Sexual connection “Yes, I'd rather die a hundred times than lose your sweetest marriage! After all ... I love you passionately, like my soul! (44) - Psyche addresses her husband Cupid in the novel The Golden Ass, written by Apuleius in the 2nd century BC. "She is full of lust, -

CHAPTER 6 SOMA AND GERMANLINE FEEDBACK In this chapter we consider how the DNA sequences of variable antibody genes in germline cells may have changed over evolutionary time. Some evidence points to the existence of a gene feedback, i.e.

Section 2 Animals and People Chapter 1 Prey, friends and enemies of primitive hunters B ancient times human life was closely connected with the animal world. Animals were the prey of hunters, a source of food and materials for clothing, and in many places a source of

As the facts irrefutably testify, there was a time when people did not exist on Earth - they once appeared on it. And along with them inevitably appeared human society. People always live only as part of separate concrete societies - socio-historical organisms, which together form a human society as a whole. Outside the system of social relations, people cannot exist. This has been noted for a long time. Even Aristotle, who lived in the IV century. BC, called a person a political animal, that is, living in a state (polity), in society. This idea was developed in the work of the Scottish thinker A. Ferguson "Essay on the history civil society"(1767). He argued that man was originally, by nature, a social being. "Humanity," he wrote, "should be considered in groups in which it has always existed. The history of an individual is only a single manifestation of the feelings and thoughts acquired by him in connection with his race, and every study related to this subject should come from whole societies, and not individual people. "The opinions that people have always lived in societies, his contemporary, Voltaire, also defended it, in his Philosophy of History (1765) he wrote: “The foundations for society have always existed, and therefore society has always existed.”

But if a person and society have arisen, then the question of where they go with their roots is legitimate. The natural answer is that the origins of man and society must be sought in the animal world. However, there is too much difference between the society in which we live now and the world of animals. Huge cities, high-rise buildings, factories and plants, railways, cars, planes, theaters, museums, books, magazines, newspapers - there is nothing similar in the animal world. Not only modern, but in general any “civilized”, as they say, society differs from the animal world.

Related to this is the rather common idea that man has nothing to do with animals at all. They refer to biblical traditions, according to which people were created by God separately from animals. AT recent decades this idea finds expression in various fantastic hypotheses, according to which the ancestors modern people came to earth from space.

In reality, however, the relationship between animals and man is undeniable. Some scholars came to this conclusion as early as the 18th century. And in the next - XIX century. - The idea of ​​the origin of man from animals has become widespread. It was, as you know, deeply substantiated in the work of the great English naturalist Charles Darwin "The Origin of Man and Sexual Selection" (1871). It quite convincingly showed that the distant ancestors of man were apes (anthropoids).

Ch.Darwin also touched upon the problem of the origin of society. He characterized man as a social animal. From this he concluded that the ancestors of man also did not live alone or even in families, but in wider associations. But having proved that man originated from animals, Ch. Darwin at the same time could not draw a concrete picture of the transformation of an animal into a man - for this he lacked factual data. He could say even less about the emergence of human society.

By now, the situation has changed dramatically. Science has accumulated a huge amount of factual material related to this problem. In the light of this material, it became clear that between the immediate animal ancestors of man, on the one hand, and people as they are now - people of the modern type, on the other, there is a long transition period that began at least 1.6 million years back.

It was a period of transformation of an animal into a man, the formation of man (anthropogenesis) and at the same time the period of the formation of human society (sociogenesis). Anthropogenesis (from Greek anthropos - man and genesis - origin) and sociogenesis (from Latin societas - society and Greek genesis - origin) were two inextricably linked sides of one single process - anthroposociogenesis - the process of becoming a person and society. The people who lived during this period differed both from animals and from people of the modern type. These were emerging people (primal people). Accordingly, they lived in an emerging society (pra-society).

The process of anthropogenesis and sociogenesis, which began 1.6 million years ago, ended approximately 35-40 thousand years ago. The pre-humans and the pre-society were replaced by the formed, ready people who lived in a ready, established society.

How exactly the process of the formation of man went can be judged by the bone remains of the animal ancestors of man, proto-humans and the earliest modern people that have come down to us. They are studied by paleoanthropology (from the Greek palayos - ancient, anthropos - man, logos - teaching).

Social relations are immaterial, incorporeal, they have no physical existence. Therefore, in fact, nothing came to us from them and could not reach us. It is possible to judge how the process of formation of society proceeded only by indirect data. Such data, on the one hand, are the same bone remains of the forefathers, on the other hand, their stone tools and other material monuments that have come down to us. They are explored by archeology (from the Greek archaios - ancient, logos - teaching).

But even direct data can be interpreted in different ways. Various scientists paint a picture of the formation of man and the evolution of his stone tools far from the same. This is especially true for indirect data. Therefore, the only way to understand the essence of sociogenesis is to compare its starting point and the end result.

The starting point of sociogenesis is the association of human animal ancestors. A certain idea about them can be formed by studying the associations of currently existing animals. The end result of sociogenesis is the established human society. It exists in different forms. One of public forms earlier, others later. The earliest form of existence of an established human society is a society that we usually call primitive or primitive communal, and in Western science - primitive (primitive), tribal (tribal), egalitarian (egalitarian), stateless (stateless), classless (classless). It existed in the form of a large number of largely independent primitive communities.

Comparison of associations of animals and primitive communities can provide a key to understanding what the process of sociogenesis was.

Animals and their associations

Of all the sciences of the animal world, the one that studies the behavior of animals in natural or close to natural conditions is the most interesting for us. It is called ethology (from the Greek ethos - character, temper and logos - teaching). This science has revealed the stimuli and motives of animal behavior. They are biological instincts. These primarily include food, sexual and self-preservation instinct. A special place is occupied by the instinct that prompts to take care of offspring. It is called maternal when only the female takes care of the cubs, and parental when the male is involved in this matter.

Maternal or parental instinct is the only need in the animal world, the satisfaction of which consists in caring for others. All other instincts of a given animal individual presuppose and require his concern only for himself. This is especially easy to see in the example of the food instinct. In an adult animal, this instinct can be satisfied in one and only one way - by providing food for itself. He directly encourages one thing - to search for food for himself and only for himself. If the animal then finds enough food that it is enough for others, or if another animal takes possession of the food found, then this does not in the least change the general direction of its behavior. It is focused on caring only for yourself. In this sense, the food instinct is an individualistic instinct. The sexual instinct and the instinct of self-preservation have the same character.

Individualistic instincts determine the behavior of the animal in all spheres of its activity, excluding only the area of ​​relations with the cubs. Therefore, it is quite legitimate to speak of the dominance in the animal world, taken as a whole, of zoological individualism. Animal egoism, i.e. Orientation towards the satisfaction of one's individualistic instincts not only does not exclude, but, on the contrary, under certain conditions inevitably presupposes the unification of animals. Where animals alone are unable to satisfy their instincts, including individualistic ones, they unite for joint activities. In conditions where joint hunting is more successful than single hunting, wolves and wild dogs form packs. The danger posed by predators encourages monkeys to unite in herds.

The desire of an animal to satisfy its instincts may be consistent with the same aspirations of other individuals of the same species, or may come into conflict with them. Whereas, in animals leading a solitary lifestyle, the clash of the strivings of individual individuals occurs from time to time, while in animals living in associations, this kind of contradiction is more or less permanent. That's why necessary condition the existence of any stable zoological association - the systematic harmonization of the clashing aspirations of all the animals that make up them. It is carried out by dominance.

Dominance is that kind of relationship between two animals in which one animal gets the opportunity to satisfy its instincts, regardless of the needs of another animal and even at its expense, and this second animal is forced to refrain from satisfying its instincts if this desire comes into conflict with the desires first animal. The first animal occupies the position (acquires a “status”, as ethologists say) of the dominant (dominant), and the second - the position (status) of the dominated (subordinate).

The dominant animal is usually the stronger one, the subordinate animal is the weaker one. One of the well-known ways to determine the status is a fight. More often than not, however, dominance relationships are established without physical confrontation. Sometimes the threat from one animal is enough to turn another into a subordinate. In other cases (usually when animals differ sharply in strength) and threats are not required.

In a zoological association, dominance relations are established between all animals, excluding the young. The elementary relations of dominance that exist between every two adult animals form a complex hierarchical system in which each animal occupies a specific place. In the zoological association there is thus a system of ranks. One of the animals can only be dominant. In this case, it has the highest rank and plays the role of leader. Most of the members of the association become dominant in relation to some and subordinate in relation to others. Individual animals are in the position of only dominated. The behavior of each animal largely depends on its position in the hierarchy, on its rank.

These relationships are clearly visible in groups of monkeys living in captivity. When animals are given food, it is not uncommon for one leader to initially approach it, sometimes several more monkeys begin to eat with him, whom he will encourage to this by his behavior. When these animals are sated, it is the turn of the next in rank. The weakest animals get access to food only after the main part of the group leaves the feeding place. Teenagers and old animals are in the worst position. They often go hungry even when there is enough food.

Dominance is sometimes interpreted as the curbing of zoological individualism. In reality, however, it is the most striking manifestation of animal egoism. Dominant animals satisfy their instincts, completely disregarding the needs of subordinate animals, and sometimes at their expense.

AT vivo dominance relations manifest themselves in different ways in associations of different animals and in different spheres of activity. Monkeys are animals, mostly herbivores. Their food, as a rule, is scattered in space and is available to everyone. Therefore, dominance relations in this area are almost not manifested in monkeys. However, when a more or less rare or attractive food object comes into view of several animals, it is the dominant animal that takes possession of it, and the subordinates, as a rule, yield without much resistance.

In chimpanzees - great apes closest to humans, there have been cases of hunting more or less large animals. Fights broke out over booty. All the meat, or at least most of it, went to the dominant animals. The rest, as a rule, received nothing. In the sphere of meat distribution among chimpanzees, zoological individualism completely dominated.

Dominance is the only way to reconcile the clashing aspirations of the members of an ordinary zoological association. Dominance prevents constant conflicts within the association of higher animals, provides relative peace and order within the framework of such an association.

At the beginning of the 20th century, the whole world literally turned upside down. It was a period of crazy ideas, experiments and discoveries. It was during this period of time that it seemed to scientists that they were on the verge of greatest discovery. For the first time, the news that a human and an animal would interbreed appeared in 1909. Biologist Ilya Ivanovich Ivanov told the world congress that it is quite possible to create an ape-man. And, he was not the only scientist dealing with this issue.

Who and when was involved in the creation of the ape-man

In 1910, the surgeons Voronov and Steinakh made the first attempts to transplant monkey glands into humans. The business of xenotransplantation gained such momentum that Voronov had to open his own monkey nursery in the south of France.

Rozanov Vladimir Nikolaevich, a well-known surgeon who operated on Stalin and Lenin in his time, also conducted numerous experiments in this area. He transplanted chimpanzee glands into humans, and it seemed to be a resounding success. Local newspapers constantly published stories about how the glands of the primate can cure dementia, reduced potency and aging. But have these attempts been successful? Over time, the world came to the conclusion that these experiments were just a placebo. That is, the effect that was observed after xenotransplantation was nothing more than self-hypnosis.

Traces of unseen beasts

In the writings of Bernard Euvelmans, a biologist and famous zoologist, there are a huge number of references to the so-called "Yeti". Whether Bigfoot really existed is still not known for sure. A large number of scientists are of the opinion that the yeti actually lived near human settlements, but there are no fewer skeptics who deny this. Once two cowboys managed to film a female Bigfoot. The famous plot of Patterson - Gimlin, on which a yeti is clearly visible, has circled the whole world, however, here too there were scientists refuting this event. They believe that since it is impossible to cross people with animals, the photos and videos presented by many eyewitnesses are nothing more than a montage.

There is another evidence of the existence of at least one Bigfoot. In the pre-revolutionary forests of Abkhazia, one prince was caught unusual woman. Her height was more than 2 meters, in addition, she was all covered with hair and could not speak. Some scientists believe that human-animal breeding experiments could lead to the birth of such an individual. She was forcibly brought to the settlement and for a long time kept locked up because she was very aggressive. There are facts confirming that the snow woman had intimate relationship with men (people in the settlement) and gave birth to at least 4 children from them. Khvit - one of her sons, subsequently had his own family and children.

Strong workforce

It is known that at the beginning of the 20th century, Joseph Stalin was sorely lacking, having learned that certain animals were carried out in Germany, he also decided not to hesitate. Under his leadership, numerous experiments were carried out on people. Crossbreeding with animals was supposed to help create incredibly hardy, and at the same time quite docile ape-men. In addition, according to scientists, such a creature should have reached full maturity in just 4 years. Stalin planned that the new labor force would be able not only to mine coal, build railways, but also, if necessary, to fight.

First attempts

The first experiments of the French scientist Sergei Voronov were aimed at rejuvenating people. While studying in Egypt, he drew attention to the eunuchs. They looked much older than the rest of the men. At this moment, the scientist thought about the influence of the gonads on the state of the body. In 1910, Voronov successfully transplanted a chimpanzee testicle into an elderly English aristocrat for the first time. Local newspapers wrote that the effect of xenotransplantation was not long in coming, and after a while the Englishman looked several years younger. In this case, the question arises: why this method rejuvenation is not used in modern transplantation? It is clear that this was in fact

Secret experiments of Professor Ivanov in Guinea

Almost at the same time, the Kremlin also began to wonder if it was really possible to cross between a human and an animal? All scientific activity in this area was entrusted to two biologists - Ilya Ivanov and Vladimir Rozanov. At that time, they were already successfully engaged in artificial Vladimir Rozanov, like his French colleague Voronov, performed operations on transplantation of the gonads of chimpanzees. The difficulty was that the demand for transplantation was so huge that the scientist did not have enough monkeys.

In 1926 Dr. Ivanov and his son went on an expedition to Guinea. They needed to capture female and male chimpanzees for experiments. In addition, they faced the task of persuading at least a few to take part in the experiment. Ivanov wanted to try to fertilize a woman with chimpanzee sperm, and a female chimpanzee with human semen. However, finding a resident of Guinea who agreed to such experiments, even for a lot of money, turned out to be impossible. Then the scientist, together with the Kremlin, decided to do it secretly. Under the guise of examination, several African women were injected with chimpanzee sperm. How this crossing of animals and humans ended is unknown. Soon the scientist Ivanov left Africa and went to conduct experiments in the Abkhazian town of Sukhumi.

Sukhumi Monkey Reserve

In 1927, in Abkhazia, in the small and little-known town of Sukhum at that time, in order to cross animals and humans, a monkey reserve was created.

From Guinea, Ivanov brought the first chimpanzees and gorillas, among which were two large and healthy females. The professor tried to impregnate them with human sperm. After some time, the female monkeys died. At autopsy, it turned out that conception never happened. At that time, Ivanov did not yet understand why the experiments were not working. Modern genetic scientists explain this quite simply.

Is it the same with chimpanzees

It turns out that despite the fact that humans and monkeys have a lot of similarities, there are also significant differences. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes for a total of 46. Chimpanzees have 24 pairs for a total of 48 chromosomes. If such individuals produce a descendant, then it will have an odd number of chromosomes - 47. Such an individual will not be able to produce offspring, since the set of chromosomes will be 46 + 1 - one chromosome will be without a pair.

An example of such a barren animal is a mule. It is known that his parents are a donkey (having 31 pairs of chromosomes) and a horse (32 pairs of chromosomes). In science, obtaining offspring from parents who belong to different species is called interspecific crossing. Human and animal can only be crossed if they have the same DNA, similar karyotype and anatomical features.

Therefore, it turns out that the crossing of animals and humans under normal conditions is impossible due to significant differences in their karyotypes. It has been proven that 18 pairs of human and monkey chromosomes are almost identical, but the rest have a lot of differences. The sex chromosomes, which are responsible for the future sex of the offspring, also differ significantly.

The impossible yesterday became possible today

Experiments on the crossing of man and animals, probably, did not stop and will never stop. The scientists found out that Professor Ivanov was right about something. can really bring great benefits to mankind. However, this is not about mutants at all and Bigfoot. Here we are talking about stem cells that can be obtained from hybrid embryos.

Modern medicine is in great need of stem cells, as they can be used to cure many diseases. The stem cell is capable of self-renewal and division, thus creating any cells of all organs and tissues. Moreover, experiments in genetic engineering prove that stem cells in the body are responsible for youth and longevity. By old age, there are much fewer such cells in the human body, tissues lose their ability to self-renewal, organs work much weaker.

Secrets and mysticism of experiments

Despite the huge amount of evidence, there were no fewer mysteries in this area of ​​\u200b\u200bresearch. For example, after the death of Ivanov, all documents and materials on crossing were hidden and strictly classified. The question arises: if the experiments did not bring any positive result, why did the Kremlin classify all the materials? Crossbreeding of animals and humans has always been shrouded in mystery. There is evidence that many women participated in the experiments in Abkhazia. They were voluntarily fertilized with chimpanzee sperm. But it was impossible to find such a woman and ask her about the progress of the experiments. What happened to all those people who participated in the experiments, and where did they disappear to?

AT this moment In many countries, experiments on crossing animals and humans are prohibited. However, does this mean that they are not carried out? Who knows, maybe in the next century science will still see a chimera?