scholarly journals Cultural group selection is plausible, but the predictions of its hypotheses should be tested with real-world data

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Turchin ◽  
Thomas E. Currie

AbstractThe evidence compiled in the target article demonstrates that the assumptions of cultural group selection (CGS) theory are often met, and it is therefore a useful framework for generating plausible hypotheses. However, more can be said about how we can test the predictions of CGS hypotheses against competing explanations using historical, archaeological, and anthropological data.

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manvir Singh ◽  
Luke Glowacki ◽  
Richard W. Wrangham

AbstractWe agree that institutions and rules are crucial for explaining human sociality, but we question the claim of there not being “alternatives to CGS [that] can easily account for the institutionalized cooperation that characterizes human societies” (target article, sect. 7). Hypothesizing that self-interested individuals coercively and collaboratively create rules, we propose that agent-based hypotheses offer viable alternatives to cultural group selection (CGS).


2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 276-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Taylor ◽  
Joanna J. Bryson

AbstractThe target article argues that whole groups can act as interactors in an evolutionary process. We believe that Smaldino's discussion would be advanced by a more thorough analysis of the appropriate replicators and lineages for this model. We show that cultural evolution is necessarily a separate process from cultural group selection, and we also illustrate that the two processes may influence each other as demonstrated by an agent-based model of communicating food-processing skills.


Author(s):  
Peter Richerson ◽  
Ryan Baldini ◽  
Adrian V. Bell ◽  
Kathryn Demps ◽  
Karl Frost ◽  
...  

AbstractHuman cooperation is highly unusual. We live in large groups composed mostly of non-relatives. Evolutionists have proposed a number of explanations for this pattern, including cultural group selection and extensions of more general processes such as reciprocity, kin selection, and multi-level selection acting on genes. Evolutionary processes are consilient; they affect several different empirical domains, such as patterns of behavior and the proximal drivers of that behavior. In this target article, we sketch the evidence from five domains that bear on the explanatory adequacy of cultural group selection and competing hypotheses to explain human cooperation. Does cultural transmission constitute an inheritance system that can evolve in a Darwinian fashion? Are the norms that underpin institutions among the cultural traits so transmitted? Do we observe sufficient variation at the level of groups of considerable size for group selection to be a plausible process? Do human groups compete, and do success and failure in competition depend upon cultural variation? Do we observe adaptations for cooperation in humans that most plausibly arose by cultural group selection? If the answer to one of these questions is “no,” then we must look to other hypotheses. We present evidence, including quantitative evidence, that the answer to all of the questions is “yes” and argue that we must take the cultural group selection hypothesis seriously. If culturally transmitted systems of rules (institutions) that limit individual deviance organize cooperation in human societies, then it is not clear that any extant alternative to cultural group selection can be a complete explanation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Richerson ◽  
Ryan Baldini ◽  
Adrian V. Bell ◽  
Kathryn Demps ◽  
Karl Frost ◽  
...  

AbstractThe main objective of our target article was to sketch the empirical case for the importance of selection at the level of groups on cultural variation. Such variation is massive in humans, but modest or absent in other species. Group selection processes acting on this variation is a framework for developing explanations of the unusual level of cooperation between non-relatives found in our species. Our case for cultural group selection (CGS) followed Darwin's classic syllogism regarding natural selection: If variation exists at the level of groups, if this variation is heritable, and if it plays a role in the success or failure of competing groups, then selection will operate at the level of groups. We outlined the relevant domains where such evidence can be sought and characterized the main conclusions of work in those domains. Most commentators agree that CGS plays some role in human evolution, although some were considerably more skeptical. Some contributed additional empirical cases. Some raised issues of the scope of CGS explanations versus competing ones.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 219
Author(s):  
Roberto Salvatori ◽  
Olga Gambetti ◽  
Whitney Woodmansee ◽  
David Cox ◽  
Beloo Mirakhur ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jersy Cardenas ◽  
Gomez Nancy Sanchez ◽  
Sierra Poyatos Roberto Miguel ◽  
Luca Bogdana Luiza ◽  
Mostoles Naiara Modroño ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document