Enquire Within: Cultural evolution and cognitive science
Cultural evolution and cognitive science need each other. Cultural evolution needs cognitive science to find out whether the conditions necessary for Darwinian evolution are met in the cultural domain. Cognitive science needs cultural evolution to explain the origins of distinctively human cogniti...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Published: |
Royal Society
2018
|
| _version_ | 1826301691684716544 |
|---|---|
| author | Heyes, C |
| author_facet | Heyes, C |
| author_sort | Heyes, C |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Cultural evolution and cognitive science need each other. Cultural evolution needs cognitive science to find out whether the conditions necessary for Darwinian evolution are met in the cultural domain. Cognitive science needs cultural evolution to explain the origins of distinctively human cognitive processes. Focussing on the first question, I argue that cultural evolutionists can get empirical traction on third-way cultural selection by rooting the distinction between replication and reconstruction, two modes of cultural inheritance, in the distinction between System 1 and System 2 cognitive processes. This move suggests that cultural epidemiologists are right in thinking that replication has higher fidelity than reconstruction, and replication processes are not genetic adaptations for culture, but wrong to assume that replication is rare. If replication is not rare, an important requirement for third-way cultural selection, one-shot fidelity, is likely to be met. However, there are other requirements, overlooked by dual-inheritance theorists when they conflate strong (Darwinian) and weak (choice) senses of ‘cultural selection’, including: dumb choices and recurrent fidelity. In a second excursion into cognitive science, I argue that these requirements can be met by metacognitive social learning strategies, and trace the origins of these distinctively human cognitive processes to cultural evolution. Like other forms of cultural learning, they are not cognitive instincts but cognitive gadgets. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:36:11Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:e3fa4fa5-14a6-4dad-991d-ea1f9a535af2 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:36:11Z |
| publishDate | 2018 |
| publisher | Royal Society |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:e3fa4fa5-14a6-4dad-991d-ea1f9a535af22022-03-27T10:13:08ZEnquire Within: Cultural evolution and cognitive scienceJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:e3fa4fa5-14a6-4dad-991d-ea1f9a535af2Symplectic Elements at OxfordRoyal Society2018Heyes, CCultural evolution and cognitive science need each other. Cultural evolution needs cognitive science to find out whether the conditions necessary for Darwinian evolution are met in the cultural domain. Cognitive science needs cultural evolution to explain the origins of distinctively human cognitive processes. Focussing on the first question, I argue that cultural evolutionists can get empirical traction on third-way cultural selection by rooting the distinction between replication and reconstruction, two modes of cultural inheritance, in the distinction between System 1 and System 2 cognitive processes. This move suggests that cultural epidemiologists are right in thinking that replication has higher fidelity than reconstruction, and replication processes are not genetic adaptations for culture, but wrong to assume that replication is rare. If replication is not rare, an important requirement for third-way cultural selection, one-shot fidelity, is likely to be met. However, there are other requirements, overlooked by dual-inheritance theorists when they conflate strong (Darwinian) and weak (choice) senses of ‘cultural selection’, including: dumb choices and recurrent fidelity. In a second excursion into cognitive science, I argue that these requirements can be met by metacognitive social learning strategies, and trace the origins of these distinctively human cognitive processes to cultural evolution. Like other forms of cultural learning, they are not cognitive instincts but cognitive gadgets. |
| spellingShingle | Heyes, C Enquire Within: Cultural evolution and cognitive science |
| title | Enquire Within: Cultural evolution and cognitive science |
| title_full | Enquire Within: Cultural evolution and cognitive science |
| title_fullStr | Enquire Within: Cultural evolution and cognitive science |
| title_full_unstemmed | Enquire Within: Cultural evolution and cognitive science |
| title_short | Enquire Within: Cultural evolution and cognitive science |
| title_sort | enquire within cultural evolution and cognitive science |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT heyesc enquirewithinculturalevolutionandcognitivescience |