gheller@YODA.EECS.WSU.EDU (Geoffrey Heller - CS216) (06/28/91)
I am curious to know if the methods of ethologists have attained any level of credibility in recent scientific works pertaining to biology. Note that I am not referring to anthropomorphism, but ethology. If not, why? If so, what is the proper method to relate the findings of studies where ethological methods are used? ========================================================== - Geoffrey Heller gheller@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu (Software Engineering) ==========================================================
rowe@pender.ee.upenn.edu (Mickey Rowe) (06/28/91)
In article <9106272202.AA12658@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu> gheller@YODA.EECS.WSU.EDU (Geoffrey Heller - CS216) writes: >I am curious to know if the methods of ethologists have attained any level >of credibility in recent scientific works pertaining to biology. Note that >I am not referring to anthropomorphism, but ethology. Not having read the book that lead you to ask this, I'm not sure where your question is coming from. There are journals with the word ethology in them, and in fact there is a journal just called ethology. My understanding is that ethology as a word merely means the study of an animal's behavior in it's natural environment (rather than say in a skinner box :) There are quite a number of scientists involved in such studies, and there is even a sub-specialty called neuroethology where people try to understand how the nervous system of an organism is built to allow it to lead its natural life. As for some of the original ethologists, Tinbergen and Lorentz (sp?) are considered very highly (quasi-gods :). Some of their students (e.g. Walter Heilegenberg of electric fish fame--I believe he's one of the editors of the Journal of Comparative Physiology) are *quite* highly respected. > - Geoffrey Heller > gheller@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu Mickey Rowe (rowe@pender.ee.upenn.edu)
mtp@allwet.zso.dec.com (Michael T. Peterson) (06/29/91)
Yes. For example, Nikko Tinbergen won a Nobel Prize for his pioneering work in this field. regards, /mtp
tbd@neuro (Tristan Davies) (06/30/91)
In article <45394@netnews.upenn.edu> rowe@pender.ee.upenn.edu (Mickey Rowe) writes: > >>I am curious to know if the methods of ethologists have attained any level >>of credibility in recent scientific works pertaining to biology. Note that >>I am not referring to anthropomorphism, but ethology. > [...] > >As for some of the original ethologists, Tinbergen and Lorentz (sp?) >are considered very highly (quasi-gods :). Some of their students >(e.g. Walter Heilegenberg of electric fish fame--I believe he's one of >the editors of the Journal of Comparative Physiology) are *quite* >highly respected. > > >Mickey Rowe (rowe@pender.ee.upenn.edu) I have to second that: neuroethology is, in many ways the field that represents the end goal of neuroscience. Understanding the brain means understanding how it accepts inputs (i.e., sensory stimuli) and processes them in such a way as to modify the animal's behavior effectively, so the animal can continue to survive. P.S. I think it's spelled Lorenz, but I'm not sure. Happy trails! Tristan "how'd you guess I'm a neurobiologist?" Davies e-mail: tbd@neuro.duke.edu Department of Neurobiology, Duke University Medical Center "grblb blabt unt mipt speeb!! oot piffoo blaboo..." -- Opus
colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby) (06/30/91)
In article <45394@netnews.upenn.edu> rowe@pender.ee.upenn.edu (Mickey Rowe) writes: >In article <9106272202.AA12658@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu> > gheller@YODA.EECS.WSU.EDU (Geoffrey Heller - CS216) writes: > >>I am curious to know if the methods of ethologists have attained any level >>of credibility in recent scientific works pertaining to biology. Note that >>I am not referring to anthropomorphism, but ethology. Yes, they have. For some information about ethology see "Animal Behaviour - an evolutionary approach", by John Alcock. It is a very well written intro college text on the subject. Chris Colby email: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu