Human Variation & Race

Mark Glen
Anthro 101
10/16/2012

Race Variation

     Humans ability to maintain homeostasis relative to environmental heat is a rather difficult task. Heat at temperatures too high affect us in that it not only damages our skin, it also causes internal damage as well. As a natural reaction to heat, we sweat. However, if the weather is hot and dry then humidity will be low, causing sweat to readily evaporate. Initially that sounds like a good thing, but when analysis extends a bit further we find that through this ready evaporation, we rapidly produce the loss of bodily water and salts just by sweating. If those minerals aren't sufficiently replenished, then the heat can potentially be fatal in less than a day. Now that's how it affects us internally, what it does externally is burn our skin.This mostly affects people with paler skin complexions and less melanin prepared to protect the skin. The burning will cause redness of the affected area, peeling of the skin that has been burned, and pain when the area is touched. 

•      Sweating, it's our bodies way of naturally cooling off when it is hot. If there is event he slightest breeze of wind, our skin will be cooled when it meets our sweat. Also, it soaks into our clothing, giving us and even further amount of cooling.

 

•      A facultative adaptation to heat would be the body's ability to tan when it's exposed for too long to the sun.

 

•      Melanin/darker skin and bipedalism are the two greatest developmental adaptations to heat. The darker skin complexions can withstand the heat more efficiently than people with pale skin. They can stand the heat longer and naturally it doesn't cause much or any harm to them. Bipedalism is everyone's adaptation to heat in that it brings us up from the ground where heat is immediately being extracted from and it allows us to expose a tremendously lower amount of our body to the sun. 

•      As for cultural adaptations, we have incorporated large bodies of water to get into like pools or oceans. We now even have swamp coolers that can do the job for us if we live in a modern, enclosed house.

     In benefit we learn how to cope with heat, how to avoid being damaged by it or possibly killed by it. Explorations like this are helpful in many ways. Example, studying our homeostasis relative to the haet conditions in the Sahara show us what we need to do to survive there. Or any other hot place on our planet, it give us the power to keep our race (human) alive when under these conditions.

     To help someone understand the variations of adaptations to heat based on race I would explain how black people have melanin in their skin that helps then withstand the heat and white people didn't develop the same way. However, they do tan during the summer time when it is most hot out in order to avoid damage by the sun. (no offense to anyone). Well, when you use race to explain adaptation variations you separate people the single "human race" that we are and put them into sub-categories, as if to be totally different species. To clarify and explain that the only reason we have different phenotypic adaptations is that every environment is different brings us back to unity. When it's explained this way, it makes the listener understand the relation we have to our environment and that its the stresses we undergo over long periods of time that shape our adaptations, not the race that we are born into.

    

Language & Communications

Mark Glen
10/9/2012
Anthro 101


Part 1: You were asked to engage in a conversation for 15 minutes where you were not allowed to use any version of a symbolic language (no speaking, writing, or ASL).

• Did you find this experiment difficult or easy? Explain. (5 pts)

•  What were the impressions of partners in the conversation? Did they alter their way of communicating with you because of your absence of symbolic communication? Describe. (5 pts)

•  Imagine that you and your partners in the conversation represent two different cultures meeting for the first time. Which culture has the advantage in communicating complex ideas? What attitudes might the speaking culture have toward the culture that does not use symbolic language? Identify individuals in our culture that have difficulty communicating with spoken language and explore how that affects how those who do speak interact with those individuals. (10 pts) 

     In the experiment of limited communication, I found it to be quite difficult to express my thoughts fully. Initially, I thought that since I know how to communicate, as I do it everyday, this would be easy. When I tried to express myself through gestures, I began to realize that I'd have to emit a lot more effort than with speaking along. I also realized that in order for the group I was communicating with to understand what I was trying to tell them, they'd need some sort of background of my form of communication; which they didn't have.
    
     The impressions that they had left me with were of confusion. They had only a slight idea of what I was trying to tell them, and even then they still had parts of information incorrect. They way they spoke to me at first was how they'd normally speak. After many failed efforts of being able to comprehend what I was communicating back to them, they began to speak at a more remedial level, hoping that my response would be more easily understandable.

     If we were two different cultures meeting for the first time, the culture with the ability to speak and identify objects by a commonly used name, and incorporate body language into their communication would be able to communicate complex ideas. This complex culture may perceive the non-symbolic speaking culture as more ignorant or more inferior. Their lower level of intelligence would be more easily detected among a culture that can speak to their own and communicate complex ideas. The first set of individuals that have a difficulty communicating spoken language in our own culture, are babies and toddlers. When they communicate with adults, they use mostly body language; they point, grab our hands and pull us to their desires, they tap our legs and look into the direction they want us to go. However, when we speak to them, we don't use fully complex and incomprehensible terminology; we speak at a very basic and understandable level. We point to objects and address them by using "one word" phrases, we will often repeat the word to the child and press their hand against the object so that they can identify it in the future. Then there are some individuals who cannot hear or speak and rely solely on their ability to communicate with bodily gestures. With them it becomes more challenging. While they're fully capable of comprehending a language, they can't hear the language being spoken around them, so it becomes almost impossible. So we use gestures to communicate back with them. This is how we've developed sign language.


Part 2: You were asked to spend 15 minutes communicating without any physical embellishments, i.e., no hand signals, not vocal intonation, not head, facial, or body movements.

•  Were you able to last for the full 15 minutes of using only speech for communicating? What made this experiment difficult for you? (5 pts)

•  How were your partners in this part of the experiment affected by your communication limitations? Explain. (5 pts)

•  What does this experiment say about our use of “signs” in our language, i.e., how important is non-speech language techniques in our ability to communicate effectively? (5 pts)

•  Are there people who have difficulty reading body language? Describe the adaptive benefit to possessing the ability to read body language. Can you describe environmental conditions where there might be a benefit to not reading body language? (5 pts)

     When I started to speak with no tone emphasis and no other form of expression, it seemed possible. After a few minutes of speaking that way I wasn't able to continue; I started to slightly use some intonation. Being that I am very expressive when I speak, it came naturally when I started to speak normally. What made this the most difficult for me was, forcing myself out of my comfort zone. Sitting very still, not nodding my head to suit the expression of my words, holding my facial muscles still when they're naturally programmed to curve over my words and to keep my hands on my lap without implying seriousness or firmness of my points almost made me feel alien to my own body.

     During the time where my communication was limited, my partners began to laugh. Eventually they calmed down and when they asked me questions, they were "straight to the point" questions. I noticed that they had gone from detailed and elaborate questions, to ones with fewer words and required a conclusion with fewer words.

     This experiment has shown me that in order to communicate an idea effectively, the possession of the ability to speak well and  the use of bodily gestures as emphasis for your words is required. We are beings who express ideas to one another because of the passion we have for them. Without the body gestures, our passion begins to wither. Words can only carry our message so far, it's the difference in tone and pitch, the movement of limbs and facial muscles that our corespondent's attention thrives off of.

     Yes, some people do have difficulty reading body language. Though I believe it is rare, it's still possible. Being able to read body language also gives you the ability to comprehend invasive ideas, i.e., if a woman is emotionally hurt and is expressing her pain to you, but you can't read body language, then her tears and palms pressed to her eyes will have no effect on how you perceive her idea. So being able to read body language really is a sign of being intelligent. If environmental conditions (for whatever reason) prohibited people from speaking face to face and we were only allowed to speak via telephone or email, then we'd have no benefit for being able to read body language. Body language is only effective to the interpreter when he/she is within visibility of the communicator.