Russian tame foxes

Started by lisa needs braces, April 13, 2010, 07:12:55 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lisa needs braces

Oh wow!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enrLSfxTqZ0&feature=related

The most surprising thing is how selecting for tameness resulted in dog-like characteristics like flabby ears and barking.

We should apply the principle of the experiment and start breeding humans for musical talent.

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: -abe- on April 13, 2010, 07:12:55 AM
Oh wow!

The most surprising thing is how selecting for tameness resulted in dog-like characteristics like flabby ears and barking.

We should apply the principle of the experiment and start breeding humans for musical talent.

So, you would our musicians to have flabby ears? Interesting concept, it would make them stand out in the crowd... ;)

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

lisa needs braces

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on April 13, 2010, 07:16:15 AM
So, you would our musicians to have flabby ears? Interesting concept, it would make them stand out in the crowd... ;)

8)

Selecting for tameness results in flabby ears (and barking)...at least in the Canidae family. Maybe equally intensive selection for musical talent in humans will result in similar physical extremes. But that's a price I'm willing to pay!

Josquin des Prez

#3
Quote from: -abe- on April 13, 2010, 07:12:55 AM
We should apply the principle of the experiment and start breeding humans for musical talent.

It has already occurred in nature several times. Africans for instance have an innate talent for music (rhythm in particular), and so do several European sub-types (Dinarics, Alpines and certain type of Mediterraneans). This explains why music has always been prominent in certain areas of Europe but not in others. The Dinaric sub-type appears to be most musically gifted from a purely raw point of view, and many of the greatest virtuosos or prodigies in European history belong to this sub-group. Haydn, Mozart, Chopin, Berlioz, Paganini, Liszt, those are just examples of heavily or predominately Dinarid individuals. The Dinaric strain is usually found starting from southern Germany, going south across Austria, Northern Italy, Hungary and spreading across all the regions adjacent to the Dinaric Alps. Those areas have always been famed for their strong musical traditions and the peculiar virtuosity of their folk music.

However, it is perhaps the Alpine sub-type that is the most musically gifted (the Dinaric being derived from this type in the first place). Bach, Handel, Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Dvorak, Brahms, Enescu, Reger, those are examples of composers with an heavy Alpine component. So it seems that European music is a predominately Alpine art form with the Dinaric strain topping off in the realm of virtuosity. The Alpine strain can be found mainly in central Europe, but particularly in France, Germany and Italy, and it is from these three nations that European music rose to the highest levels. This also explains why certain nations rarely achieved anything of note in this field.

Yours truly is of course predominantly Dinaric with heavy Alpine admixture, which explains my attitude towards you puny Anglo-Saxon types.

Josquin des Prez

#4
BTW, i forgot to mention that European Jews seem to have a great talent for music as well. It does not come as a surprise for instance that so many among America greatest musicians (America being a predominately Anglo-Saxon nation) happen to be Jewish (when they are not African).

lisa needs braces

Josquin, there's no denying the evidence that certain groups of Europeans dominate in classical music over others, but perhaps that's entirely a matter of culture and not genetics. Is there any reason why musical ability would become more widespread among some Europeans and not others? Any idea as to what selection effects led to these differences that would be present in some cultures and not others?

Josquin des Prez

#6
Quote from: -abe- on April 13, 2010, 08:16:14 AM
but perhaps that's entirely a matter of culture and not genetics.

And perhaps the foxes are tamer because they are raised in captivity.

Quote from: -abe- on April 13, 2010, 08:16:14 AM
Is there any reason why musical ability would become more widespread among some Europeans and not others? Any idea as to what selection effects led to these differences that would be present in some cultures and not others?

I think we would have to understand what causes musical ability in the first place before being able to answer that. I'm sure in certain respects the difference is purely mechanical. For instance, Dinarics are usually very tall and gauntly in built, with lean, long fingers and a very highly responsive nervous system, which would certainly give them an edge not only in music but in other fields of physical activity as well (basketball for instance). But then again, Alpines are usually short, stocky and not particularly nimble at all. Quite the contrarty in fact (Beethoven quickly comes to mind). Yet, the vast majority of Europe's greatest composers are all Alpinids, so perhaps there is a musical gene which somehow is found more predominately among certain Europeans then others. Or perhaps it is because Alpines, being essentially a peasant race, were selected for certain psychological traits which included an inner compulsion for order, form and a certain level of sternness which tend to play out in their favor under certain conditions. Its all speculation really. What matters is that certain groups of Europeans appear to be more successful in certain fields then others, and the cause may very well be genetic.

Lethevich

Hehe, this sounds like a Dungeons and Dragons DM describing the difference between dwarves and elves ::) Do Alpinids get an +1 toughness save throw modifier?
Peanut butter, flour and sugar do not make cookies. They make FIRE.

jowcol

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on April 13, 2010, 09:45:02 AM


I think we would have to understand what causes musical ability in the first place before being able to answer that. I'm sure in certain respects the difference is purely mechanical. For instance, Dinarics are usually very tall and gauntly built, with lean, long fingers and a very highly responsive nervous system, which would certainly give them an edge not only in music but in other fields of physical activity as well (basketball for instance). But then again, Alpines are usually short, stocky and not particularly nimble at all. Quite the contrarty in fact (Beethoven quickly comes to mind). Yet, the vast majority of Europe's greatest composers are all Alpinids, so perhaps there is a musical gene which somehow is found more predominately among certain Europeans then others. Or perhaps it is because Alpines, being essentially a peasant race, were selected for certain psychological traits which included an inner compulsion for order, form and a certain level of sternness which tend to play out in their favor under certain conditions. Its all speculation really. What matters is that certain groups of Europeans appear to be more successful in certain fields then others, and the cause may very well be genetic.

Interesting analysis-- I could see a probabilistic model where climate, genetics, cultural and experiential factors all contribute.

It would also be interesting to expand this to slavs.  (this did start with Russian foxes....)  A comparison between Rachmaninoff and Scriabin would be interesting.  Rachmaninoff would definitely have the physical attributes that would help his playing.  But Scriabin was tiny-- not the first person you would expect, from a purely physical viewpoint, to be a virtuoso pianist.

I'd agree that we don't know what causes musical ability.  (And would have a hard time on this forum coming up with a consensus definition that we could all abide by).  It wouldn't surprise me to see some perceptual traits play a role.

Another interesting way to view this is over time, how given styles and abilities are propagated across the overall population.  We can look at the "melting pot" of the US.  Yes, the origins of styles such as blues, jazz may have been localized to a given population with similar cultural and genetic characteristics, but over time we've seen the styles and performers spread out across those lines.  If you see a jazz band, blues band, or a symphony orchestra now, there is a lot of diversity, and there are some really great artists within that diversity.  I would say that this would lessen the role of the genetic component, but would increase the experiential component.  The diversity could also be created (or inhibited) by a culture.  Many of the first musicians who crossed the lines had to face some pretty tough crowds...
"If it sounds good, it is good."
Duke Ellington