scholarly journals Evolutionary Explanations of Simple Communication: Signalling Games and Their Models

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-43
Author(s):  
Travis LaCroix
2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Malhotra

AbstractAlthough Boyer & Petersen's (B&P's) cataloguing of and evolutionary explanations for folk-economic beliefs is important and valuable, the authors fail to connect their theories to existing explanations for why people do not think like economists. For instance, people often have moral intuitions akin to principles of fairness and justice that conflict with utilitarian approaches to resource allocation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 336-341
Author(s):  
Ivana Hromatko ◽  
Josip Hrgović

Evolution ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eevi Savola ◽  
Clara Montgomery ◽  
Fergal M. Waldron ◽  
Katy M. Monteith ◽  
Pedro Vale ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Jørgen Jacobsen ◽  
Mogens Jensen ◽  
Birgitte Sloth

Cephalalgia ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 624-632 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Loder

Susceptibility to migraine is determined by genetic factors and is therefore subject to the forces of natural selection. Migraine is a common and ancient disorder whose prevalence may be increasing, suggesting that a migraine-prone nervous system may be associated with reproductive or survival advantages. Five evolutionary explanations are reviewed that might account for the persistence of migraine: (i) migraine as a defence mechanism; (ii) migraine as a result of conflict with other organisms; (iii) migraine as result of novel environmental factors; (iv) migraine as a trade-off between genetic harms and benefits; and (v) migraine as a design constraint. An evolutionary perspective on migraine allows the generation of important hypotheses about the disorder and suggests rewarding possibilities for further research.


2021 ◽  
Vol 113 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-361
Author(s):  
Marc Slors

Abstract Group-identification and cognition: Why trivial conventions are more important than we think In existing (evolutionary) explanations for group formation and -identification, the function of cultural conventions such as social etiquette and dress codes is limited to providing group-markers. Group formation and identification itself is explained in terms of less arbitrary and more substantial phenomena such as shared norms and institutions. In this paper I will argue that, however trivial and arbitrary, cultural conventions fulfil an important cognitive function that makes them essential to the formation of and identification with large groups. Complex role-division, both informal and institutional, is important in the functioning of any large group of people. Shared conventions enable a virtually automatic understanding of signals, scripts and rules that regulate the interaction of divided roles. They provide a cultural infrastructure within which we perceive e.g. specific behavior and clothing as a range of social-cultural affordances for role-interactions. Shared familiarity with this infrastructure is the foundation for the basic kind of trust of in-group strangers that is a requirement for the formation of large groups. This non-intellectualist view on group formation and group identification can contribute to new ways of dealing with problems in multicultural societies.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles H. Pence

Recent arguments concerning the nature of causation in evolutionary theory, now often known as the debate between the 'causalist' and 'statisticalist' positions, have involved answers to a variety of independent questions – definitions of key evolutionary concepts like natural selection, fitness, and genetic drift; causation in multi-level systems; or the nature of evolutionary explanations, among others. This Element offers a way to disentangle one set of these questions surrounding the causal structure of natural selection. Doing so allows us to clearly reconstruct the approach that some of these major competing interpretations of evolutionary theory have to this causal structure, highlighting particular features of philosophical interest within each. Further, those features concern problems not exclusive to the philosophy of biology. Connections between them and, in two case studies, contemporary metaphysics and philosophy of physics demonstrate the potential value of broader collaboration in the understanding of evolution.


2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 1119-1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Barrett ◽  
Calvin T. Cochran ◽  
Simon Huttegger ◽  
Naoki Fujiwara

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document