scholarly journals Understanding Cultural Evolutionary Models: A Reply to Read's Critique

2006 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 771-782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Henrich

This reply to Read's (2006) critique of my paper (Henrich 2004) is divided into three parts. Part I clarifies misinterpretations and mischaracterizations of both Dual Inheritance Theory in general and my model specifically. Part II addresses several problems in Read's empirical analyses of forager toolkits, and presents an alternative analysis. Part III tackles some common misunderstandings about the relationship between cost-benefit models (such as Read's) and cultural evolutionary modeling approaches, as well as highlighting some concerns with Read's efforts. In writing this, I have tried to introduce the reader to the issues in debate, but to fully understand this reply, one should read both my paper and Read’s critique.

2021 ◽  
pp. 114-134
Author(s):  
Geoff Kushnick

This chapter explores the relationship between parenting and technology from an evolutionary perspective. The exploration is organized around the “three styles” framework for understanding and differentiating between the three major evolutionary approaches to the study of human behavior: evolutionary psychology, human behavioral ecology, and dual inheritance theory. For each of these evolutionary approaches, the chapter provides two examples of the relationship between parenting and technology, one related to childbearing and the other related to childrearing. Is the evolutionary approach a useful one to understand this relationship? First, although each has as its focus the application of evolutionary theory to the study of human behavior, each of the three styles brings a different set of assumptions and priorities. Second, an evolutionary perspective points to specific, and theoretically justified, behavioral concomitants of technological change.


Author(s):  
Lorenzo Baravalle ◽  
Victor J. Luque

The Price equation is currently considered one of the fundamental equations – or even the fundamental equation – of evolution. In this article, we explore the role of this equation within cultural evolutionary theory. More specifically, we use it to account for the explanatory power and the theoretical structure of a certain generalised version of dual-inheritance theory. First, we argue that, in spite of not having a definite empirical content, the Price equation offers a suitable formalisation of the processes of cultural evolution, and provides a powerful heuristic device for discovering the actual causes of cultural change and accumulation. Second, we argue that, as a consequence of this, a certain version of the Price equation is the fundamental law of cultural evolutionary theory. In order to support this claim, we sketch the ideal structure of dual-inheritance theory and we stress the unificatory role that the Price equation plays in it. 


Author(s):  
Timothy A. Kohler

Echoes of all the major approaches to applying evolutionary theory and method to the archaeological record can be found in the Southwest. Prior to about 1980, cultural evolutionary approaches were quite common; after that time, until the mid-1990s, selectionism was the dominant approach. More recently, human behavioral ecology and, to a smaller degree, dual inheritance theory have oriented most evolutionary research, while at the same time, research that draws on the theories and methods of complex adaptive systems has become more prominent. All of these approaches are likely to contribute to solving the grand challenges facing archaeology in the Southwest.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Nettle ◽  
Thom Scott-Phillips

The last thirty years has seen the emergence of a self-styled ‘evolutionary’ paradigm within psychology (henceforth, EP). EP is often presented and critiqued as a distinctive, contentious paradigm, to be contrasted with other accounts of human psychology. However, little attention has been paid to the sense in which those other accounts are not evolutionary, or at least evolutionalizable. We distinguish between a commitment to evolution, and a more specific commitment to adaptationism. We argue that all formulable accounts of human psychology are evolutionary in a real sense: non-evolutionary psychology is impossible. Not all psychologies are explicitly adaptationist, but those that are not still draw on informal notions of organismal function, and thus implicitly require at least a weak version of adaptationism. We argue that the really distinctive and contentious feature of EP is not its commitment to evolution, or even adaptationism. It is the commitment to domain-specificity and the associated multiplicity of innately specialized psychological mechanisms. This commitment entails a narrow parsing of what an adaptive problem is, and has the consequence that the science of psychology ends up consisting of many narrow proximal explanations, rather than a few broad ones. We illustrate this thesis by examining a range of paradigms that can be seen as competitors to canonical EP: social role theory; cultural evolutionary psychology and dual inheritance theory; Bayesian cognitive science; and Giddens’ social theory. Narrow versus broad functional specialization emerges as the central locus of difference between the different psychologies we review.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily A. Schultz

<p class="p1"><span class="s1"><strong>Abstract </strong></span>| Many North American anthropologists remain deeply suspicious of attempts to theorize the evolution of culture, given the legacy in our discipline of nineteenth-century stagist theories of cultural evolution that were shaped by scientific racism<span class="s2"><strong>. </strong></span>In the late twentieth-century, some theorists tried to escape this legacy by using formal models drawn from neo-Darwinian population biology to reconceptualize cultural evolutionary processes, but these more recent approaches have been found unsatisfactory for reasons of their own. For example, gene-culture coevolution and the dual inheritance theory have limited appeal to many contemporary cultural anthropologists because these theories rely on definitions of culture, and assumptions about human individuals and social groups, that many cultural anthropologists no longer find persuasive<span class="s2"><strong>.</strong></span>Niche construction, by contrast, appears more promising as a framework for connecting cultural change with biological and ecological change. Nevertheless, the innovative features of niche construction coexist uneasily alongside the same problematic features that limit the usefulness of gene-culture coevolution and dual inheritance theory in cultural anthropology<span class="s2"><strong>. </strong></span>This article discusses anthropological concerns about niche construction theory, but also suggests ways in which some of them might be reduced if niche construction theory were to incorporate insights from developmental systems theory and actor network theory.</p>


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoff Kushnick

This chapter explores the relevance of evolutionary theory for understanding the relationship between technology and parenting. It does this by elaborating two examples -- one related to childbearing and one to childrearing -- for each of the three major paradigms in the application of evolutionary theory to human behaviour: human behavioural ecology, evolutionary psychology, and dual-inheritance theory. The examples range from a cross-cultural test of the idea that heavier female contribution to subsistence will lead to the development of more elaborate baby-carrying technology, to the demonstrated role tv-broadcasted soap operas have played in lowering fertility rates in some developing countries.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Benjamin Badcock ◽  
Axel Constant ◽  
Maxwell James Désormeau Ramstead

Abstract Cognitive Gadgets offers a new, convincing perspective on the origins of our distinctive cognitive faculties, coupled with a clear, innovative research program. Although we broadly endorse Heyes’ ideas, we raise some concerns about her characterisation of evolutionary psychology and the relationship between biology and culture, before discussing the potential fruits of examining cognitive gadgets through the lens of active inference.


Author(s):  
Dominik Hauptvogel ◽  
Susanne Bartels ◽  
Dirk Schreckenberg ◽  
Tobias Rothmund

Aircraft noise exposure is a health risk and there is evidence that noise annoyance partly mediates the association between noise exposure and stress-related health risks. Thus, approaches to reduce annoyance may be beneficial for health. Annoyance is influenced by manifold non-acoustic factors and perceiving a fair and trustful relationship between the airport and its residents may be one of them. The distribution of aircraft noise exposure can be regarded as a fairness dilemma: while residents living near an airport may seem to have some advantages, the majority of residents living under certain flight routes or in their immediate proximity suffer from the disadvantages of the airport, especially the noise. Moreover, a dilemma exists between the airport’s beneficial economic impact for a region and the physical and psychological integrity of residents. Aircraft noise exposure through the lens of social justice research can help to improve our understanding of noise annoyance. Research indicates that the fairness perceptions of the parties involved can be enhanced by (a) improving individual cost–benefit ratios, (b) providing a fair procedure for deciding upon the noise distribution, and (c) implementing fair social interaction with residents. Based on the review of evidence from social justice research, we derive recommendations on how fairness aspects can be integrated into aircraft noise management with the purpose of improving the relationship between the airport and its residents, to reduce annoyance, and to enhance the acceptance of local aviation and the airport as a neighbor.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document