E-Journal of Philosophy of Education:
International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 3, 2018

Quest for the Origin of Incest Taboo

Juichi YAMAGIWA
Kyoto University

1. Introduction
The method of discussing the norms of human society through comparison withanimals has been forbidden for a long time in the world of Western science. It originatesfrom Darwinian Theory of evolution.
Charles Darwin, who proposed the concept of 'Origin of Species' in 1859 andadvocated the concept that different species evolved from common ancestors in the past,
avoided mentioning the evolution of mankind. In the "Descent of man" written in 1871,
he explained that continuity between animals and humans can be found not only tomorphological features but also to intellectual ability and moral character. And since thegorillas and chimpanzees that are most morphologically similar to humans live only in
the African continent, we foretold that fossils of the oldest human ancestors can be foundthere. However, the majority of anthropologists at that time believed that humans had
evolved in Europe and Asia, and they had continued to discover old human fossils in
Europe (ex. Homo neanderthalensis) and Asia (ex. Homo erectus in Java and Beijing).
Such belief led to a large misunderstandings of human evolution. In 1909, old humanfossil was discovered in Britain and anthropologists named it Piltdown man. However it
was a false fossil that skillfully shaped the mandible of the orangutans with those ofmodern humans. For 40 years until 1949, people believed that human evolved in Britain
by the false evidence. In 1964, the discovery of Homo habilis in the Olduvai Gorge,
Tanzania finally proved the Darwin's forecast.
On the other hand, the study of human society using evolutionary theory blossomedin "Ancient Society" of Lewis Morgan in 1977. He noted that marriage forms around theworld are reflected in differences in relatives 'names, trying to locate the form of marriage
and relatives of prehistoric times by following the change in relatives' names. Based on
the results, Morgan described the evolutionary pathway from the era of primordial

2

J. YAMAGIWA

marriage in which sexual intercourse was prohibited between parents and brothers andsisters, by the appearance of the insect taboo, collective marriage, Punarua marriage
which shares each other's spouse with same- Daughter marriage tolerate sexualintercourse outside marriage, depicted a pathway evolved into the current single marriage.
However, this theory was criticized as a wrong method of dividing the modern family
form into advanced one and late one, and arranging it temporally along the axis ofevolution. In addition, because the greater risks of the idea leading to racial discriminationand colonial rule, and leading to Eugenic thought appeared using evolution theory werepointed out, the opinion that it is dangerous to apply evolutionary theory easily to humansociety spread rapidly. In the first half of the 20th century, rather than exploring theevolution of human society, the focus was on finding universal features in human society,evolutionary theory was applied only to nonhuman animals. There was a trend thatsociety and culture should not be talked about in terms of evolution.
Anthropologists argued that families are common and most basic societal featuresof humans, while avoiding mentioning its origin. However, as a condition for the family
to be established, any scholar raised the presence of the insect taboo., Claude Lévi-Strauss
who wrote "The Elementary Structures of Kinship" in 1949, asserted that exchange orreciprocity is a fundamental principle behind the human society, and suggested that incest
taboo may lead to the lack of women to marry within relatives and facilitate marriage byexchange of women between them.
In the course of these Western academic societies, suddenly, scientific disciplines toapply evolutionary theory to human society and to discuss the evolution of society
appeared. It was Japan that was a frontier in the academic world led by Europe and theUnited States, and it was academic called animal sociology. The fact that monkeys notinhabited in Europe and the United States lived in various places of Japan worked
advantageously, and primatology to learn the continuity between human and animalsociety was fostered. Among them, the family and the incest taboo were regarded as animportant theme from the beginning.

2. Evolution of human family and incest taboo
Kinji Imanishi, the founder of Japanese primatology, declared that society can berecognized for all creatures in his book "The World of Living Things" in the midst ofWorld War II in 1941. He hypothesized that all living things constitute a "species society"unique to each species, by living in a society without prejudice to language andconsciousness, and by having a proto identity that reacts with the same species
Symposium: The Future of Inquiry into Human Beings: In Search for Contact Points between Primatology,
Anthropology, and Philosophy of Education

Quest for the Origin of Incest Taboo

3

individually. And by interacting with other species in the place where the species lives,
we can assume a "holistic society" consisting of several species, he insisted. This is the
hypothesis before James Watson and Francis Crick found out the replication mechanismof the DNA, which is the universal structure of genes in all living things. Since then allorganisms have been programmed by DNA, making it of common origin was recognized
as a universal fact. Imanishi stated the idea that all the creatures should have differentiatedfrom a common ancestor and could react each other to shape a society or community.
Imanishi dissertation was the theme of the "habitat segregation" phenomenon of aquatic
insects named Hirata mayfly (Schistonota), but during the Second World War he had astrong interest in mammalian society through the observation of Przewalski's Wild Horse(Equus ferus przewalskii) in Inner Mongolia. He started the study on animal society withhis students after the war. Their challenge was to confirm the existence of society andculture in non-human animals.
Imonishi, Junichiro Itani, and Shunnzo Kawamura, who met Japanese monkeys at
Toi Peninsula in Miyazaki prefecture in 1948, had a strong impression in their stunningmovements as a group, and they decided to study on a society of monkeys. By obtaining
phylogenetically close subjects to humans as monkeys, the center of research was
directed towards the evolution of society, leading to human beings. In 1951, Imanishi
wrote "Society before Human Beings", in which, through an overview of the society of
insects and birds, he emphasized the necessity of logic to unite two conflicting socialorganizations such as pair bonds between sexes and a larger group consisting of both
sexes, in order to consider the evolutionary pathway from an animal society to a humansociety. For the first time there emerged human families as a universal unit in a humansociety for the main theme of Japanese primatology.
Primate researchers who succeeded in provisioning Japanese monkeys at Koshimain Miyazaki prefecture and Takasakiyama in Oita prefecture to observe Japanesemonkeys at close proximity, soon found that the social structure of Japanese monkeys
were characterized by linear dominance ranks, leaderships, alliance formation within kingroups, and the pre-cultural ability to propagate newly acquired behavior such as washingpotatoes with water and collected wheat grains by dropping them with sand into sea water.
However, Japanese monkeys were phylogenetically too far away from humans. Imanishi
and others started investigating great apes trying to find clues to social evolution leading
to human beings. They conducted three surveys of gorillas in Africa held in 1958-60. Its
main purpose was to find the original type of the human family in the gorilla society.
Unfortunately, gorillas were not provisioned like Japanese monkeys, and in 1960
the gorilla survey was forced to be interrupted due to outbreaks of independent wars
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 3, 2018

4

J. YAMAGIWA

everywhere in the habitat of gorillas. Based on the results of these insufficient surveys,
Imanishi published a paper entitled "the Origin of Human Families - from the standpointof primatology" on Ethnology Studies (Imanishi, 1961). The gorilla society was depicted
as a "pre-family" in which male enters from outside to gain a young daughter as a spouse,
becoming an interceding son and becoming independent. He proposed four conditions
for the establishment of a human family, 1) the marriage system, 2) incest taboo, 3)
division of labor between sexes, 4) close neighboring relationship, among which heconsidered that the three conditions excluding the division of labor have been sproutly
established in the ape society. Actually, before the survey of gorillas, Kisaburo Tokuda
and Itani reported that mothers and their sons tend to avoid copulation in macaque groups
including Japanese monkeys even in estrus (Tokuda & Itani, 1953). Imanishi thought that
nonhuman primates had already a tendency to avoid sexual intercourse among close
relatives, although this tendency was not established by institution like humans. Masao
Kawai and Hiroki Mizuhara also reported from their survey on mountain gorillas in the
Virunga Volcanoes that gorillas groups extensively overlapped their range withneighboring groups without territoriality (Kawai & Mizuhara, 1959). Imanishi therefore
imagined that "pre-family" of gorillas organize a neighborhood community like humansociety, with keeping close relationships among families having non-territoriality.
This hypothesis became invalid later, because male gorillas unlikely join groups
after emigration from their natal groups (Harcourt et al., 1976). Avoiding wars, Japanese
primatologists led by Imanishi started to study chimpanzees in Tanzania, succeeded inprovisioning chimpanzees in Mahale Mountains and established a long-term research siteat the eastern shore of Lake Tanganyika. Junichiro Itani, who took charge in the surveys
of chimpanzees and hunter gatherers, focused on the similarity of the community called
Pygmy's band and the group of chimpanzees. He proposed "Preband Theory", that theestablishment of a community preceded the establishment of a family in the evolution of
mankind (Itani, 1966). He also pointed out that the group-living primate societies have
two contrasted extremes of male transfer or female transfer from their natal groups toother groups, and hypothesized the evolutionary pathway of primate societies fromelemental society of nocturnal monkeys with solitary nature and territoriality,
monogamous pairs with territoriality, polygynous or polyandrous groups with partly
overlapping home ranges, multi-male and multi-female groups, and finally todifferentiate into matrilineal (female-bonded) or patrilineal (female-transfer) societies(Itani, 1972). In his theory, incest avoidance constitutes the major role in the evolution ofprimate social structures.

Symposium: The Future of Inquiry into Human Beings: In Search for Contact Points between Primatology,
Anthropology, and Philosophy of Education

Quest for the Origin of Incest Taboo

5

3. Incest avoidance in primates
Avoidance of incest is attained by two different features of non-human primates.
One is a propensity to leave natal groups by one sex, to transfer into other groups without
close relatives, and to breed there. This prevents them to copulate with close relatives in
the groups into which they transfer. Moreover, they do not stay in the new groups for a
prolonged period and leave them before their offspring mature, so that the transferredindividuals may not have the opportunity to copulate with their offspring consequently.
Only males tend to transfer in Cercopithecus monkeys including Japanese monkeys,
while only females transfer in the African great apes (chimpanzees and gorillas). The
former is regarded as matrilineal society and the latter as patrilineal society in primatology.
The latest ancestral society of humans may have the patrilineal features as the African
great apes (Foley & Gamble, 2009; Yamagiwa, 2015).
The other is a behavioral features of primates to avoid copulation with close relatives,
even if they coexist with kin related individuals after maturity. In Japanese monkeys, after
provisioning, or in isolated conditions without any group nearby to transfer, there
observed mature males that had never left their natal groups. Yukio Takahata (1982)
investigated Japanese monkeys at Arashiyama Monkey Park in Kyoto and found out thatmating is avoided within the fourth degree of kinship relations. Since Japanese monkeys
live in a matrilineal society, the degree of kinship relations is based on maternal relations.
The first degree is mother-son, the second is brother-sister and grandmother-grandson,the third is aunt-nephew, and the fourth is cousins. Female Japanese monkeys usuallyform alliance among kin in conflicts, and they have affiliative relationships within the
fourth degree of kin relations from birth. Such affiliation relationships may prevent themfrom sexual interactions. Moreover, Takahata found that a male-female pair formed
through sexual interactions during the mating season gradually developed the tendency
to avoid copulation in the next mating season. Japanese monkeys have the mating seasonfrom autumn to winter in which they form a peculiar proximate relationships throughcopulation. This relationships with the dominant male enables the subordinate females toaccess the artificial foods at the provisioning site, and the followership between themcontinues in the next non-mating and mating seasons. But it consequently leads them toavoidance of copulation irrespective kin relatedness. Based on these observations,Takahata concluded that affiliative relationships may generally prevent Japanesemonkeys from copulative interactions.
Mating avoidance with conspecific kin has been observed in other primate species(e.g., red colobus: Starin, 2001; baboons: Alberts & Altmann, 1995; langurs: Sterck et al.,2005), but found that they do not recognize their kin-related conspecifics inherently
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 3, 2018

6

J. YAMAGIWA(Pusey, 1990). Based on DNA analysis extracting from blood samples in confined troopsof Japanese monkeys and Barbary macaques, they did not avoid copulation with paternal
relatives (Inoue et al, 1990; Kuester et al, 1994). Not biological relations, but intimate
relationships after birth may cause incest avoidance in primates.
Copulation in mother-son pairs is also rare in the great apes (Pusey, 1980; Harcourt& Stewart, 2007; Kano, 1992). In gorillas, copulation tends to be avoided in fatherdaughter pairs (Stewart & Harcourt, 1987). It is not necessary for these males to bebiologically related to daughters; an affinitive relationship between a male and young
female may be sufficient for the avoidance of copulation. Alexander (1970) reported that
copulation was avoided in a male-female pair in which the male took care of the female
during her childhood. Kuester et al. (1994) monitored pairs of Barbary macaques andfound that mating avoidance may occur when more than 3% of daytime is allocated to
intimate caretaking lasting 6 months, irrespective of biological paternity. This implies that
incest avoidance is fostered by intimate social relationships at immaturity, even in
nonhuman primates. Human families are not totally based on biological kin relations, but
are constructed based on cognitive relationships through caretaking after birth.

4. From incest avoidance to Incest taboo
In fact, it has been known for a long time that intimate contact in early childhood
also leads to repelling sexual intercourse in humans. Edward Westermarck (1891) pointed
out that men and women in an intimate relationship since childhood have a tendency to
avoid sexual intercourse, in "The History of Human Marriage". However, this theory wascriticized by Sigmund Freud (1910), who created psychoanalysis in the same era, as it is
not necessary to ban as a taboo if suppression of close relatives sexual intercourse isnatural procurement. For Freud, the earliest sexual excitations of youthful human beings
are invariably of an incestuous character due to the inherent nature of the foundation of
the “Oedipus complex”. Even then this theory was criticized and ignored by sociologists
and anthropologists.
However, in the latter half of the 20th century, as the researches on the communityof Kibbutz in Israel progressed, some reports came to support Westermarck's hypothesis.
Kibbutz is an organization that separates children from their families and raises them in
a community, but it became clear that men and women, who grew up in the same Kibbutz,
did not get married as expected and that they tended to marry other Kibbutz origin(Shepher, 1971). In addition, Arthur Wolf (1970), who investigated household
registration records from Taiwan, found that intimate childhood association promotes
Symposium: The Future of Inquiry into Human Beings: In Search for Contact Points between Primatology,
Anthropology, and Philosophy of Education

Quest for the Origin of Incest Taboo

7

sexual aversion. Women who are forced to marry a childhood associate bear fewer
children than those who marry a stranger. They are also more likely to divorce or avoid
their husbands in favor of other men. Based on this case, Wolf (1995) concludes thathuman beings, like other primates, have intimate relationships during early childhood
avoiding sexual intercourse. As a result of these reports in succession, the theory ofWestermarck revived and is now called "Westermarck effect".
Why the Westermarck effect on primates had to be normalized to taboo in humans.
It should have been caused by growing population size with forming a community
including several families. In nonhuman primates, the mean group size is positively
correlated with the ratio of the neocortex size to other parts of the brain. This is called the“social brain hypothesis,” which proposes that social complexity is the driving force forincreases in brain size (Dunbar, 1996). Considering that the human brain has also evolved
as such a "social brain", since the brain has started to grow two million years ago, thebrain capacity increases about three times, the brain of modern human fits 150 people forthe suitable group size. This agrees with the average size of bands in contemporary
hunter gatherers. In other words, human beings have rapidly increased the population
since farming and livestock began 12,000 years ago, but they had lived for as long as 150
population groups at the most for many years during the life of hunting and gathering.
The number of 150 people is a community including 10 to 20 families. The society
with this multi-level structure has never been recognized even by the great apes. That is
because the principles of families and communities have conflicts sometimes. Withinfamilies kin-related people do not demand return, while in communities members usually
have duties according to roles for cooperation. Due to these conflicts, gorillas form asmall family group, and chimpanzees form a large community without segregation offamily groups. An exceptional example is Hamadryas baboons living in grasslands
within a multi-level society, in which small polygynous groups aggregate to form a large
band or troop and females transfer within bands. The lack of competitive food resourcesin grasslands may prevent females from forming kin-based coalitions, and the highpredation pressure may lead to frequent association and alliance formation among malesof different polygynous groups (Barton et al., 1996). Adding to these ecological factors,
sexual coercion including infanticide may have promoted cooperation among kin-related
leader males of different groups and facilitated modular society (Grueter et al., 2012).
When early hominids extended their range into open land, they may have faced the sameproblems as papionins in promoting a multi-level social system (Yamagiwa, 2015).
The first possible human family in the Homo clade is assumed to be a community
in which several monogamous and polygynous groups associate loosely. Females
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 3, 2018

8

J. YAMAGIWA

transferred between groups within or between communities, and males dispersed fromtheir natal groups but remained in a community to cooperate with kin-related males. A
community with substructures of various compositions had a tendency of fission-fusion
for different daily tasks (Aureli et al., 2008). Increased animal foods in their diet facilitatedencephalization, and early weaning and subsequent delayed maturation promotedcooperative breeding and division of labor for provisioning their offspring. Thesechanges in life history and feeding technology led to a multi-level community structurein which several families cooperated with each other in diverse tasks of subsistence(Yamagiwa, 2018). This formation might have been resilient against severe conditions inarid areas and enabled Homo erectus to expand their distribution out of Africa.
However, in order to maintain a breeding group called families and to organize thecommunities they gathered, it is necessary to weaken the repulsion among small familygroups like gorillas, or to establish regulations on promiscuous sexual interactions suchas chimpanzees. When families and communities become unit of marriage, accepting
bride or son-in from outside, opportunities for unrelated men and women to live together
may increase. It is necessary to set norms on sexual interactions to keep autonomy of thefamily as a breeding group. If a wife wishes to have sexual relations with her husband’s
father or brothers, or a husband does in the same way, the couple will not be able to forma sustainable bond.
Our ancestors should have used the tendency of incest avoidance called“Westermarck effect” inherited from nonhuman primates for making these norms. Kinrelated members tend to avoid sexual intercourse due to affinity relations formed in earlychildhood. Both parents-in-law and in-law daughter or son were also regarded in such
relationships, during which they created a norm to prohibit sexual intercourse in theextended family through marriage. The norm that intimate relationships among kin do
not lead to sexual relationships opened the way for couples to coexist with other family
members without having sexual trouble. Without these norms, our ancestors could not
create a community including multiple families.
However, as the community expands in size and the movement of people between
community increases, independence of families as breeding groups is hardly maintained
only by prohibition of incest. Therefore, it seems likely that cultures and customs
developed to hide sexual intercourse from the public place and to restrict sexual
expression to private places. Nevertheless, people suffer from sexual troubles including
violence in modern society. Human society is not yet able to control the sexualinteractions, in which sociality and creativity unique to humans may be embedded.

Symposium: The Future of Inquiry into Human Beings: In Search for Contact Points between Primatology,
Anthropology, and Philosophy of Education

Quest for the Origin of Incest Taboo

9

References
Alberts, S., Altmann, J. (1995). Balancing costs and opportunities: Dispersal in malebaboons. American Naturalist, 145, 279-306.
Alexander, B.K. (1970). Paternal behavior of adult male Japanese monkeys. Behaviour,36, 270-85.
Aureli F, Schaffner CM, Boesch C, Bearder SK, Call J, Chapman CA, Connor R, Di
Fiore A, Dunbar RIM, Henzi SP, Holekamp K, Korstjens AH, Layton R, Lee P,
Lehmann J, Manson JH, Ramos-Fernandez G, Strier KB, van Schaik CP (2008)
Fission-fusion dynamics: New research frameworks. Curr Anthropol 49: 627-654.
Barton, R.A., Byrne, R.W., Whiten, A. (1996). Ecology, feeding competition and social
structure in baboon. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 38, 321-329.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the
Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: Murray.
Darwin, C. (1871). The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. London:
Murray.
Foley, R., Gamble, C. (2009). The ecology of social transitions in human evolution. In
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences,364, 3267-3279.
Freud S. (1918) Totem and Taboo: Resemblances Between the Psychic Lives of Savages
and Neurotics. New York: Moffat, Yard. (Original work published 1913)
Grueter, C.C., Chapais, B., Zinner, D. (2012). Evolution of multilevel social systems in
nonhuman primates and humans. International Journal of Primatology, 33, 10021037.
Harcourt, A.H., Stewart, K.J., Fossey, D. (1976). Male emigration and female transfer inwild mountain gorilla. Nature 263: 226–227.
Harcourt, A.H., Stewart, K.J. (2007). Gorilla Society: Conflict, Compromise andCooperation Between the Sexes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Imanishi, K. (1941). The World of Living Things. Kobundo, Tokyo. Translated by
Pamela Asquith et al. (2002) “ A Japanese View of Nature” , Routledge, London and
New York.
Imanishi, K. (1951). Society before Human Being. Iwanami, Tokyo.
Imanishi, K. (1961). The origin of human family: from a viewpoint of primatologie.
Ethnological Studies, 25, 119-38. (in Japanese)
Inoue, M., Takenaka, A., Tanaka, S., Kominami, R., Takenaka, O. (1990). Paternity
discrimination in a Japanese macaque group by DNA fingerprinting. Primates
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 3, 2018

10

J. YAMAGIWA

31(4): 563-570
Itani, J. (1954). The monkeys at Takasakiyama. Kobunsha, Tokyo. (in Japanese)
Itani, J. (1966）Social Structure of Chimpanzees. Shizen 21 (8). (in Japanese)
Itani J. (1972). Social Structure of Primates. Seitaigakukoza, vol. 20, Kyoritsushuppan(in Japanese)
Itani, J. (1977). Evolution of primate social structure. Journal of Human Evolution, 6,
235-43.
Itani, J. (1984). The evolution of primate social structures. Man (N.S.), 20, 593-611.
Kawai M, Mizuhara H. (1959). An Ecological Study on the Wild Mountain Gorilla(Gorilla gorilla beringei) -Report of the JMC 2nd Gorilla Expedition 1959-.
Primates 2: 1Kuester, J., Paul, A., Arnemann, J. (1994). Kinship, familiality and mating avoidance in
Barbary macaques, Macaca sylvanus. Animal Behaviour 48: 1183-1194.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1949). Les Structures Elementaires de la Parente. Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1956). The family. In: H.L. Shapiro (ed.), Man, Culture and Society (pp.
261-285), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Morgan L.H. (1877). Ancient Society. MacMillan & Company, London.
Pusey, A. (1990). Mechanisms of inbreeding avoidance in nonhuman primates. In: J.R.
Feierman (ed), PEDOPHILIA: BIOSOCIAL DIMENSIONS, New York:
Springer-Verlag. Pp. 201-220
Shepher, J. (1971). Mate selection among second generation kibbutz adolescents andadults: Incest avoidance and negative imprinting. Archives of Sexual Behavior
1(4): 293–307
Starin, E.D. (2001). Patterns of inbreeding avoidance in Temminck’s red colobus.
Behaviour, 138, 453-465.
Sterck, E.H.M., Willems, E.P., van Hooff, J.A.R.A.M., Wich, S.A. (2005). Female
dispersal, inbreeding avoidance and mate choice in Thomas langurs (Presbytes
thomasi). Behaviour, 142, 845-868.
Stewart, K.J., Harcourt ,A.H. (1987). Gorillas: Variation in female relationships. In:
PRIMATE SOCIETIES, B.B. Smuts, D.L. Cheney, R.M. Seyfarth, R.W.
Wrangham T.T. Struhsaker (eds), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp.155164.
Takahata, Y. (1982) The socio-sexual behavior of Japanese monkeys. Z. Tierpsychol., 59:
89‐108.
Symposium: The Future of Inquiry into Human Beings: In Search for Contact Points between Primatology,
Anthropology, and Philosophy of Education

Quest for the Origin of Incest Taboo

11

Tokuda, K., Itani, J. (1953). The monkey at Koshima: Sexual Behavior. Nihondobutsuki
Vol.3, Shisakusha (in Japanese)
Westermarck, E. (1891). The History of Human Marriage. London: MacMillan.
Wolf, A.P. (1970). Childhood Association and Sexual Attraction: A Further Test of theWestermarck Hypothesis. American Anthropologist 72: 503-515.
Yamagiwa, J. (2015). Evolution of hominid life history strategy and origin of humanfamily. In T. Furuichi, J. Yamagiwa, F. Aureli (Eds.), Dispersing Females: Life
History and Social Strategies in Male-Philopatric Species, (pp.255-285). Tokyo:
Springer.
Yamagiwa, J. (2018). Evolution of community and humanity from primatological
viewpoints. In : Stomu Yamash’ta, Tadashi Yagi, Stephen Hill (eds), The Kyoto
Manifesto for Global Economics : The Platform of Community, Humanity, andSpirituality, Springer Nature, Singapore, pp. 329-357.

E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 3, 2018