The Thrill of Discovery

Whether exploring a ruined tomb by torchlight, submerging to great depths in search of lost ships, or sending lone robot emissaries to search the stars, human experience is shaped by discovery. More than being a thrill, discoveries challenge our outstanding paradigms and force us to reexamine our understandings of the world. Join in as your TAL hosts Adam Gamwell, Ryan Collins, and Aneil Tripathy bring recent discoveries to the forefront and examine why the unknown is so evocative.

IMG_5568

 


Human Endurance w/ Ben Gebo

Join us for our 50th episode! Return guest host Ben Gebo joins Adam, Aneil, and Ryan as we uncover the human quest to endure, and to push ourselves to the limit. From marathons to surviving evolution, we tackle time and space to bring you an incredible story of the human will to find, and surpass, our own limits. Episode 50


Special Episode: Police Militarization, Race, Trust, Violence and Ferguson, MO

TAL-Logo-3.3Join Amy, Ryan, Aneil and Adam and special guest Delande Justinvil for an important episode of This Anthropological Life as we take head-on the complex issues of race in the United States, security, law enforcement and police brutality.

Episode 40 Police Militarization, Violence, Race, Trust and Ferguson, MO w/ Delande Justinvil. Recorded 9/3/14


Reproducing Rights and Wrongs: Personhood, Religious and Reproductive Freedoms, Gender, and SCOTUS

Artgate_Fondazione_Cariplo_-_Canova_Antonio,_Allegoria_della_GiustiziaEpisode 32, Season 3

Special Episode on the Supreme Court’s rulings over religious freedom and freedom of speech.

On this week’s episode we take on 5 recent and ongoing court cases that deal with first amendment rights of freedom of speech, reproductive rights, gender and bodies including the Supreme Court rulings that close corporations that label themselves for-profit may deny contraceptive health care that they deem a burden to their religious beliefs, the ban on the 35-foot buffer zone outside Massachusetts Planned Parenthood buildings, gun laws and more! We dive into corporate personhood, freedom of speech and religion, gender, bodies, emotions, individuality versus collectivity and more! Keeping pace with last week, this episode is one of our most jam packed yet! You don’t want to miss this!


The Politics of Difference and Relatedness

By hairymuseummatt (original photo), DrMikeBaxter (derivative work) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

By hairymuseummatt (original photo), DrMikeBaxter (derivative work) [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Episode 39, Season 3

Join us this week for a trip to the ancient…present? This week Ryan, Aneil, and Adam cover the politics of difference through an unlikely lens and cutting edge research. Were Neanderthals good parents? What does new archaeological and biological research tell us about European’s genetic relatedness to Neanderthals? ? Putting these questions together, we turn our anthropological lens to hidden assumptions about parenting styles, ancestry, subsistence, and lifestyles, and help draw out how notions of difference are constructed.

Season 3 Finale, recorded in studio 9/1/14


Non-Human Rights, with new co-host Amy Hanes

Episode 23 Non-Human Rights Available now!

Join us as we  dive into the world of non-human rights centered

By By Aaron Logan [CC-BY-2.5 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5)], via Wikimedia Commonsaround recent court cases dealing with the rights of chimpanzees, our closest non-human cousins (though some might say they are, in fact, human). What are rights, exactly, and who gets to choose who (or what) does and doesn’t have rights? Turning our anthropological eye to the world or rights tells us a lot about how we define others and ourselves. Tune in for an awesome season finale and help us celebrate moving into season 3 of This Anthropological Life!

 

 

 

With endings come new beginnings too. As our co-host Ryan heads to Mexico this summer for archaeological fieldwork, Aneil and Adam will be joined in studio by a fresh new voice, Amy Hanes. Amy brings a wealth of knowledge and anthropological know-how to the table centering on non-human anthropology, emotion and affect, space and place, among a whole host of others. We’re excited to have her join the crew! Her bio will be up on the website soon. Aired 4/29/14


Special guest Ben Gebo today on TaL, ‘Altered States’ pt 2

Join This Anthro Life for another mind-bending conversation as we ‘turn on, tune out, and drop in’ the conversation with returning guest Ben Gebo. With Ben’s help we will further explore the world of TAL16consciousness, altered states, the use of hallucinogenics throughout evolutionary history, the effects of music on the brain and more!

Altered States part two 3/4/14 at 1 pm WBUR 100.1 FM and wbur.org. Podcast available after the show.

Remember to write in on Twitter @thisanthrolife or send an email at [email protected] to ask questions or comment during the show! We’ll be taking phone calls soon, too!

Also check out Ben’s photos on his website! (bengebo.com)

© Ben Gebo

© Ben Gebo


Altered States of Consciousness

Hey y’all – we had a great show today and would love for you to check it out and hear what you think! Continuing some of the themes we’ve been building over the course of season two, we’ve traveled from beer, to locomotion, then to sleep, dreams, and now our first part on altered states. Join us as we explore the human propensity to alter our consciousness, belong to something larger than ourselves, feel creative, moral and ethical taboos, and more!

We’ll be back next week with a returning guest Ben Gebo to round out part 2 of our conversation on altered states including Terrence McKenna’s ‘Stoned Ape Theory’, psychotropic use in humans and animals, and much more!

Show stream here

Download the podcast here

cheers!


Bringing Our Origins up to Date and Filling Missing Links: Thoughts on Discoveries and Why We Want Them to be so Great

Can the discovery of one hominin skull truly revolutionize our understanding of human origins? This critical question is often overlooked in the media’s use of sexy language and bold stories of rising tensions, which allure wide audiences into compelling and sensational stories. Just a few short days ago I was reviewing student posts from a class on human origins when I received a message from a friend asking for my input on the discovery of a new Homo Erectus skull from Dmanisi, in southern Georgia. “What are your thoughts on this?” my friend asked.

Being a daily reader of BBC, NYtimes, and Discovery science sections I was surprised I hadn’t yet heard of this ‘new’ discovery. The name Dmanisi, however, did make me pause. The skull that was found back in 2005?  A quick Google search revealed this particular paleoanthropological discovery is indeed new and is the fifth well-preserved skull to be recovered from the area.

It didn’t take long to see the impact of the discovery in the media, on message boards, or social networks. My friend’s initial question, posted on Facebook, had already received a series of comments and shares ranging from pure fascination to a sense of mild shock and disbelief. Similarly, CNN, BBC, Discovery and any other news site with a scientific interest were showcasing this as a headline story. Extra, extra, read all about it! New fossil shatters the story of human evolution!

What was so earth shattering about this story though? It certainly isn’t about another missing link between humans and apes. I’m biased here. I love the subject and have been a teaching assistant in a class focused on just this subject for years. When a finger bone was found in 2010 with DNA identifying a potentially different species of hominin from our own genus Homo, I was exited. Let’s be real, I was giddy. The implications were making a cool sci-fi story come to life for me and this happens every time there is a new discovery of a human ancestor.

The media shared in my excitement. Headlines ranged in claims from human ancestry being thrown into ‘disarray,’ ‘sparking controversy,’ and declaring it’s time to ‘rethink human evolution.’ The actuality here, however, doesn’t really differ or deviate from expectations in the field. The hypotheses put forward by the researchers stem from the evidence that Dmanisi skull 5, a Homo Erectus skull, and the four other associated skulls, exhibit a wide range of variation. The skulls look remarkably different and are believed to be from the same species. This line of evidence lead a group of researchers to suggest the human evolutionary tree is not as bushy as it was once believed to be. While this thought is really cool, it isn’t new.

In some ways this discussion dives back into two theoretical extremes, which have a tendency to occasionally butt heads in a feud whenever a new fossil discovery is made (lets say once every year and a half or so). After the skirmish, the two theories often shake on a tentative compromise, which often leans in the direction of one more than the other. What I’m talking about are the “Out of Africa” and “Multi-regionalism” theories.

In a nutshell the former says, I think modern humans all came out of Africa around the same time and populated the world looking for tasty snacks and adventure. The other theory thinks people kind of did there own thing in isolation everywhere, sharing a common ancestor with something. Then they got board and left home for adventure and new tasty snacks. These two ideas are hypotheses. This means they need to be tested, holes need to be poked in them, and new compelling ideas need to emerge victorious from the ashes and continue the cycle.

There is a small problem in this. Really big discoveries don’t happen very often. In fact, in the field of paleoanthropology, just about every discovery is a big discovery. If one were ambitious enough to pile every bone of a possible modern human ancestor into a football stadium, there would be plenty of left over seats and that game would probably be blacked out. On the other hand, one could certainly take fantastic photos of these specimens and make a really nice coffee table book.

At its root, the problem is that we don’t have enough comparative fossil data to work from. What we do have may not even be representative. Bones do not preserve well if unattended. Making matters worse, many of our early ancestors were not the predators but scavengers that doubled as prey. To be preserved, you need a lot of luck to die in a place with the perfect conditions while being fortunate enough that nothing scavenges you. This means places like caves, riverbeds with silty sediments, or a healthy coding of volcanic ash are among the best for preservation. Typically, this doesn’t happen very often. As a result, we tend to look for fossils in places where the conditions were right in the past, and where the conditions are right today. This means caves, rift valleys (areas where the earth has opened up and placed fossils on the surface for us), and where political environments are safe and accommodating.

Now that that is out of the way, change happens frequently in the field as one new discovery provides a new specimen to a small supply. Drastic change in this field also happens, but not nearly as frequently because of the issues above. Back to the “Out of Africa” or “Multi-regionalism” debate, the five Dmanisi skulls, showing significant variation, have been taken to suggest that previous discoveries and classifications of other potential species of human ancestors in the Homo genus (such as H. Habilus, H. Rudolfensis, and H. Ergaster) are actually all the same. They’re all H. Erectus. The claim is that the Dmanisi H. Erectus individuals turned our understanding of a wide and bushy tree of descent into a relatively straight line. If only things were that easy.

Modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens are polytypic, meaning we look drastically different from one another. If you walk to a dog park and pick the first two dogs you see, say a Shih Tzu and a German Shepard, they look different but are very much the same species. Dogs are polytypic. If you walk into a jaguar reserve in Belize and compare the first two jaguars you see, you are much more unlikely to be able to tell them apart. Jaguars are less polytypic.

Humans have a wide array of different skull forms and sizes. Anthropologists can attest to this, as the field got much of its early start by comparing the shapes and sizes of skulls from people of different populations. In saying that, there is no reason why the skulls of our direct ancestor, H. Erectus/H. Ergaster, shouldn’t show the same variation over a wide geographic distribution (also a wide range of different adventures and tasty snacks). Bearing that in mind, the differences could be significant if we had information as to how those differences were being expressed. Modern human variation occurs on a cline (think incline or a curve on a graph), meaning that on two polar ends of the spectrum, variation is very significant. Yet, there is continuous variation between the extremes accounting for the drastic differences at each end.

In order to be sure, we’d need to see how and when the different H. Erectus/H. Ergaster/ H. Rudolphensis/ H. Habilus skulls are distributed. Time and place are very critical, as closer to 2 MYA the skull traits should be more primitive, having recently separated from the Australopithecine genus. Skulls from 1 MYA (and more recent) will show more derived characteristics. As for the idea that H. Erectus/H. Ergaster/ H. Rudolphensis/ H. Habilus could be the same, that really just depends upon who is making the taxonomy. Lumping versus splitting. That argument is very old. As much as this skull changes things (by adding another variation to account for) and is a great cause for excitement in the field, the argument is not new or revolutionary.

Yet, we shouldn’t forget how alluring new discoveries are.

Paleoanthropology is one of the few fields in which any person can make a huge discovery about our collective social past. Just take the young boy, Matthew Berger, who stumbled across Australopithecus Sediba (a possible human ancestor) in 2008, with his father outside of Johannesburg. No matter how small the find (sometimes only a tooth or finger bone) it not only provides a window into understanding our origins, but our story, which far predates the advent of history. In this sense, looking to the past and digging up fossils, may shed more light on how we understand the notion of human nature and how we should think about it in the future.

Image

Photo: By Author

Check out the discovery

http://www.sci-news.com/othersciences/anthropology/science-dmanisi-human-skull-georgia-01474.html


Dinosaurs, Cyborgs, and Rock Sounds: Reflections on Multinatural Histories Exhibit, Harvard Museum of Natural Science

I was fortunate enough to be able to attend a lecture by PhD student and co-curator Olivier Surel (Université Paris-Ouest Nanterre La Défense, Philosophie) of the Multinatural Histories exhibit on Thursday (10/10/13) and the one night only exhibit on Saturday (10/12/13). The exhibit itself brought together a number of artists who explore mediums of video, music and sound, photography, material culture, and performance. The idea behind the exhibit was to dismantle contemporary assumptions about taxonomic hierarchies about how nature is captured and displayed in a museum setting. The curator team, who also includes Marcus Owens, Courtnay Cain Saunders, and Rachel Schneider, took as their theoretical departure the work of Eduardo Vivieros de Castro and Bruno Latour, whose works seek to reconceptualize how notions of the modern world have been premised on the separation of ‘nature’ and ‘culture’ and subject and object. Without getting too theoretical here, the very idea of multiculturalism (an idea that the United States and many other nations proclaim as a kind cure to xenophobia), that there can be many cultures in one place, is premised on there being a single nature, through which each culture acts as part of the multitude. Cultures change, but nature is the constant. Flipping the idea around, from a multinatural perspective the material world shares a “universal culture of life and vitality”. Multinaturalism rejects the idea that there is a single nature ‘out there’ but in fact that humans, material objects, non-human animals, and even ideas are capable and do inhabit multiple worlds with each other in various configurations and assemblages, all based in the culture of life. Key questions include who and what have and give voice to actions and how different things, people, and objects come together at various points to make possible different worlds.

The magic of the exhibit is that each artist used one room – arthropods or glass flowers, for example – and placed or performed their work on top of, in front of, around, the extant exhibitions. The result was an at times chaotic re-imagining of the ‘proper’ order of a curated museum setting. Massive cretaceous era dinosaur skeletons, silent and static, were juxtaposed with rapid abstract video pieces displayed on iPads.

Two other notable examples include first the Harvard minerals collection room  in which massive speakers were set about the room playing the sounds of rocks hitting each other and being rubbed together. The effect was to transform, again, silence into an affront to the senses. Thus an experiential temporality was infused in the room, keeping my focus on the here and now of the space, and to remind me that, like the taxidermic animals down the hall, these minerals too were and indeed are capable of movement and sound, whose biographies can be told, in essence in their own tongue. Second, in the New England Floura and Fauna room were strewn about various pieces of American kitsch – photographs, a flag, trinkets, toys, etc. But (and this is my favorite part of the exhibit), a masked being wearing a purple dress walked slowly around the room, moving uncomfortably close to visitors and simply repeated the question “Where is my land?” despite anyone’s attempt to answer or move away. The result was a powerful charge against what we consider “our space”, whether in New England, or a museum hall, or our personal sense of space. The robotic looking mask and slow movements reminded me of Donna Haraway’s 1985 piece “The Cyborg Manifesto” in that this being had no “land”, no where it belonged yet is now a part of the landscape we co-inhabit. The question for Haraway is who would be able to take this detached position, this new being, and claim it or create new space for it, hopefully in the name of more open access to ways of being in the world.

Overall, I’d say the exhibit was a great success, especially for a first-try of re-imagining curatorial practices through a multinatural lens. I spoke briefly with Surel after the exhibit closed and am pleased to hear they have plans to expand this exhibit in New York in the future.  – Adam GImage

Photo: Ryan Collins

Click here to visit the website

http://www.multinaturalhistories.com/