The Question of Culture 95cell repositories have been established for researchers to
obtain samples of primate DNA. Other biomedical re-
search is far more invasive to the individual primate. For
example, to document the infectious nature of kuru, a
disease closely related to mad cow disease, extract from
the brains of sick humans was injected into the brains of
living chimpanzees. A year and a half later, the chimpan-
zees began to sicken. They had the same classic features of
kuru—uncontrollable spasticity, seizures, dementia, and
ultimately death.
The biological similarities of humans and other pri-
mates leading to such research practices derive from a
long, shared evolutionary history. By comparison, the cul-
tural rules that allow our closest relatives to be the subjects
of biomedical research are relatively recent. As Goodall
has said, ”Surely it should be a matter of moral responsi-
bility that we humans, differing from other animals mainly
by virtue of our more highly developed intellect and, with
it, our greater capacity for understanding and compassion,
ensure that the medical progress slowly detaches its roots
from the manure of non-human animal suffering and de-
spair. Particularly when this involves the servitude of our
closest relatives.”^29
But there are powerful social barriers that work
against the well-being of our animal relatives. In West-
ern societies there has been an unfortunate tendency to
erect what paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould refers to as
“golden barriers” that set us apart from the rest of the
animal kingdom.^30 Sadly, this mindset blinds us to the
fact that a continuum exists between “us” and “them”
(animals). We have already seen that the physical differ-
ences between humans and apes are largely differences of
degree, rather than kind. It now appears that the same is
true with respect to behavior. As primatologist Richard
Wrangham put it,
Like humans, [chimpanzees] laugh, make up after
a quarrel, support each other in times of trouble,
medicate themselves with chemical and physical
remedies, stop each other from eating poison-
ous foods, collaborate in the hunt, help each
other over physical obstacles, raid neighboring
groups, lose their tempers, get excited by dramatic
weather, invent ways to show off, have family tra-
ditions and group traditions, make tools, devise
plans, deceive, play tricks, grieve, and are cruel
and are kind.^31of trees where small animals, including primates, might
be hiding. The primatologists even observed the chimps
extract bush babies from tree hollows with the spears.
Because this behavior is practiced primarily by young
chimpanzees, with one adolescent female the most fre-
quently exhibiting the behavior, spear hunting seems to
be a relatively recent innovation in the group. Just as the
young female Japanese macaques mentioned above were
the innovators in those groups, this young female chimp
seems to be leading this behavior in Senegal. Further, the
savannah conditions of the Fongoli Reserve make these
observations particularly interesting in terms of human
evolutionary studies, which have tended to suggest that
males hunted while females gathered.
The Question of Culture
The more we learn of the behavior of our nearest primate
relatives, the more we become aware of the importance of
learned, socially shared practices and knowledge in these
creatures. Do chimpanzees, bonobos, and the other apes
have culture? The answer appears to be yes. The detailed
study of ape behavior has revealed varied use of tools and
patterns of social engagement that seem to derive from the
traditions of the specific group rather than a biologically
determined script. Humans share with the other apes an
ability to learn the complex but flexible patterns of behav-
ior particular to a social group during a long period of
childhood dependency.
If we agree that these other primates possess culture,
does this demand a reorientation in how humans behave
toward them, such as stopping the use of monkeys and
apes in biomedical research? Jane Goodall argues vehe-
mently for this change. She emphasizes that cultural pro-
cesses determine the place of animals within biomedical
research, and she advocates eliminating the cultural dis-
tinction between humans and our closest relatives for re-
search purposes. Some governments are responding to her
calls as seen by the 2008 approval by the Spanish Parlia-
ment of the “Declaration on Great Apes,” which extends
some human rights to gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos,
and orangutans.^28
Some biomedical research disturbs animals minimally.
For example, DNA can be extracted from the hair natu-
rally shed by living primates, allowing for cross-species
comparisons of disease genes. To facilitate this process,
(^28) O’Carroll, E. (2008, June 27). Spain to grant some human rights to apes.
Christian Science Monitor.
(^29) Goodall, J. (1990). Through a window: My thirty years with the chimpan-
zees of Gombe. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
(^30) Quoted in de Waal, The ape and the sushi master, p. 235.
(^31) Quoted in Mydens, S. (2001, August 12). He’s not hairy, he’s my brother.
New York Times, sec. 4, 5.