scholarly journals The Cultural Evolution of Human Nature

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Stanford
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Human Behaviour ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Social Anthropology ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Cultural Evolutionary ◽  
Ontological Framework

Abstract Recent years have seen the growing promise of cultural evolutionary theory as a new approach to bringing human behaviour fully within the broader evolutionary synthesis. This review of two recent seminal works on this topic argues that cultural evolution now holds the potential to bring together fields as disparate as neuroscience and social anthropology within a unified explanatory and ontological framework.

scholarly journals Human nature, human culture: the case of cultural evolution

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 20170018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Lewens
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Social Anthropology ◽  
Human Culture ◽  
Organic Evolution ◽  
Related Idea ◽  
Cultural Evolutionary

In recent years, far from arguing that evolutionary approaches to our own species permit us to describe the fundamental character of human nature, a prominent group of cultural evolutionary theorists has instead argued that the very idea of ‘human nature’ is one we should reject. It makes no sense, they argue, to speak of human nature in opposition to human culture. The very same sceptical arguments have also led some thinkers—usually from social anthropology—to dismiss the intimately related idea that we can talk of human culture in opposition to human nature. How, then, are we supposed to understand the cultural evolutionary project itself, whose proponents seem to deny the distinction between human nature and human culture, while simultaneously relying on a closely allied distinction between ‘genetic’ (or sometimes ‘organic’) evolution and ‘cultural’ evolution? This paper defends the cultural evolutionary project against the charge that, in refusing to endorse the concept of human nature, it has inadvertently sabotaged itself.

Rethinking Cultural Evolutionary Psychology

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 477-492
Author(s):  
Ryan Nichols ◽  
Henrike Moll ◽  
Jacob L. Mackey
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Social Interaction ◽  
Evolutionary Psychology ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Cultural Learning ◽  
Cultural Evolutionary ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Point Of Departure ◽  
Alternative Theories

AbstractThis essay discusses Cecilia Heyes’ groundbreaking new book Cognitive Gadgets: The Cultural Evolution of Thinking. Heyes’ point of departure is the claim that current theories of cultural evolution fail adequately to make a place for the mind. Heyes articulates a cognitive psychology of cultural evolution by explaining how eponymous “cognitive gadgets,” such as imitation, mindreading and language, mental technologies, are “tuned” and “assembled” through social interaction and cultural learning. After recapitulating her explanations for the cultural and psychological origins of these gadgets, we turn to criticisms. Among those, we find Heyes’ use of evolutionary theory confusing on several points of importance; alternative theories of cultural evolution, especially those of the Tomasello group and of Boyd, Richerson and Henrich, are misrepresented; the book neglects joint attention and other forms of intersubjectivity in its explanation of the origins of cognitive gadgets; and, whereas Heyes accuses other theories of being “mindblind,” we find her theory ironically other-blind and autistic in character.

scholarly journals Cultural evolutionary theory: How culture evolves and why it matters

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (30) ◽  
pp. 7782-7789 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Creanza ◽  
Oren Kolodny ◽  
Marcus W. Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Population Genetics ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
Societal Implications ◽  
Genetic Evolution ◽  
Core Concepts ◽  
Theoretical Population ◽  
Cultural Evolutionary

Human cultural traits—behaviors, ideas, and technologies that can be learned from other individuals—can exhibit complex patterns of transmission and evolution, and researchers have developed theoretical models, both verbal and mathematical, to facilitate our understanding of these patterns. Many of the first quantitative models of cultural evolution were modified from existing concepts in theoretical population genetics because cultural evolution has many parallels with, as well as clear differences from, genetic evolution. Furthermore, cultural and genetic evolution can interact with one another and influence both transmission and selection. This interaction requires theoretical treatments of gene–culture coevolution and dual inheritance, in addition to purely cultural evolution. In addition, cultural evolutionary theory is a natural component of studies in demography, human ecology, and many other disciplines. Here, we review the core concepts in cultural evolutionary theory as they pertain to the extension of biology through culture, focusing on cultural evolutionary applications in population genetics, ecology, and demography. For each of these disciplines, we review the theoretical literature and highlight relevant empirical studies. We also discuss the societal implications of the study of cultural evolution and of the interactions of humans with one another and with their environment.

scholarly journals Theoretical plurality, the extended evolutionary synthesis, and archaeology

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 (2) ◽  
pp. e2006564118
Author(s):  
Anna Marie Prentiss
Keyword(s):  
Behavioral Ecology ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Cultural Transmission ◽  
Evolutionary Process ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Extended Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Cognitive Archaeology ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Cultural Evolutionary

The study of cultural evolution now includes multiple theoretical frameworks. Despite common influence from Darwinian evolutionary theory, there is considerable diversity. Thus, we recognize those most influenced by the tenets of the Modern Synthesis (evolutionary archaeology, cultural transmission theory, and human behavioral ecology) and those most aligned more closely with concepts emerging in the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (cultural macroevolution and evolutionary cognitive archaeology). There has been substantial debate between adherents of these schools of thought as to their appropriateness and priority for addressing the fundamentals of cultural evolution. I argue that theoretical diversity is necessary to address research questions arising from a complex archaeological record. Concepts associated with the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis may offer unique insights into the cultural evolutionary process.

scholarly journals Human niche, human behaviour, human nature

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 20160136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agustin Fuentes
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Human Evolution ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Human Behaviour ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Evolutionary Approach ◽  
Extended Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Nuanced Understanding ◽  
Flexible Capacity ◽  
Review Current

The concept of a ‘human nature’ or ‘human natures’ retains a central role in theorizing about the human experience. In Homo sapiens it is clear that we have a suite of capacities generated via our evolutionary past, and present, and a flexible capacity to create and sustain particular kinds of cultures and to be shaped by them. Regardless of whether we label these capacities ‘human natures’ or not, humans occupy a distinctive niche and an evolutionary approach to examining it is critical. At present we are faced with a few different narratives as to exactly what such an evolutionary approach entails. There is a need for a robust and dynamic theoretical toolkit in order to develop a richer, and more nuanced, understanding of the cognitively sophisticated genus Homo and the diverse sorts of niches humans constructed and occupied across the Pleistocene, Holocene, and into the Anthropocene. Here I review current evolutionary approaches to ‘human nature’, arguing that we benefit from re-framing our investigations via the concept of the human niche and in the context of the extended evolutionary synthesis (EES). While not a replacement of standard evolutionary approaches, this is an expansion and enhancement of our toolkit. I offer brief examples from human evolution in support of these assertions.

scholarly journals Extending the Explanatory Scope of Evolutionary Theory: The Origin of Historical Kinds in Biology and Culture

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunter Wagner ◽  
Gary Tomlinson
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Population Biology ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Extended Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Modern Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Intellectual Challenge ◽  
Recent Extension

Since its inception, evolutionary theory has experienced a number of extensions. The most important of these took the forms of the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis (MES), embracing genetics and population biology in the early 20th century, and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES) of the last thirty years, embracing, among other factors, non-genetic forms of inheritance. While we appreciate the motivation for this recent extension, we argue that it does not go far enough, since it restricts itself to widening explanations of adaptation by adding mechanisms of inheritance and variation. A more thoroughgoing extension is needed, one that widens the explanatory scope of evolutionary theory. In addition to adaptation and its various mechanisms, evolutionary theory must recognize as a distinct intellectual challenge the origin of what we call “historical kinds.” Under historical kinds we include any process that acquires a quasi-independent and traceable lineage-history in biological and cultural evolution. We develop the notion of a historical kind in a series of paradigmatic exemplars, from genes and homologues to rituals and music, and we propose a preliminary characterization.

scholarly journals The cultural evolution and ecology of institutions

2021 ◽  
Vol 376 (1828) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Currie ◽  
Marco Campenni ◽  
Adam Flitton ◽  
Tim Njagi ◽  
Enoch Ontiri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Ecological Factors ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Institutional Diversity ◽  
Change Over Time ◽  
Agent Based ◽  
Macro Scale ◽  
Cultural Evolutionary ◽  
Over Time

Human societies are structured by what we refer to as ‘institutions’, which are socially created and culturally inherited proscriptions on behaviour that define roles and set expectations about social interactions. The study of institutions in several social science fields has provided many important insights that have not been fully appreciated in the evolutionary human sciences. However, such research has often lacked a shared understanding of general processes of change that shape institutional diversity across space and time. We argue that evolutionary theory can provide a useful framework for synthesizing information from different disciplines to address issues such as how and why institutions change over time, how institutional rules co-evolve with other culturally inherited traits, and the role that ecological factors might play in shaping institutional diversity. We argue that we can gain important insights by applying cultural evolutionary thinking to the study of institutions, but that we also need to expand and adapt our approaches to better handle the ways that institutions work, and how they might change over time. In this paper, we illustrate our approach by describing macro-scale empirical comparative analyses that demonstrate how evolutionary theory can be used to generate and test hypotheses about the processes that have shaped some of the major patterns we see in institutional diversity over time and across the world today. We then go on to discuss how we might usefully develop micro-scale models of institutional change by adapting concepts from game theory and agent-based modelling. We end by considering current challenges and areas for future research, and the potential implications for other areas of study and real-world applications. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Foundations of cultural evolution’.

Revising Plants, man and life: Edgar Anderson reshapes a classic book

2003 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Kleinman
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Ernst Mayr ◽  
Active Participant ◽  
Evolutionary Mechanism ◽  
Popular Work ◽  
Scientific Attention ◽  
Key Events ◽  
Jesup Lectures

On at least four occasions, Edgar Anderson (1897–1969) began revising his book Plants, man and life (1952). Given both its place in Anderson's career and his place in the development of evolutionary theory in the mid-twentieth century, the emendations are noteworthy. Though a popular work, Plants, man and life served as the distillation of Anderson's ideas on hybridization as an evolutionary mechanism, the need for more scientific attention on domesticated and semi-domesticated plants, and the opportunities such plants provided for the study of evolution. Anderson was an active participant in several key events in what historians have come to call the Evolutionary Synthesis. For example, he and Ernst Mayr shared the 1941 Jesup Lectures on “Systematics and the origin of species”. Anderson's proposed revisions to his book reflect both an attempt to soften certain acerbic comments as well as an attempt to recast the book as a whole.

Human Nature

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dupré
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
Biological Theory ◽  
Developmental Plasticity ◽  
Human Behaviour ◽  
Standard Account ◽  
Important Concept ◽  
Process Perspective ◽  
Unpredictable Environment

This sketch of an account of human nature begins with the claim that we should see humans as a kind of process, a life cycle, rather than as a kind of substance or thing. A particular advantage of such a process perspective is that it readily accommodates the developmental plasticity that has been an increasingly important concept in recent biological theory. Human behaviour, on this account, should be understood as providing adaptive and flexible responses to an unpredictable environment. It is, therefore, generally misguided to provide a standard account of human nature in terms of behaviour or behavioural dispositions. If there is such a thing as human nature, it is a uniquely refined propensity for novel and unpredictable behaviour.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document