, that I first heard and met Irv DeVore. His talk was on evolutionary biology and Hamilton’s rule. Both were new to me. Irv was a champion speaker. Students packed his anthropology classes at Harvard. He became a Leakey stalwart and a particularly close friend. I liked his topic. Genes code for traits, and traits more adaptive to niche pressures are likelier to carry the genes that encode them into the next generation. The likeliness is “fitness”. A beauty of this is that you can predict traits from the environment (niche), and the environment from traits. That promised the kind of logical challenge that I loved. Survival of the fittest was not news to us. What was news was that bright scientists like Irv were specializing in that logic, and making testable predictions for creatures generally, humans included, rather than sticking to the groups they studied most. That meant people | could talk to. Hamilton’s rule was put up as the prime example. It starts from the principle that the end game in biology is investment in the next generation. Hamilton had reasoned in 1965 that genes coding for most efficient investment in closest kin, who were likeliest to carry copies of those genes, ought to leave most copies in the next generation. We would invest in them when consanguinity was greater than cost/benefit ratio measured in fitness given up and fitness gained at the other end. I didn’t like this. Something was missing. The logic was seductive. But Achilles does overtake the tortoise. Traits compete, like those racers, for niche space. The winner is the fittest at meeting needs of the niche. Hamilton’s rule seemed to leave that out. Chapter 1: Recollections 1/06/16 16

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.