100 Monkeys

The 100th Monkey
A story about social change.
by Ken Keyes. Jr.


The Japanese monkey, Macaca Fuscata had been observed in the wild for a period of over 30 years. In 1952, on the island of Koshima. scientists were providing monkeys with sweet potatoes dropped in the sand. The monkey liked the taste of the raw sweet potatoes, but they found the dirt unpleasant. An l8 month old female named Imo found she could solve the problem by washing the potatoes in a nearby stream. She taught this trick to her mother. Her playmate also learned this new way and they taught their mothers too.

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/111103-macaca1.jpg

This cultural innovation was gradually picked up by various monkeys before the eyes of the scientists. Between 1952 and 1958 all the young monkeys learned to wash the sandy sweet potatoes to make them more palatable. Only the adults who imitated their children learned this social improvement. Other adults kept eating the dirty sweet potatoes.

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/111103-macaca3.jpg

Then something startling took place. In the Autumn of 1958, a certain number of Koshima monkeys were washing sweet potatoes - the exact number is not known. Let us suppose that when the sun rose one morning there were 99 monkeys on Koshima Island who had learned to wash their sweet potatoes. Let's further suppose that later that morning, the hundredth monkey learned to wash potatoes.

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/111103-macaca4.jpg

THEN IT HAPPENED! By that evening almost everyone in the tribe was washing sweet potatoes before eating them. The added energy of this hundredth monkey somehow created an ideological breakthrough!

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/111103-macaca7.jpg

But notice: A most surprising thing observed by these scientists was that the habit of washing sweet potatoes then transmitted silently over the sea... Colonies of monkeys on other islands and the mainland troop of monkeys at Takasakiyama began washing their sweet potatoes. Thus, when a certain critical number achieves an awareness, this new awareness may be communicated from mind to mind.

http://server3.uploadit.org/files/111103-macaca5.jpg

Although the exact number may vary, this Hundredth Monkey Phenomenon means that when only a limited number of people know of a new way, it may remain the conscious property of these people.

There is a point at which if only one more person tunes in to a new awareness, a field is strengthened so that this awareness is picked up by almost everyone.

There's a lot more to this, if anyone is interested I'll post more later.


:)

I getting a bit tired but this certainly looks interesting.

Would you happen to have an online source? :)

Are they suggesting something along the lines of telepathy/collective unconscious here? :huh: (or am I too tired to appropriatedly comprehend the text)

im not quite sure i understand is it about social skills or telepathy?

neway its got monkeys so it rocks :D :lol:

You can Google a lot of info on this, be prepared for a counter claim too, this is not accepted science by all. The probable leader in the field is Rupert Sheldrake, again, you can Google a lot of info on him too.

Here is one to set the scene, there are many more. When I get time, I will look deeper into what is available on the net.

Rupert Sheldrake.


:)

Appreciated. :D

Mr Sheldrake is not universally popular I notice, still the theory/ies are interesting.

Some more Sheldrake.

Sheldrake online.

The psychic pet phenomenom.

Genius or charlatan?


:)

The Collective Unconscious has been expounded for centuries in some cultures, and more recently has been accepted by some westerners...

The trouble is that it would be hard to prove/disprove, although there is evidence to support both viewpoints.

Like most things that are "supernatural"..mainstream science will scoff and laugh. just like they did to just about every "Original" thinker, including those later proven to be right.

Most "Scientists", in their own ways, are as close minded as any religious fanatic....

I too like sweet potatoes... :D Although I prefer my potatoes unwashed :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rat Faced@12 November 2003 - 01:20


Most "Scientists", in their own ways, are as close minded as any religious fanatic....

---

There is no data to support such a sweeping statement. Your hypothesis is untenable. Case closed.


I was just wondering how monkeys could "communicate" to the others what they are doing. Are they sending out the literal message "clean potatoes taste good" or is the transmission something more innate so that "language" is not an issue.

Imagine men on one island who speak English washing potatoes and suddenly the Chinese speaking inhabitants of an adjacent island, who have no visual or auditory communication with them, starting doing the same.

I can understand how people who have different languages can communicate via mimicry and hand gestures, but if both of these tools are removed, what is the nature of the communication?

That's a good point Hobbes, how did we communicate before we learned to talk?


:)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@12 November 2003 - 02:56
That's a good point Hobbes, how did we communicate before we learned to talk?


:)

---

"Talking" implies physical proximity to allow communication with sound, visual cues, and emotional intonation (happy, sad, fearful).

The article posted implies "projecting" a behavior via minds united under said behavior beyond physical proximity.

I can understand salmon returning to their place of birth by swimming upstream from the ocean being related to a sense of smell which is beyond our capacity. In such a case there is a subtle but real continuity between the target and the source. We all have learned that information is transmitted in many forms which our senses are not able to perceive. But in this case, there is no such continuity between the source and target (more of a leap) and in addition, instead of transmitting a scent, these apes are felt to be transmitting ideas/opinions in some sort of "mind" language. A bit far fetched to me.

Have you ever had a wife, Or brother, or even a close friend.... Your standing in a crowd, or on a bus, or at a gathering.... Someone say's something and you and your fo begin to laugh at the same time.... You both had the same thought, or conscious belief. Pretty freaky shit!!!

Saturday April 10th 1971, 11.50pm. I am in my lounge with my wife and a friend and his wife. I get up to do something, suddenly I get a severe pain across the top of my chest, and the back of my head near my neck. The pain is so intense I fall to the floor screaming. This lasts for maybe 10 seconds, then nothing, no pain, nothing.
The following day I am at my parents house, there is a knock on the door, it's the police informing us that my younger brother was killed in an accident the night before.

From the coroners court we hear .. Christopher ******* died at 11.50 pm April 10th from severe lacerations to the upper chest and back of the skull. He died instantly.

How did I get that pain from miles away?



:)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@12 November 2003 - 03:27
Saturday April 10th 1971, 11.50pm.  I am in my lounge with my wife and a friend and his wife.  I get up to do something, suddenly I get a severe pain across the top of my chest, and the back of my head near my neck.  The pain is so intense I fall to the floor screaming.  This lasts for maybe 10 seconds, then nothing, no pain, nothing.
The following day I am at my parents house, there is a knock on the door, it's the police informing us that my younger brother was killed in an accident the night before.

From the coroners court we hear ..  Christopher ******* died at 11.50 pm April 10th from severe lacerations to the upper chest and back of the skull. He died instantly.

How did I get that pain from miles away?



:)

---

Such events are an abberation, sometimes a simple muscle spasm can be reinterpreted as a premonition with the proper data.

Your point is valid, that there may be communication between humans/animals which is as yet poorly understood, but I still hold my reservations. I've lost loved ones and I had no clue until the phone call.

I am not the type to try and trivialize/rationalize something which has been a very important occurance in your life, I am just speaking about monkeys.

Anyway, sorry about that.

Where you twin's BD?

No Tim, I'm 8 years older, he was 15, I was 23.


:)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@12 November 2003 - 02:55
No Tim, I'm 8 years older, he was 15, I was 23.


:)

---

Sorry to hear about that mate!!! In 1986 I was out partying with friend's, I borrowed my old man's car, got a little to pissed and slept in the car for the night.
I woke up in a panic for some reason, tried to start the car to go home, the car would'nt start. ( I had'nt left light's on or anything like that ) I waved down a guy going to work and he gave me a boost, car started and went about 20 feet then died. The guy saw me in his rear view came and came back. I think this happened twice. Finally the car ran long enough to get me home. When I got there, why I don't know ( especially with the car not running properly ) I drove into town. On my way back I saw my brother, I pulled over, he got out of his car, as he approached me, I blurted out " Mom's dead isn't she " He replied Yep!!!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes+12 November 2003 - 01:53--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 12 November 2003 - 01:53)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@12 November 2003 - 01:20


Most "Scientists", in their own ways, are as close minded as any religious fanatic....

---

There is no data to support such a sweeping statement. Your hypothesis is untenable. Case closed.


[/b][/quote]
No data?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yep...and the Earth is flat, you cant travel more than 60mph without dying, heavier than air flight is impossible, you cant split the atom.......do i have to go on?


Look at &#39;em all, fighting over which theory is correct in just about every subject. Once they have decided upon one, they will fight tooth and nail to keep that, despite any opposing evidence.

The original thinkers that move science, and hence civilization, on....are 1 in a hundred.

The rest are good enough to improve your hair gel, but not cure your dandruff.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rat Faced@12 November 2003 - 08:54

The original thinkers that move science, and hence civilization, on....are 1 in a hundred.

---

So lets get 100 original thinkers, put them together on an island, then we could all be geniuses :unsure: :blink: :huh:

I think your being a bit harsh on scientists RF,

Quote:

---

The original thinkers that move science, and hence civilization, on....are 1 in a hundred.

---

maybe, but the idiots who retard science by attempting to publish pure crap are two a penny. Scepticism is important for science, otherwise we would be permanently investigating nonsense. A couple of the underlying principles in science are that any experiment can be repeated with similar results, and that a hypothesis fits the data of one experiment and makes verifiable predictions for further experiments. A major problem with theories regarding psychic powers is that the evidence is usually just anecdotal, any experiments that try and pin it down fail or are unrepeatable.
This Sheldrake bloke doesn&#39;t seem to be accepted by his peers, to me thats a bad sign, it may just be because the conclusions he draws are too way out for conventional thinking, but imo it more likely means his experiments are not conducted scientifically and so any results and conclusions are unusable.

I dont think i was being harsh.

There is nothing wrong with scientists improving hair gel....its where the money is ;)

I agree with ya Rat Faced, but I think the statistic would be more like 1 in 250 or even 1 in 500. :o

This Sheldrake chap seems like a decent spud :

Quote:

---

In 1996, Sheldrake paused in his dogged research to hook up with renegade priest Matthew Fox and hold public discourses on God (which is you-know-what spelled backward). After all, the Almighty seems to be where the larger implications of morphic resonance head. What if morphic resonance encompasses the narrative direction of our lives? Perhaps destiny is more than just some literary conceit. Maybe karma is not only instant, but real as well. Perhaps we can even actually influence God herself as easily as chicks can stop random-movement robots.

Ah. These ideas just bounce off Sheldrake. He doesn&#39;t bite. After all, his God is, well, British. "I belong to the Church of England," he says. He talks about his beliefs, and he buys the whole thing -- Father, Son, Holy Ghost. Rupert Sheldrake is only a heretic in the Church of Science.

---

Rupert Sheldrake: The delightful crackpot

Quote:

---

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@13 November 2003 - 00:28
This Sheldrake chap seems like a decent spud :

Quote:

---

In 1996, Sheldrake paused in his dogged research to hook up with renegade priest Matthew Fox and hold public discourses on God (which is you-know-what spelled backward). After all, the Almighty seems to be where the larger implications of morphic resonance head. What if morphic resonance encompasses the narrative direction of our lives? Perhaps destiny is more than just some literary conceit. Maybe karma is not only instant, but real as well. Perhaps we can even actually influence God herself as easily as chicks can stop random-movement robots.

Ah. These ideas just bounce off Sheldrake. He doesn&#39;t bite. After all, his God is, well, British. "I belong to the Church of England," he says. He talks about his beliefs, and he buys the whole thing -- Father, Son, Holy Ghost. Rupert Sheldrake is only a heretic in the Church of Science.

---

Rupert Sheldrake: The delightful crackpot

---

homo

Quote:

---

homo

---

:lol:

going back to the original topic
im studing biological anthropology
and i have been taught about the potato washing phenomena
but not all the monkeys picked up the trait so how could you explain that with collective consiousness
the other theory is that they taught each other as we teach each other
and the ones that don&#39;t do could not be taught beacuse they were to old.
there was another case with bonobos in a sanctuary in the amazon
the keepers taught the bonobos how to break open nuts with a stick and the young ones did it easily but the older ones couldn&#39;t do it at all
so i think the collective conciousness has some truth in it but to think that it completely explains the 100 monkeys phenomena.

Quote:

---

science is just a string of disproved theories

---