How Bracher's Theory Relates to Documentary Filmmaking

How Bracher’s Theory Relates to Documentary Filmmaking

            The art of documentary filmmaking is a painstaking, deliberate attempt to tell a story, teach a lesson, and create awareness about an issue. In my previous career as a film and television producer, I had a drive and a passion to tell stories rooted in social justice and equality. This drive rooted in my educational instruction as a social worker and community advocate. Documentary films are different from other pictures such as feature films and comedy shorts, in that their main goal is to capture some facet of reality or aspect of the world we live in.

            My last documentary in 2010, “Still Here: A Journey to Triumph” told the story of a group of youth who retraced the path of their ancestors from Africa to the US to Nova Scotia. The film not only recounted the historical journey this group took, but it revealed the personal experiences and tragedies of a generation.

            In section four of his book, Bracher talks about the diachronic integration of identity. He states that this is essential in order to experience compassion and guilt.  He uses the example of how literary works, such as plays and novels take a person on a trip through the cause and effect of a given situation. Documentary films do the same, in that they lead the viewer in the direction the filmmaker wants to take them. It forces them to examine the aspects of the narrative the writer wants them to ponder, and sometimes leas to more questions, hypothesis and actions.

            Bracher says that in order for a person to experience compassion, three things must happen: 1) there must recognition that the other person is experiencing suffering; 2) the other person is unable to alleviate the suffering, and 3) the factors that brought on the suffering are not the other person’s fault. Yet, many resist the notion that a person’s plight is not always their fault.

            In the film, the story begins with the historical context of how this group of African Americans came to arrive on the shores of the southern states and the horrific conditions they faced there. These stories are not new. But the propensity is to shrug of these experiences as old news, and someone else’s problem. Bracher talks about the American Dream -  with its focus on personal values, prosperity and the notion of freedom and opportunity - being just that; a dream.  This ideology is a myth that continues to be planted in the hearts and minds of hopeful Americans and others around the world, who go to drastic lengths to make their way to America’s ‘land of opportunity’.

            Bracher states that this ‘Great Lie’ biases us to believe that those who are not achieving the ‘dream’ are not doing so because they have chosen not to, and that their position is due to their own fault. To relate this back to the film, the idea of the American Dream were it true, was not afforded to this group of African Americans. To achieve the dream, one had to work hard (how could this group work in meaningful jobs that they were excluded from them); they had to educate themselves (how could this group educate themselves when at that time they were not permitted to read, write or attend school); they had to establish footing in the community (how could this group establish a firm foundation when simple amenities such as public washrooms, buses and many establishments denied them access or entry).

            Yet, even though this group was forcefully brought to America, forced into slavery, and destined to live in poverty suffering and harsh conditions for generations to come, the diachronic integration of identity was not evident during this time, as compassion for their plight was not a common experience. Society did not experience guilt for the human suffering that occurred in the lives of a whole group of people, even though this group was not permitted to be what they wanted to be. Instead, this group of African Americans were labeled as lazy, uneducated and accused of spending too much time blaming others for their fate instead of doing something about it. Bracher says seeing people as being at fault for their own suffering makes sympathy further impossible.

            Bracher states that what is needed to alleviate this scenario of blaming is to develop the capacity for greater diachronic integration, which can be done through reading narratives. I would further, in relation to the film that it can be done by also viewing narratives. This lessens the incidences of exclusions from the past, and expands our ability to respond in a compassionate way. As I the film, Bracher states that narratives dealing with issues of homelessness, poverty, and I would add historically displaced groups are valuable areas for further development of human compassion and guilt. These types of stories reinforce the notion that societal factors and other macro level causes and influences remain beyond a person or group of people’s control.

            I must quote Brahcer when he states that,

A similar integration can be pursued through the

painstaking deconstruction and reconstruction,

either by literary texts or by critical analysis of

them, of appraisals of responsibility regarding

victims in all sorts of circumstances. Such an

operation involves starting from a condition, such

as poverty, for which the victims themselves are

widely presumed to be responsible, and then tracing

the causes of this condition step by step back to

the point at which the victims’ responsibility

dissolves. At that point, one’s appraisal of

responsibility is reversed, dissolving hatred and

contempt and replacing these emotions with

sympathy and compassion.

            This was the goal of this documentary - to challenge peoples’ believes about minorities in Canada. Although still in denial, Canada did have slavery. After it was abolished, the treatment of Blacks did not vanish with it. Racism still very much exists in Canadian society, as demonstrated in many aspects of Canadian society; the police force (heavy weight champion boxer Kirk Johnson); the school system (The Frank Bligh Report); the courts (Donald Marshall Jr. Inquiry); and the list goes on.

            If society continues to identify these injustices as ‘their fault’ they will continue to lack the compassion necessary to effect real change. That includes changes in perception, attitude and motivation. Bracher states that with thorough integration, those who are well off, privileged and in power will be implicated in the suffering. This places responsibility on all of us to examine the conditions that permit such suffering to continue, and take steps to eliminate them.

            Bracher asserts that through literary education (and I add again through visual mediums, films, images and pictures) students can incorporate guilt into their identity registers. This, he says, rids the student of any motives to blame the victim, or not feel compassion for them. As he stated, it eliminates the assertion of statements that Caucasians make when they attempt to diffuse guilt away from themselves. This includes statements pertaining to the fact they that did not personally enslave anyone so they should not be made to sacrifice financially or otherwise for the advantage of Black people, as Bracher articulates.

            Whether they be teachers, policy makers, administrators (as Bracher mentioned) or even filmmakers, who teach through visual stories, educators can help students to identify the unconscious guilt and own it. Many may see it as a threat to their identity, but it is vital for eliminating the problem of victim blaming in our society.

           

           

A New Way of Understanding Communities

                   I have decided to focus this blog on the exercise we did in class last week, relating it to what we learn from Wenger. In his book, Communities of Practice, we learn what informs community. We also understand that there are certain implications that come with our participation within a community of practice.

          In the class exercise, we were put into groups and asked to search the school to find ways in which the institution demonstrated communities of practice and how it negotiated meaning for different kinds of learning. Right away, one of the first things that struck me was the physical location of the professors’ offices in relation to each other. Profs of similar subjects were grouped in one section of the space, side by side, distinctly bonded together by the subjects they taught; as a community of practice, separate from the other communities that share the institution.

                   As Wenger takes Tomasello's philosophy of the triangle and builds on it, we learn that the negotiation of two people sharing the meaning of an object can be expanded to show that we also negotiate the meaning of a community of practice. The whole process of participating, which I stated earlier, has certain implications. I believe Wenger would say that our learning is influenced by our participation in communities of practice. How does this translate to the location of professor's offices in a university?

          For me, this physical placement translated into an unseen boundary where professors of Women's Studies were distinctly displaced from IT professors; and professors of English were distinctly displaced from math professors. These communities did not intersect with one another of their own accord. The cross-over came from the students who come with a necessity to form connections between these communities of practice in order to follow the path that lead to their degree.

          Some form of negotiation of community had formed. An invisible line drawn around professors by subject created a community that professors not associated with that subject did not cross. The physical location of the offices is just a manifestation of the distinct negotiated communities within the university. This brings about the point of the 3 ways of belonging. Certainly, alignment comes to mind. There is a sense of community, belonging and togetherness among professors of the same subject. A community of math professors' engagement with each other on various matters pertaining to the subjects they teach, as well as their shared connections to the students they have in common solidify this union. Yet, this sense of community does not translate when that same student crosses over to engage in courses taught by an English or Women's Studies teacher.

          In class, I asked the question, "If we equate education to the concrete structure of the university building, how then do we begin to challenge and break down the structures that perpetuate this isolation of communities. The response was that we were doing it now, by identifying the issue, by discussing it, by embarking upon the journey of lifelong learning. From that, I gleaned that we must see education for the hegemonic structure that it is. It is not neutral. However, we must remain engaged in the goal of resisting these structures.

          We understand that learning not only refers to formal education, but that it transcends and permeates through all aspects of our lives. We are each members of multiple communities of practice. One is not in isolation of the other. They all overlap and intersect with one another. Our learning comes in the form of formal education, of course, but it also comes in the form of life experiences, cultural and ancestoral information, environmental factors, workplace learning and on the job training, also informal learning in the workplace – those skills that no one teaches you in a classroom, but you acquire by doing.

          All of these ways that we take in information serve to enhance our skills, expand our knowledge, and increase out capacity to be transformed in our thinking. They also provide key insights into our identity, which is the perfect lead in to Bracher’s book, Radical Pedagogy. Bracher believes that identity is one of the key motivators for learning. It will be interesting to engage in discussion about Bracher’s theories and how they differ or complement those of the previous authors.

Bracher and Identity Theft!

          Bracher states that identity is a crucial factor in the motivation to learn. Maintaining and enhancing our identity drives us to continually learn and expand the meaning of who we are by way of our newly acquired knowledge and accomplishments. In fact, Bracher goes on to say that the development of a strong identity is an essential part of our well-being as humans.

So then, what happens to us when our identity is compromised? The Office of the Privacy Commissioner in Canada has a whole website dedicated to helping its citizens protect themselves against this fast growing invasion of privacy. http://priv.gc.ca/fs-fi/02_05_d_10_e.cfm . The website describes identity theft as the unauthorized use of your personal information. I would add that it is usually stolen for personal gain.

Each year thousands and thousands of people across the world fall victim to this crime. In this age of advanced technology, we have developed multiple ways of communicating with each other; faster and better than ever before. The transmission of information across cyber space is unprecedented. However, along with this advance comes the ease at which your personal information can become vulnerable to theft.

Now, there are a few points of note in Bracher’s book Radical Pedagogy that create interesting notions to ponder or challenge. First, Bracher says that our need to maintain identity can interfere with learning. Secondly, he says that when we do experience learning in support of our sense of identity, it’s seen as a threat to us and so we resist the learning.

In the first assertion, Bracher uses the example that students who are athletic, attractive and rich lack the motivation to learn because they already have availed to them all that they need to ensure a strong sense of identity.

In the second assertion, Bracher uses the example that unbeknownst to us as students, we often see learning as a threat to our identities as opposed to supportive of it. Thus we fight it and resist it with much force.

To take Bracher’s theory out of the classroom and into the real world, I have chosen to apply his theory using the example of identity theft; what happens to us when we become the victim of this crime, and how this contradicts what Bracher’s teaches us about our motivation and identity.

We know that identity theft can take many forms, and victims can be targeted in many ways. You can lose your identity simply by tossing old bills in the mail – thieves will dumpster dive and rummage through your garbage looking for your information. Other forms involve phone calls from fraudsters soliciting donations on behalf of reputable organizations and other types of bogus calls. The more sophisticated means of stealing people’s identity can include elaborate internet schemes such as hacking, and technological schemes through ATM machines.

But what does this mean to us in terms of the threat to our identity? Long gone are the days when people had to go directly into the bank to do their banking business. You can open accounts, complete transactions and transfer funds from account to account without ever having to leave your home.

Long gone are also the days when workers received their pay in the form of a cheque, pensioners received their pensions in the form of a cheque, and when you arrived at the counter to purchase your goods, you paid with cash. This is not to say it no longer happens at all, but these practices are no longer the norm.

Today, most employers use a direct deposit system for paying employees; debit and credit cards are the most widely used methods of payment for consumer purchases; and government bodies encourage pensioners and taxpayers alike to use their direct deposit system for receiving any government funds such as pension, GST and income tax refunds.

As a result of these shifts, our identity continues to be increasingly at risk. The Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC) reported that in 2009, they received 11,095 reports from Canadian victims. In dollars, this equated to a total loss of over 10 million dollars; which risen by a million dollars from the 2008 total. http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/index-eng.htm

Decades ago, a department dedicated solely to handling cases of identity theft was almost non-existent, as was websites dedicated to educating people about how to protect themselves.

Bracher’s theory in his first example would suggest that athletes, attractive people and rich people would not be concerned with identity theft, because according to him, they would already have all they needed to support their sense of identity. So then, in essence, this would mean that if they were to fall victim to identity theft, they would not be concerned because their looks will continue to sustain them, or their high profile athlete status will keep them grounded, or their money will allow them to simply ‘purchase’ a new identity.

Bracher’s second example that suggests we fight against learning even when it supports our sense of identity can also be challenged here. Government and citizens alike agree that we all need to be educated about identity theft as one of the only means we have to fight it. Not only have whole websites cropped up dedicated to helping to educate citizens about this threat to their identity, but workshops for seniors and other vulnerable populations are taking place across the country.

On January 8, 2012, the Senate Bill S-4 came into law, making it illegal to possess another person’s identity information for criminal purposes. Prior to that, laws were inadequate to address this threat to our identity. We understand that becoming educated about the issues will help us to safe guard our identities. The only ones that may resist the learning around this issue are the ones who want to steal identities form others, and the less victims now, the easier it is for the criminal.

Bracher states that education is one of the key elements in social change. One of the key ways people can become empowered. His ideas here help to support mine and contradict his own, because we understand how important our identities are, what it means to lose them, and how learning about the threats and becoming educated about how to protect ourselves will ensure the preservation of what Bracher calls the crucial factor in our motivation to learn. 

Collapse of Civilization?

               I watched an interesting documentary recently on the National Geographic channel called 2210: The Collapse? The documentary was a science fiction story set 200 years after the hypothetical collapse of civilization as we know it today. The documentary doesn't make factual predictions or claims per se,  but challenges the viewer to use their imagination to explore what would cause the world to collapse, citing issues such as abuse of the water supply. 
           The heart of this story lies in the examination of our use and overuse of resources, searching underwater lost cities and civilizations swallowed up by drought and desert. What I found interesting about it was the information about the California water supply...although it was science fiction, it gave me pause to contemplate whether this could really happen. 
            As it went, there arose a serious problem with the California water supply. Drastic measures were needed, the documentary stated, in order to preserve this water supply. Farmers, who were consuming over 100 Lt of access water per farmer per day, according to the narrator, were struggling to survive. 
          As conditions deteriorated, farmers saw an opportunity to make great profit and turn their situations around. What happened was that farmers began taking a gamble with their savings to dig deep for water, hoping to cash in on society's need for this valuable resource. Farmers began to abandon their labor and the production of fruit in favour of selling off water allocations.
           What they would do is sink their savings into drilling down as far as 2400 feet, hoping for wet gold - water. Then they would sell it and make lucrative profits. The problem with this practice was obvious. Eventually, this continual pulling of water up from the ground would have a devastating effect on the water table. After a while, the water table would get so low, there would be no alternative but to cease this practice. Then what?
            New regulations were introduced to limit the amount of water residents could use. An L.A resident described being permitted to only water his garden or use large amounts of water twice a week, on Tuesdays and Fridays. To do otherwise would be to pay a huge bill. He used the example that if he were to use large amounts of water on days other that what was regulated, he would see the difference in a water bill go from $400 to over $2,000.
            The documentary portrayed the fall out from water misuse quite candidly. It insisted that without water limits, and with the ongoing digging from deep below the ground, lands would eventually become equivalent to a desert - lacking water and moisture. What archaeologists would discover are highly compressed layers of soil. This would provide evidence of how this underground resource had been depleted and sucked dry. The documentary introduced the increased competition that will arise between countries as they fight for water. 
            Already, we see evidence of this in real life. For example, some poorer countries have staged protests against companies coming in and attempting to claim dominion over water supply, trying to charge citizens for the use of water. The documentary discussed the issue in Bolivia as an example of a water war, which it cites will soon become a common occurrence across the world.

            About ten years ago, the Bolivian government attempted to enter into a contract with foreign investors to sell Cochabamba's public water system. The privatization of this commodity did not sit well with the people of Bolivia, and soon a water war ensued. Here is a snippet of the Bolivia story:

           

Bolivia's Water War Victory

by Jim Schultz

Earth Island Journal, Autumn 2000

 

At 10am, President Hugo Banzer places Bolivia under martial law. This drastic move concludes a week of protests, general strikes and transportation blockages that have jerked the country to a virtual standstill, and follows the surprise announcement of government concession to protesters' demands to break a $200 million contract selling Cochabamba's public water system to foreign investors.

The water system is currently controlled by Aguas del Tunari, a consortium led by London-based International Water Limited (IWL), which is itself jointly owned by the Italian utility Edison and US-based Bechtel Enterprise Holdings. Upon purchasing the water system, the consortium immediately raised rates by up to 35 percent. That untenable hike sparked the protests.

In January, "Cochabambinos" staged strikes and blocked transit, effectively shutting their city down for four straight days. The Bolivian government then promised to lower rates, but broke that promise within weeks. On February 4, when thousands tried to march in peaceful protest, President Banzer had police hammer protesters with two days of tear gas that the 175 people injured and two youths blinded.

Ninety percent of Cochabamba's citizens believed it was time for Bechtel's subsidiary to return the water system to public control, according to results of a 60,000-person survey conducted in March. But it seems that the government has come to Bechtel's rescue, insisting the company remain in Bolivia. President Banzer, who ruled Bolivia as a dictator from 1971-78, has suspended almost all civil rights, banning gatherings of more than four people, and severely limiting freedom of the press. "We see it as our obligation, in the common best interest, to decree a state of emergency to protect law and order," Banzer trumpeted.

Local radio stations have been closed or taken over by military. News paper reporters have been arrested. Police conducted nighttime raids searching homes for water protesters and arresting as many as 20 people.

The local police chief has been installed as state governor. The "emergency government" now consists of a president (Hugo Banzer), a governor (Walter Cespedes) and a mayor (Manfred Reyes Villa), each of whom is a graduate of the notorious School of the Americas in Ft. Benning, Georgia (infamous for training foreign military personnel in terror and assassination techniques).

Rural blockades erected by farmers have cut some cities off from food and transportation. Large crowds of angry residents armed with sticks and rocks are massing in the city centers, where confrontations with military and police escalate.

Tear gas has engulfed thousands of demonstrators in downtown Cochabamba, while a large military operation is mobilizing to clear the highways in five of the nation's nine provinces.

All this puts Cochabamba on the front-line in the battle against a globalization of water resources. The Coordiadora de Defense de Aguay la Vida (CDAV, Coalition in Defense of Water and Life), a broad-based collaborative including environmental groups, economists, lawyers, labor unions and local neighborhood organizations, spearheads the campaign to prevent loss of local control over water systems. Its leaders either have been arrested or driven underground.

            The documentary also discussed impending water crises in Southeast Asia, as well as an ongoing water war between Syria, Turkey and Lebanon. Although the documentary was a science fiction look at what may lead to the collapse of our civilization, many of the points raised were valid and worth further investigation. What would those who come after us think of the way in which we handled our resources? What would they say about our inability to prevent the elimination of vital resources?


If you are interested, you can watch the documentary here:

As Children Learn...

          After commenting on another student's blog; where she talked about her memories of learning as a school child, I decided to expand my comments further in the form of my own blog. I began my comments to her with my agreement on her position that schools have been trying to make a change in the way children are taught. But I also agree that there are multiple challenges and difficulties to making a successful transition. The public school system still has a long way to go in its education of our children.
          As children, we learn from an early age through play. In fact, in the field of child studies, play is seen as a child's work. We know that in our work circles, we are at our best when we feel productive and achieve expected results. This is no different for a child who, through their play, is pleased when the sand castle is finally built or when they have won the track and field race. Yet, educators fail to acknowledge the importance of this process in children.
          Let's use an example of the workplace again. Suppose you were hired to wash dishes in a hotel kitchen. On your first day of work your boss or trainer will take the time to help you familiarize yourself with your new role. They will give you a tour of your work space show you where everything is that you will need to do your job. Then you are given pages of forms to fill out, documents to read, and policies to familiarize yourself with.
          After spending a whole day as a passive observer, taking in all of the information that was being deposited to your brain you are now pumped and ready to put all of that training into practice. But the next day, instead of getting your hands in, you are required to watch work videos of do's and dont's; fire safety; workplace hazard training; use of the machines and so on. Moe passive learning where the information is being deposited, but you don't receive the opportunity to contribute anything back. I think you understand where I'm going with this.
          For the remainder of that week, you have pretty much taken in all you possibly can about your role, what it will look like, how to handle situations as they arise, and procedures for safety. However, you still have yet to run the industrial dishwasher. You still have yet to discover which settings will work for you, and what your personal speed will be in clearing one large load for the next. Everything is still nestled in your head, but none of it has gained any real world value.
          Finally, the following week, you get to put your sills into practice. But on that day, there was a plane mishap and the rerouted passengers were being put up in your hotel for the night. All of a sudden, the dining room immediately filled up with unexpected patrons. You discover that you are not fast or efficient enough to keep up with the demand. You are not equipped to handle the overheating of the dishwasher from over use. You didn't realize the difficulty in transferring the clean dishes all the way across the kitchen without making multiple trips. You feel inadequate, ill-prepared and unproductive.
          This is what we are doing to our school children. We are depositing massive amounts of information into their brains. Their success is measured by their ability to memorize the information. They are rarely given the opportunity to put their skills into any hands on, tangible practice. Therefore, when the opportunity presents itself, our children are ill-prepared to apply this information to real world practice.
         Also problematic is the fact that classrooms are not inclusive. The diverse ways in which our children learn are still not taken into account during curriculum planning. Still needed are safe spaces conducive to the expression of free thought, the ability to challenge the learning, and the opportunity to expand the imagination. I also worry about the children who continue to fall through the cracks. The ones who have problems concentrating, or the ones whose behavioral issues become the main focus and stumbling block to their learning. Having four children of my own going through the school system, I can say that I have seen minimal progression toward inclusiveness and change. In thinking about it, perhaps its more of an acknowledgement that change is needed rather than actual change. Either way, I think we still have a very very long way to go.

Susan Savage-Rambaugh & Bonobos

As each class progresses, I learn more and more about what we know biologically, and what we learn through culture. It is interesting to learn about the research done on bonobos, and their similarity to humans. Another interesting topic is the issue of how much of what non humans know and understand is biological, and how much is a result of cultural influences. How much of what they are able to do comes from training and learned behaviors and how much of it is already inherent in their DNA?
I was fascinated by Susan Savage-Rambaugh's  presentation on Kanzi and Pamanisha. You can find her presentation at: http://www.ted.com/talks/susan_savage_rumbaugh_on_apes_that_write.html . Any references made to Susan here have been taken from her presentation. During the 17 minute presentation, Susan claims that Bonobos are one of the happiest species on the planet. I believe that bonobos do differ from us in a lot of ways, but they are also like us in many others way. Such as the way they walk, which is very close to the way we do. In terms of their sexuality, however, they differ from humans in that sexuality permeates their entire life, according to Susan. And sexuality is used to resolve conflict among them and for communication. Susan said that as humans we compartmentalize our lives to fit into categories where everything has its place, unlike bonobos - where sex is a part of all aspects of their lives. But Susan believes we too, were not always like this. She also believes its not our biology, but culture, that has gotten us to where we are. In the film presentation, the woman (I wasn't clear if she was Susan) was seen in the woods with Kanzi. When she told him to gather sticks for a fire, he gathered and broke sticks for the pile. Then she told him that she had a lighter in her pocket, and that he could use it to start the fire. He reached into her pocket and using the lighter, he started the fire. Bonobos have an uncanny ability to observe an action, and then imitate it. He blew out the fire on the roasted marshmallow after she did. He even had an awareness of what he needed to do to keep the fire going. Of course he had to have observed these actions at some point, or been trained over a period of time. I keep using words like fascinating and amazing, but the fact that the bonobos could enter into an environment, be familiar with it, and carry out certain sets of actions, such as gathering wood and lighting fires, is certainly fascinating . Even when it was time to leave the camp ground, the bonobos, when asked, grabbed the jug of water and poured it over the fire to put it out. Bonoos can also understand language. The fact that he could understand language and follow through on complex human commands was quite fascinating to watch. The bonobos' level of understanding is so amazing. Is the fact that the bonobos was able to gather objects and carry them from place to place, and understands that when they look in a mirror they are seeing themselves examples of their biological make up, or human culture? Susan says that by combining bonobo and human culture, scientists are better able to see how culture plays a role in the lives of bonobos. I observed Pamanisha, another bonobos, exhibiting some of the same protective characteristics as human mothers. For instance, when her baby wanted to play with the scissors. Aware of the danger of getting hurt, Pamanisha removed the scissors from the baby's reach. Pamanisha also showed motherly qualities when she carefully and meticulously used the scissors to cut her baby's hair. That takes skill, hand/eye coordination, and the use of fine motor skills. The most incredible thing of all to me, was watching Pamanisha draw images in chalk on the floor to communicate where she wanted to go. She drew a symbol that represented the hut in the woods, and a drawing similar to the one that represented the leash she wears when she goes out. I was so fascinated by this. Susan stated that bonobos communicate in the wild using their own language, and I believe this to be true. Susan demonstrated through this presentation that because of their similarities to us, bonobos are one of the most interesting and remarkable creatures on the planet. This leaves me to wonder, how much of what the bonobos are capable of doing and understanding is within their biological make up, and how much of it is influenced by their exposure to human culture.

Human Learning vs Non Human Learning

Tomasello is a hard read. What I took from his views is that he makes the assertion that we as human have a unique and distinct capacity for cultural learning which is based on his narrowly defined view of culture. I hear him arguing that only we as humans have specific cultural attributes. I agree that there are aspects of learning that are unique to us as humans - for example, the ability to learn and acquire language, memorize data, draw connections, and be empathetic. We do differ from non humans in those respects. But Tomasello says non humans do not possess these abilities to learn because they do not experience any social processes of culture as they develop, like humans do. He asserts that we as humans have the ability to pass our knowledge on to future generations, but non humans do not. He says that our imitative learning process has resulted in our cultural evolution. There is truth in his statements and I agree with some of his views, but I also believe that there are many facets and meanings of culture. I think a lot of people would challenge some of Tomasello's views. If he broadened his definition of what constitutes culture, a few parts of his arguments may not be as strong. I would argue that non humans also experience forms of cultural learning and that we are not as different as Tomasello says we are. Even a domesticated dog adjusts to the 'culture' of the home he lives in. Savage-Rumbaugh and Fields (2000) wrote a peer review of Tomasello's book. http://search.proquest.com/docview/198153329?accountid=12617 In it, they challenged statements made by Tomasello, such as: 'only human beings engage in cultural learning' and 'socialization of attention is unique to human culture'. I also challenge such statements. The authors state that there has been research done and evidence to show otherwise. Also, Tomasello says that because the non humans have not been proven to exhibit certain behaviors in the wild, that they do not possess the ability to be intentional about their learning. I feel that the ability to learn certain behaviors is inherent in some non humans, whether or not that learning occurred in their natural habitat. For example: Tomasello says that nonhuman primates do not try to bring others to locations so that they can observe things there. But a police canine on a drug unit does this. The skill may not have been learned in the wild, but the cultural ability to learn it is still apparent. Tomasello says nonhuman primates do not actively offer objects to other individuals by holding them out. But a dog will hold out its dish when it wants to eat, or hold out a ball when it wants you to play catch. Other animals such as crows, dolphins and chimps have exhibited very strong characteristics that Tomasello says they do not possess. I am trying to wrap my head around some of the notions that animals are so vastly different from us in these ways. In the meantime, although I agree that there are many aspects of our learning as humans that differ from the social learning capacities of non humans, there are aspects of both that I feel remain quite similar.
To add to this blog post, I must explain that the above post was created after reading the first hundred pages of Tomasello, and before the class' discussion on it. During class, I was fascinated by the level of discussion and debate about Tomasello's views. For instance, a few students mentioned that Tomasello did not include certain animals in his book that we know surpass others in terms of their abilities. We were informed that Tomasello has done subsequent research and does include a more in depth perspective of the abilities of some non human primates in his other work. The class discussion has added tremendously to my learning curve in understanding Tomasello's views. The interest has been peaked to go out and research some of his subsequent findings, which is all a valuable part of our learning. I find Tomasello's work stretches our knowledge and belief about non human primates and provides interesting but debatable positions on the issue of human learning vs non human learning. I am interested to discover where our class discussions in the future will take us.   WLT