1
|
Nichols R, Charbonneau M, Chellappoo A, Davis T, Haidle M, Kimbrough EO, Moll H, Moore R, Scott-Phillips T, Purzycki BG, Segovia-Martin J. Cultural evolution: A review of theoretical challenges. EVOLUTIONARY HUMAN SCIENCES 2024; 6:e12. [PMID: 38516368 PMCID: PMC10955367 DOI: 10.1017/ehs.2024.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2023] [Revised: 01/15/2024] [Accepted: 01/16/2024] [Indexed: 03/23/2024] Open
Abstract
The rapid growth of cultural evolutionary science, its expansion into numerous fields, its use of diverse methods, and several conceptual problems have outpaced corollary developments in theory and philosophy of science. This has led to concern, exemplified in results from a recent survey conducted with members of the Cultural Evolution Society, that the field lacks 'knowledge synthesis', is poorly supported by 'theory', has an ambiguous relation to biological evolution and uses key terms (e.g. 'culture', 'social learning', 'cumulative culture') in ways that hamper operationalization in models, experiments and field studies. Although numerous review papers in the field represent and categorize its empirical findings, the field's theoretical challenges receive less critical attention even though challenges of a theoretical or conceptual nature underlie most of the problems identified by Cultural Evolution Society members. Guided by the heterogeneous 'grand challenges' emergent in this survey, this paper restates those challenges and adopts an organizational style requisite to discussion of them. The paper's goal is to contribute to increasing conceptual clarity and theoretical discernment around the most pressing challenges facing the field of cultural evolutionary science. It will be of most interest to cultural evolutionary scientists, theoreticians, philosophers of science and interdisciplinary researchers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan Nichols
- Department of Philosophy, CSU Fullerton, Fullerton, CA, USA
- Center for the Study of Human Nature, CSU Fullerton, Fullerton, CA, USA
| | - Mathieu Charbonneau
- Africa Institute for Research in Economics and Social Sciences, Université Mohammed VI Polytechnique, Rabat, Morocco
| | - Azita Chellappoo
- School of Social Sciences and Global Studies, Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
| | - Taylor Davis
- Department of Philosophy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA
| | - Miriam Haidle
- Research Center ‘The Role of Culture in Early Expansions of Humans’, Heidelberg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Erik O. Kimbrough
- Smith Institute for Political Economy and Philosophy, Chapman University, Orange, CA, USA
| | - Henrike Moll
- Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Richard Moore
- Department of Philosophy, University of Warwick, Coventry, England, UK
| | - Thom Scott-Phillips
- Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science, Institute for Logic, Cognition, Language & Information, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Benjamin Grant Purzycki
- Benjamin Grant Purzycki, Department of the Study of Religion, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Jose Segovia-Martin
- M6 Polytechnic University, Rabat, Morocco
- Complex Systems Institute, Paris Île-de-France, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bandini E. Addressing misconceptions on Latent Solution tests: Comment on "Blind alleys and fruitful pathways in the comparative study of cultural cognition" by Andrew Whiten. Phys Life Rev 2023; 44:64-66. [PMID: 36516612 DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2022.12.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Elisa Bandini
- Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zürich, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bone-related behaviours of captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) during two excavating experiments. Primates 2023; 64:35-46. [PMID: 36401675 PMCID: PMC9842580 DOI: 10.1007/s10329-022-01033-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2021] [Accepted: 10/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
After stone tools, bone tools are the most abundant artefact type in the Early Pleistocene archaeological record. That said, they are still relatively scarce, which limits our understanding of the behaviours that led to their production and use. Observations of extant primates constitute a unique source of behavioural data with which to construct hypotheses about the technological forms and repertoires exhibited by our hominin ancestors. We conducted two different experiments to investigate the behavioural responses of two groups of captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes; n = 33 and n = 9) to disarticulated, defleshed, ungulate bones while participating in a foraging task aimed at eliciting excavating behaviour. Each chimpanzee group was provided with bone specimens with different characteristics, and the two groups differed in their respective experience levels with excavating plant tools. We found that several individuals from the inexperienced group used the provided bones as tools during the task. In contrast, none of the individuals from the experienced group used bones as excavating tools, but instead continued using plant tools. These chimpanzees also performed non-excavating bone behaviours such as percussion and tool-assisted extraction of organic material from the medullary cavity. Our findings serve as a proof-of-concept that chimpanzees can be used to investigate spontaneous bone tool behaviours such as bone-assisted excavation. Furthermore, our results raise interesting questions regarding the role that bone characteristics, as well as previous tool-assisted excavating experience with other raw materials, might have in the expression of bone tool-assisted excavation.
Collapse
|
4
|
de Chevalier G, Bouret S, Bardo A, Simmen B, Garcia C, Prat S. Cost-Benefit Trade-Offs of Aquatic Resource Exploitation in the Context of Hominin Evolution. Front Ecol Evol 2022. [DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2022.812804] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
While the exploitation of aquatic fauna and flora has been documented in several primate species to date, the evolutionary contexts and mechanisms behind the emergence of this behavior in both human and non-human primates remain largely overlooked. Yet, this issue is particularly important for our understanding of human evolution, as hominins represent not only the primate group with the highest degree of adaptedness to aquatic environments, but also the only group in which true coastal and maritime adaptations have evolved. As such, in the present study we review the available literature on primate foraging strategies related to the exploitation of aquatic resources and their putative associated cognitive operations. We propose that aquatic resource consumption in extant primates can be interpreted as a highly site-specific behavioral expression of a generic adaptive foraging decision-making process, emerging in sites at which the local cost-benefit trade-offs contextually favor aquatic over terrestrial foods. Within this framework, we discuss the potential impacts that the unique intensification of this behavior in hominins may have had on the evolution of the human brain and spatial ecology.
Collapse
|
5
|
Field experiments find no evidence that chimpanzee nut cracking can be independently innovated. Nat Hum Behav 2022; 6:487-494. [PMID: 35075258 DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01272-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2021] [Accepted: 12/07/2021] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Cumulative culture has been claimed a hallmark of human evolution. Yet, the uniqueness of human culture is heavily debated. The zone of latent solutions hypothesis states that only humans have cultural forms that require form-copying social learning and are culture-dependent. Non-human ape cultural behaviours are considered 'latent solutions', which can be independently (re-)innovated. Others claim that chimpanzees, like humans, have cumulative culture. Here, we use field experiments at Seringbara (Nimba Mountains, Guinea) to test whether chimpanzee nut cracking can be individually (re-)innovated. We provided: (1) palm nuts and stones, (2) palm fruit bunch, (3) cracked palm nuts and (4) Coula nuts and stones. Chimpanzee parties visited (n = 35) and explored (n = 11) the experiments but no nut cracking occurred. In these experiments, chimpanzees did not individually (re-)innovate nut cracking under ecologically valid conditions. Our null results are consistent with the hypothesis that chimpanzee nut cracking is a product of social learning.
Collapse
|
6
|
Bandini E, Reeves JS, Snyder WD, Tennie C. Clarifying Misconceptions of the Zone of Latent Solutions Hypothesis: A Response to Haidle and Schlaudt: Miriam Noël Haidle and Oliver Schlaudt: Where Does Cumulative Culture Begin? A Plea for a Sociologically Informed Perspective (Biological Theory 15: 161-174, 2020). BIOLOGICAL THEORY 2021; 16:76-82. [PMID: 34720770 PMCID: PMC8550035 DOI: 10.1007/s13752-021-00374-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2020] [Accepted: 12/12/2020] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
The critical examination of current hypotheses is one of the key ways in which scientific fields develop and grow. Therefore, any critique, including Haidle and Schlaudt's article, "Where Does Cumulative Culture Begin? A Plea for a Sociologically Informed Perspective," represents a welcome addition to the literature. However, critiques must also be evaluated. In their article, Haidle and Schlaudt (Biol Theory 15:161-174, 2020. 10.1007/s13752-020-00351-w; henceforth H&S) review some approaches to culture and cumulative culture in both human and nonhuman primates. H&S discuss the "zone of latent solutions" (ZLS) hypothesis as applied to nonhuman primates and stone-toolmaking premodern hominins. Here, we will evaluate whether H&S's critique addresses its target.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisa Bandini
- Department of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Jonathan Scott Reeves
- Department of Human Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany
| | - William Daniel Snyder
- Department of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Claudio Tennie
- Department of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|