scholarly journals Experts in action: why we need an embodied social brain hypothesis

2021 ◽  
Vol 377 (1844) ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Barrett ◽  
S. Peter Henzi ◽  
Robert A. Barton
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
Cognitive Skills ◽  
Social Evolution ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Large Body ◽  
The Body ◽  
Social Brain ◽  
Primate Brain ◽  
The Social ◽  
Large Brain

The anthropoid primates are known for their intense sociality and large brain size. The idea that these might be causally related has given rise to a large body of work testing the ‘social brain hypothesis'. Here, the emphasis has been placed on the political demands of social life, and the cognitive skills that would enable animals to track the machinations of other minds in metarepresentational ways. It seems to us that this position risks losing touch with the fact that brains primarily evolved to enable the control of action, which in turn leads us to downplay or neglect the importance of the physical body in a material world full of bodies and other objects. As an alternative, we offer a view of primate brain and social evolution that is grounded in the body and action, rather than minds and metarepresentation. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Systems neuroscience through the lens of evolutionary theory’.

scholarly journals Understanding primate brain evolution

2007 ◽  
Vol 362 (1480) ◽  
pp. 649-658 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.I.M Dunbar ◽  
Susanne Shultz
Keyword(s):  
Life History ◽  
Path Analysis ◽  
Group Size ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Brain Evolution ◽  
Primate Brain ◽  
The Social ◽  
Large Brain ◽  
Brain Data ◽  
The Relationship

We present a detailed reanalysis of the comparative brain data for primates, and develop a model using path analysis that seeks to present the coevolution of primate brain (neocortex) and sociality within a broader ecological and life-history framework. We show that body size, basal metabolic rate and life history act as constraints on brain evolution and through this influence the coevolution of neocortex size and group size. However, they do not determine either of these variables, which appear to be locked in a tight coevolutionary system. We show that, within primates, this relationship is specific to the neocortex. Nonetheless, there are important constraints on brain evolution; we use path analysis to show that, in order to evolve a large neocortex, a species must first evolve a large brain to support that neocortex and this in turn requires adjustments in diet (to provide the energy needed) and life history (to allow sufficient time both for brain growth and for ‘software’ programming). We review a wider literature demonstrating a tight coevolutionary relationship between brain size and sociality in a range of mammalian taxa, but emphasize that the social brain hypothesis is not about the relationship between brain/neocortex size and group size per se ; rather, it is about social complexity and we adduce evidence to support this. Finally, we consider the wider issue of how mammalian (and primate) brains evolve in order to localize the social effects.

scholarly journals Social brains, simple minds: does social complexity really require cognitive complexity?

2007 ◽  
Vol 362 (1480) ◽  
pp. 561-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Barrett ◽  
Peter Henzi ◽  
Drew Rendall
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
Cognitive Complexity ◽  
Social Complexity ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Social Worlds ◽  
Social Brain ◽  
Proximate Mechanisms ◽  
The Social ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Mind

The social brain hypothesis is a well-accepted and well-supported evolutionary theory of enlarged brain size in the non-human primates. Nevertheless, it tends to emphasize an anthropocentric view of social life and cognition. This often leads to confusion between ultimate and proximate mechanisms, and an over-reliance on a Cartesian, narratively structured view of the mind and social life, which in turn lead to views of social complexity that are congenial to our views of ourselves, rather than necessarily representative of primate social worlds. In this paper, we argue for greater attention to embodied and distributed theories of cognition, which get us away from current fixations on ‘theory of mind’ and other high-level anthropocentric constructions, and allow for the generation of testable hypotheses that combine neurobiology, psychology and behaviour in a mutually reinforcing manner.

New research frameworks in the study of chimpanzee and gorilla sociality and communication

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam G. B. Roberts ◽  
Anna Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Social Evolution ◽  
Social Complexity ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
The Social ◽  
Human Social Evolution ◽  
Research Frameworks ◽  
New Research ◽  
Large Groups

Group size in primates is strongly correlated with brain size, but exactly what makes larger groups more ‘socially complex’ than smaller groups is still poorly understood. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) are among our closest living relatives and are excellent model species to investigate patterns of sociality and social complexity in primates, and to inform models of human social evolution. The aim of this paper is to propose new research frameworks, particularly the use of social network analysis, to examine how social structure differs in small, medium and large groups of chimpanzees and gorillas, to explore what makes larger groups more socially complex than smaller groups. Given a fission-fusion system is likely to have characterised hominins, a comparison of the social complexity involved in fission-fusion and more stable social systems is likely to provide important new insights into human social evolution

Governing Homelessness through Running

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan C Clift
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Body ◽  
Self In Relation ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Not For Profit ◽  
Development Organizations ◽  
Self Sufficiency ◽  
The Social ◽  
A Site

In the context of social welfare austerity and non-state actors’ interventions into social life, an urban not-for-profit organization in the United States, Back on My Feet, uses the practice of running to engage those recovering from homelessness. Promoting messages of self-sufficiency, the organization centralizes the body as a site of investment and transformation. Doing so calls to the fore the social construction of ‘the homeless body’ and ‘the running body’. Within this ethnographic inquiry, participants in recovery who ran with the organization constructed moralized senses of self in relation to volunteers, organizers, and those who do not run, while in recovery. Their experiences compel consideration of how bodily constructions and practices reproduce morally underpinned, self-oriented associations with homeless and neoliberal discourses that obfuscate systemic causes of homelessness, pose challenges for well-intentioned voluntary or development organizations, and service the relief of the state from social responsibility.

Habitus and Field

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Leander
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
Social World ◽  
The Body ◽  
International Studies ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Social ◽  
The World ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
Heuristic Devices

The terms habitus and field are useful heuristic devices for thinking about power relations in international studies. Habitus refers to a person’s taken-for-granted, unreflected—hence largely habitual—way of thinking and acting. The habitus is a “structuring structure” shaping understandings, attitudes, behavior, and the body. It is formed through the accumulated experience of people in different fields. Using fields to study the social world is to acknowledge that social life is highly differentiated. A field can be exceedingly varied in scope and scale. A family, a village, a market, an organization, or a profession may be conceptualized as a field provided it develops its own organizing logic around a stake at stake. Each field is marked by its own taken-for-granted understanding of the world, implicit and explicit rules of behavior, and valuation of what confers power onto someone: that is, what counts as “capital.” The analysis of power through the habitus/field makes it possible to transcend the distinctions between the material and the “ideational” as well as between the individual and the structural. Moreover, working with habitus/field in international studies problematizes the role played by central organizing divides, such as the inside/outside and the public/private; and can uncover politics not primarily structured by these divides. Developing research drawing on habitus/field in international studies will be worthwhile for international studies scholars wishing to raise and answer questions about symbolic power/violence.

scholarly journals Fall-Recovery Technique as Technology in Dancer’s Body

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-74
Author(s):  
Kiki Rahmatika
Keyword(s):  
Human Body ◽  
Social Life ◽  
The Body ◽  
The Social ◽  
Recovery Technique ◽  
The Right ◽  
Fall Recovery

the human body is a tool that capable of understanding and then reveal various problems that exist in the social life. Body as tool means a body that has a technique or as technology that is able to express the problem. if the body has been positioned as a tool, of course the tool must have a technique that has been honed its ability. For example fall-recovery’s technique which is discovered by dorris Humphrey. then to get to the technique, the body must get treatment, conditioning and emphasis through strict discipline. ultimately the techniques that make the body into technology will be constructed through body behavior which is doing by long exercises and method from the right technique.

scholarly journals Bourdieu’s theory and the social constructivism of Berger and Luckmann

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 518-537
Author(s):  
Milos Jovanovic
Keyword(s):  
Social Relations ◽  
Social Constructivism ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
The Body ◽  
Social Functions ◽  
Sociological Approach ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
The Social ◽  
The One

The paper compares Pierre Bourdieu?s sociological approach with the one developed by Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann. The aim of the paper is to identify the complementarities and incongruences of these approaches. The main similarity consists in the intention to ?dialectically? overcome/bridge the gap between ?objectivism? and ?subjectivism? in social theory. Another parallel includes a negative attitude towards the relativistic tendencies of postmodernism. These authors share the thematization of: the body as a locus of social influences, the centrality of language in social life, the social functions of knowledge, and the importance of power in social relations. Differences in theorizing are attributed to the different intellectual, theoretical, and socio-cultural contexts in which these scientists operated. The divergences of these theoretical approaches become evident when one examines the different meaning and significance attached to the concepts of individuation, structure, action, habitus and habitualization, structure of relevance and relation of common-sense and scientific knowledge. Finally, there is a visible difference in political views: Bourdieu was a critic ?from the left,? while Berger and Luckmann were self-proclaimed liberal conservatives.

The Social Brain

2021 ◽  
pp. 109-122
Author(s):  
Susan D. Healy
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Social Intelligence ◽  
Brain Size ◽  
Social Brain ◽  
Social Intelligence Hypothesis ◽  
The Social ◽  
Intellectual Abilities ◽  
Main Driver ◽  
Machiavellian Intelligence

The first discussion of a relationship between sociality and intelligence came in the middle of the twentieth century, especially by Humphrey who suggested that living socially demanded intellectual abilities above and beyond those required by an animal’s ecology. This led to the Social Intelligence Hypothesis, and then the Machiavellian Intelligence Hypothesis, both proposing that sociality was the main driver of the superior intellect of primates, especially humans. Two key challenges for this hypothesis are that sociality is difficult to quantify and cognition is not well tested by problem solving. More importantly, as data from more species have been examined, the analyses increasingly fail to show that sociality explains variation in brain size, even in primates. I conclude that appealing as this hypothesis is, it does not do a very compelling job of explaining variation in brain size.

scholarly journals We Recognize Ourselves as Being Similar to Others: Implications of the “Social Brain Hypothesis” for the Biological Evolution of the Intuition of Freedom

2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 147470490700500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eckart Voland
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Social Intelligence ◽  
Social Evolution ◽  
Selective Pressure ◽  
Biological Evolution ◽  
Social Brain ◽  
Social Attribution ◽  
The Social ◽  
Behavioral Tendencies ◽  
The Will

Consistent with and in extension of the “social brain hypothesis,” I discuss the idea that the intuition of free will emerged during the course of primate social evolution. If, as the “social brain hypothesis” alleges, the main selective pressure among primates is on generating social knowledge about one's cooperators and competitors, then it is the knowledge about others and not the knowledge about oneself that is the scarce cognitive resource. It is beneficial to make the others predictable and to form hypotheses about their probable behavioral tendencies. This is done by behavior reading and mind reading and by classifying the recurring stochastic patterns in everyday language as the “will.” Thus, the idea of free will emerged first as a social attribution and not as an introspectively gained insight. The fact that ego applies the idea of freedom also to itself and considers itself to be as free as it considers the social partners to be free, i.e. unpredictable, is in this view a non-selected by-product of social intelligence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document