A tehetség eredete

Tanulmányunkban a tehetség két aspektusát elemezzük. Az egyik szinten arra a kérdésre keresünk választ, hogy milyen örökletes tényezők tehetők felelőssé a lángész kialakulásáért. Megállapítjuk, hogy a jelenlegi kutatások szerint a tehetség mögött nem fedezhetők fel specifikus gének, de lehetségesek olyan genetikai hatások, amelyek egyfajta emergens szerveződése teremti meg az alapját a lángész kialakulásának – természetesen a különböző környezeti hatásokkal kölcsönhatásban. A másik szintű elemzésben a tehetség evolúciós eredetére kérdezünk rá, és négy olyan humánspecifikus kognitív képesség kialakulását elemezzük, amelyek fontos szerepet játszhatnak a szellemi kiválóság megjelenésében. Nevezetesen arra teszünk kísérletet, hogy megértsük az elmeolvasás, rugalmas gondolkodás, nyelv és kreativitás evolúciós létrejöttét. Ehhez olyan magyarázó model-leket veszünk igénybe, mint a Szociális Intelligencia, Machiavelli Intelligencia, Szexuális Szelekció és Fluid Intelligencia hipotézisek. E magyarázatok megerősítése további kutatásokat igényel.In this paper, two aspects of talent are analyzed. On the one level, I am looking for an answer to what hereditary factors would be responsible for the development of talent. In the light of the current studies, no specific genes have been found to prescribe talent. However, possible genetic effects with an emergent property of their mutual relationships may create the basis of formation of genius – obviously interacting with the environmental effects. On the other level of analysis I am focusing on the evolutionary background of talent. Four human specific cognitive abilities are analyzed that play important roles in the formation of intellectual excellence: mind reading, flexible thought, language, and creativity. The explanations to the evolution of these abilities include Social Intelligence Hypothesis, Machiavellian Intelligence Hypothesis, Sexual Selection Theory, and Fluid Intelligence Hypothesis. The confirmation of these explanations requires further studies.

The Social Brain

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.

A behavioral task for exploring dynamics of communication system in dilemma situations

This research proposes a behavioral task to demonstrate the process of evolution of human communication systems based on the Machiavellian intelligence hypothesis, claiming that human sophisticated social intelligence such as linguistic ability has been formed through behaviors that maximize self-interest in a competitive social situation. The proposed task was designed as a dilemma game involving messaging to establish Machiavellian communication. The game was developed based on experimental semiotics, a method that generates novel artificial language and examines language functions. Through the proposed task, pairs of participants attach meanings to arbitral graphic symbols forming novel communication systems. In case studies using this task, participants modified or ambiguated the communication system by means of a dilemma between sharing and monopolizing rewards. The result suggests that the proposed game causes ambiguation of the communication system that functions equivocally.

The Evolution of Grooming and Hand Use in Primates: An Interdisciplinary Perspective

The evolution of manual grooming and its implications have received little attention in the quest to understand the origins of simian primates and their social and technical intelligence. All simians groom manually, whereas prosimians groom orally despite comparable manual dexterity between some members of the two groups. Simians also exhibit a variable propensity for the manipulation of inanimate, non-food objects, which has culminated in tool making and tool use in some species. However, lemuriform primates also seem capable of tool use with training. Furthermore, lemuriforms appear to understand the concept of a tool and use their own body parts as “tools”, despite not using inanimate objects. This suggests that prosimian primates are pre-adapted for proprioceptive object manipulation and tool use, but do not express these cognitive abilities by default. This essay explores the paleontological, anatomical, cognitive, ethological, and neurological roots of these abilities and attempts to explain this behavioural divide between simians and prosimians. Common misconceptions about early primate evolution and captive behaviours are addressed, and chronological inconsistencies with Machiavellian Intelligence are examined. A “licking to picking” hypothesis is also proposed to explain a potential link between manual grooming and object manipulation, and to reconcile the inconsistencies of Machiavellian Intelligence. Bayesian decision theory, the evolution of the parietal cortex and enhanced proprioception, and analogies with behavioural changes resulting from artificial selection may help provide new insights into the minds of both our primate kin and ourselves.