DOCSLIB.ORG

Sense and Nonsense: Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Behaviour

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sense and Nonsense: Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Behaviour Sense and Nonsense: Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Behaviour Kevin N. Laland Gillian R. Brown OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page i Sense and Nonsense SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page ii This page intentionally left blank SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page iii Sense and Nonsense Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Behaviour Kevin N. Laland Royal Society University Research Fellow Sub-Department of Animal Behaviour University of Cambridge and Gillian R. Brown Research Scientist Sub-Department of Animal Behaviour University of Cambridge 1 SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page iv 1 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Bangkok Buenos Aires Cape Town Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kolkata Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi São Paulo Shanghai Taipei Tokyo Toronto and an associated company in Berlin Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in the United States By Oxford University Press Inc., New York © Kevin N. Laland and Gillian R. Brown, 2002 The moral rights of the authors have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First published 2002 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer A catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available ISBN 0 19 850884 0 (Hbk) 10987654321 Typeset by EXPO Holdings, Malaysia Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by T.J. International, Padstow, Cornwall SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page v Preface Can evolutionary theory help us to understand human behaviour and society? Many evolutionary biologists, anthropologists, and psychologists are optimistic that evo- lutionary principles can be applied to human behaviour, and have offered evolutionary explanations for a wide range of human characteristics, such as homicide, religion, and sex differences in behaviour. Others are sceptical of these interpretations, and stress the effects of learning and cul- ture. They maintain that human beings are too special to study as if they were just another animal—after all, we have complex culture, language, and writing, and we build houses and programme computers. Perhaps both of these stances are right to a degree. Some aspects of our behaviour may be more usefully investigated using the methods of evolutionary biology than others. The challenge for sci- entists will be to determine which facets of humanity are open to this kind of analysis, and to devise definitive tests of any hypotheses concerning our evolutionary legacy. For those of us fascinated by this challenge, knowledge of the diverse methods by which human behaviour is studied from an evolutionary perspective would seem a pre- requisite. In this book, we outline five evolutionary approaches that have been used to investigate human behaviour and characterize their methodologies and assumptions. These approaches are sociobiology, human behavioural ecology, evolutionary psychology, memetics, and gene–culture coevolution. For each, we discuss their SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page vi vi PREFACE positive features and their limitations and in the final chap- ter we compare their relative merits. Innumerable popular books have already been published that discuss human behaviour and evolution, e.g. The Selfish Gene (Dawkins, 1976), The Rise and Fall of the Third Chimpanzee (Diamond, 1991), Darwin’s Dangerous Idea (Dennett, 1995), How the Mind Works (Pinker, 1997) and The Meme Machine (Blackmore, 1999). Each gives a unique and stimulating view of human nature. However, such books usually take a single viewpoint on human evolution, frequently identifying with a particular school, such as evolutionary psychology or memetics. There have also been academic books published from these different perspec- tives, such as Culture and the Evolutionary Process (Boyd and Richerson, 1985), The Adapted Mind (Barkow et al., 1992), Adaptation and Human Behavior (Cronk et al., 2000) and Darwinizing Culture: the Status of Memetics as a Science (Aunger, 2000). In contrast to these, our book takes a plu- ralistic approach, highlighting how different researchers have divergent views on the best way to use evolutionary theory to study humanity. Heated debates and personal attacks have often ensued. Some of the approaches described will be new to many readers, as the theories on which they are based have generally not made it further than the specialist scientific literature. In presenting these fields we endeavour to translate these methodologies into easily understandable examples, and thereby make accessi- ble new perspectives on how human behaviour and culture can be interpreted. In writing this book, we pursue three goals. First, like Eric Alden Smith and colleagues (Smith et al., 2001), we see a need for ‘a guide for the perplexed’ for those of us who have SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page vii PREFACE vii struggled to understand the plethora of confusing terms and apparent differences of opinion and approach in the use of evolutionary theory to study human behaviour. Secondly, in line with a long tradition of researchers based at the Sub-Department of Animal Behaviour at the University of Cambridge, where we work, we believe that research in this domain is best served by a rigorous, self- critical science, and that the study of behaviour requires a broad perspective that incorporates questions such as how behaviour develops over an individual’s lifetime as well as questions about how behaviour evolves. Thirdly, we see great value in pluralism in the use of methodology, and the integration of approaches. We hope to have made a small contribution in each of these regards. This book does not provide an overview of the use of evo- lutionary theory in areas such as economics, law, and litera- ture. We acknowledge the important work in these areas, but would rather maintain the length of the book as it is, and remain within more familiar territory. To those whose research is addressed, we hope that a fair synopsis is provided and are very grateful to all of the experts who have taken the time to discuss their work with us. We have personal views on the relative merits of the five schools of thought described; however, we have attempted to treat each approach evenly by asking leading members in the fields to help us to present their views accurately. Perhaps our profiles of the alternative approaches will highlight to some researchers how the meth- ods may be integrated in the future, as well as draw attention to the conflicts that are yet to be resolved. Of those who cur- rently deny the relevance of biology to the study of human behaviour, we hope that we might perhaps make some con- verts. More realistically, we hope that their scepticism will be SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page viii viii PREFACE tempered by the realization that not all researchers in this area are genetic determinists, Panglossian adaptationists, or wan- ton biologizers, and that many are prepared to place empha- sis on non-biological and even non-evolutionary explana- tions. Our intention is that this introductory book will be of use to undergraduate and postgraduate students (for example, in zoology, anthropology, and psychology) and to experts on one approach who would like to know more about the other perspectives, but also to lay persons interested in evo- lutionary explanations of human behaviour. We have tried to write the text so that anyone interested in this subject area will find the material easy to comprehend. Our inten- tion is not to provide a textbook review of the whole subject area, but rather to give a taste of the various options. For readers who would like to know more about a particular perspective, further reading is provided at the end of the book. The most enjoyable aspect of writing this book has been the opportunity to interact with many of the leading authorities in this area of research. We have been over- whelmed by the kindness and generosity of those who have discussed their work with us and have commented on chap- ters of the book: we have learned so much from them. We would like to thank the following people for commenting on one or more chapters and for discussing the material in the book: Robert Aunger, Pat Bateson, Gillian Bentley, Susan Blackmore, Monique Borgerhoff Mulder, Robert Boyd, Nicky Clayton, Tim Clutton-Brock, Leda Cosmides, Alan Costall, Nick Davies, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Robin Dunbar, Dominic Dwyer, Marc Feldman, Dan Fessler, Jeff Galef, Oliver Goodenough, Russell Gray, SN-Prelims (i-xii) 3/4/02 12:22 PM Page ix PREFACE ix Kristen Hawkes, Robert Hinde, Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, David Hull, Rufus Johnstone, Mark Kirkpatrick, Richard Lewontin, Elizabeth Lloyd, John Maynard Smith, John Odling-Smee, Sally Otto, Henry Plotkin, Peter Richerson, Eric Alden Smith, Elliott Sober, John Tooby, Markus Vinzent, and Ed Wilson.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Following the Trail of Ants: an Examination of the Work of E.O
    Sacred Heart University DigitalCommons@SHU Writing Across the Curriculum Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) 2012 Following The rT ail Of Ants: An Examination Of The orW k Of E.O. Wilson Samantha Kee Sacred Heart University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/wac_prize Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Entomology Commons, Other Genetics and Genomics Commons, Philosophy of Science Commons, Religion Commons, and the Theory, Knowledge and Science Commons Recommended Citation Kee, Samantha, "Following The rT ail Of Ants: An Examination Of The orkW Of E.O. Wilson" (2012). Writing Across the Curriculum. 2. http://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/wac_prize/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) at DigitalCommons@SHU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Writing Across the Curriculum by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@SHU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Samantha Kee RS 299-Writing With Public Purpose Dr. Brian Stiltner March 2, 2012 Following the trail of ants An examination of the work of E.O. Wilson Edward Osborne Wilson was a born naturalist, in every sense of the word. As a child growing up in Alabama, he collected and studied species of snakes, flies, and the insect that became the basis of his life’s work, ants. He made a goal to record every species of ant that could be found in Alabama—a childhood project that would eventually lead to his first scientific publication. By age 13, Wilson discovered a red, non-native ant in a local town in Alabama, and by the time he entered the University of Alabama, the fire ant had become a significant threat to the state’s agriculture.
    [Show full text]
  • Man Meets Dog Konrad Lorenz 144 Pages Konrad Z
    a How, why and when did man meet dog and cat? How much are they in fact guided by instinct, and what sort of intelligence have they? What is the nature of their affection or attachment to the human race? Professor Lorenz says that some dogs are descended from wolves and some from jackals, with strinkingly different results in canine personality. These differences he explains in a book full of entertaining stories and reflections. For, during the course of a career which has brought him world fame as a scientist and as the author of the best popular book on animal behaviour, King Solomon's Ring, the author has always kept and bred dogs and cats. His descriptions of dogs 'with a conscience', dogs that 'lie', and the fallacy of the 'false cat' are as amusing as his more thoughtful descriptions of facial expressions in dogs and cats and their different sorts of loyalty are fascinating. "...this gifted and vastly experiences naturalist writes with the rational sympathy of the true animal lover. He deals, in an entertaining, anectdotal way, with serious problems of canine behaviour." The Times Educational Supplement "...an admirable combination of wisdom and wit." Sunday Observer Konrad Lorenz Man Meets Dog Konrad Lorenz 144 Pages Konrad Z. Lorenz, born in 1903 in Vienna, studied Medicine and Biology. Rights Sold: UK/USA, France, In 1949, he founded the Institute for Comparative Behaviourism in China (simplified characters), Italy, Altenberg (Austria) and changed to the Max-Planck-Institute in 1951. Hungary, Romania, Korea, From 1961 to 1973, he was director of Max-Planck-Institute for Ethology Slovakia, Spain, Georgia, Russia, in Seewiesen near Starnberg.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Aggression Diffusion Modeling and Minimization in Online Social
    On the Aggression Diffusion Modeling and Minimization in Twitter MARINOS POIITIS, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece ATHENA VAKALI, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece NICOLAS KOURTELLIS, Telefonica Research, Spain Aggression in online social networks has been studied mostly from the perspective of machine learning which detects such behavior in a static context. However, the way aggression diffuses in the network has received little attention as it embeds modeling challenges. In fact, modeling how aggression propagates from one user to another, is an important research topic since it can enable effective aggression monitoring, especially in media platforms which up to now apply simplistic user blocking techniques. In this paper, we address aggression propagation modeling and minimization in Twitter, since it is a popular microblogging platform at which aggression had several onsets. We propose various methods building on two well-known diffusion models, Independent Cascade (퐼퐶) and Linear Threshold (!) ), to study the aggression evolution in the social network. We experimentally investigate how well each method can model aggression propagation using real Twitter data, while varying parameters, such as seed users selection, graph edge weighting, users’ activation timing, etc. It is found that the best performing strategies are the ones to select seed users with a degree-based approach, weigh user edges based on their social circles’ overlaps, and activate users according to their aggression levels. We further employ the best performing models to predict which ordinary real users could become aggressive (and vice versa) in the future, and achieve up to 퐴*퐶=0.89 in this prediction task. Finally, we investigate aggression minimization by launching competitive cascades to “inform” and “heal” aggressors.
    [Show full text]
  • The Strange Survival and Apparent Resurgence of Sociobiology
    This is a repository copy of The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/118157/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Dennis, A. orcid.org/0000-0003-4625-1123 (2018) The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. History of the Human Sciences, 31 (1). pp. 19-35. ISSN 0952- 6951 https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117735966 Dennis A. The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology. History of the Human Sciences. 2018;31(1):19-35. Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695117735966. Article available under the terms of the CC- BY-NC-ND licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ The strange survival and apparent resurgence of sociobiology Abstract A recent dispute between Richard Dawkins and Edward O. Wilson concerning fundamental concepts in sociobiology is examined.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution, Politics and Law
    Valparaiso University Law Review Volume 38 Number 4 Summer 2004 pp.1129-1248 Summer 2004 Evolution, Politics and Law Bailey Kuklin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Bailey Kuklin, Evolution, Politics and Law, 38 Val. U. L. Rev. 1129 (2004). Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol38/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Valparaiso University Law School at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Valparaiso University Law Review by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Kuklin: Evolution, Politics and Law VALPARAISO UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 38 SUMMER 2004 NUMBER 4 Article EVOLUTION, POLITICS AND LAW Bailey Kuklin* I. Introduction ............................................... 1129 II. Evolutionary Theory ................................. 1134 III. The Normative Implications of Biological Dispositions ......................... 1140 A . Fact and Value .................................... 1141 B. Biological Determinism ..................... 1163 C. Future Fitness ..................................... 1183 D. Cultural N orm s .................................. 1188 IV. The Politics of Sociobiology ..................... 1196 A. Political Orientations ......................... 1205 B. Political Tactics ................................... 1232 V . C onclusion ................................................. 1248 I. INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • Avian Monogamy
    (ISBN: 0-943610-45-1) AVIAN MONOGAMY EDITED BY PATRICIA ADAIR GOWATY AND DOUGLAS W. MOCK Department of Zoology University of Oklahoma Norman, Oklahoma 73019 ORNITHOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS NO. 37 PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS' UNION WASHINGTON, D.C. 1985 AVIAN MONOGAMY ORNITHOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS This series, published by the American Ornithologists' Union, has been estab- lished for major papers too long for inclusion in the Union's journal, The Auk. Publication has been made possiblethrough the generosityof the late Mrs. Carll Tucker and the Marcia Brady Tucker Foundation, Inc. Correspondenceconcerning manuscripts for publication in the seriesshould be addressedto the Editor, Dr. David W. Johnston,Department of Biology, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030. Copies of Ornithological Monographs may be ordered from the Assistant to the Treasurer of the AOU, Frank R. Moore, Department of Biology, University of Southern Mississippi, Southern Station Box 5018, Hattiesburg, Mississippi 39406. (See price list on back and inside back covers.) OrnithologicalMonographs,No. 37, vi + 121 pp. Editors of Ornithological Monographs, Mercedes S. Foster and David W. Johnston Special Reviewers for this issue, Walter D. Koenig, Hastings Reservation, Star Route Box 80, Carmel Valley, CA 93924; Lewis W. Oring, De- partment of Biology,Box 8238, University Station, Grand Forks, ND 58202 Authors, Patricia Adair Gowaty, Department of BiologicalSciences, Clem- son University, Clemson, SC 29631; Douglas W. Mock, Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019 First received, 23 August 1983; accepted29 February 1984; final revision completed 8 October 1984 Issued October 17, 1985 Price $11.00 prepaid ($9.00 to AOU members). Library of CongressCatalogue Card Number 85-647080 Printed by the Allen Press,Inc., Lawrence, Kansas 66044 Copyright ¸ by the American Ornithologists'Union, 1985 ISBN: 0-943610-45-1 ii AVIAN MONOGAMY EDITED BY PATRICIA ADAIR GOWATY AND DOUGLAS W.
    [Show full text]
  • Steps to an Evolutionary Ecology of Mind and Morality
    This page intentionally left blank Death, Hope and Sex Steps to an Evolutionary Ecology of Mind and Morality By showing how and why human nature is what is is, evolutionary theory can help us see better what we need to do to improve the human condition. Following evolutionary theory to its logical conclusion, Death, Hope, and Sex uses life history theory and attachment theory to construct a model of human nature in which critical features are understood in terms of the development of alternative reproductive strategies contingent on environmental risk and uncertainty. James Chisholm examines the implication of this model for perspectives on concerns associated with human reproduction, including teen pregnancy, and young male violence. He thus develops new approaches for thorny issues such as the nature–nurture and mind–body dichotomies. Bridging the gap between the social and biological sciences, this far-reaching volume will be a source of inspiration, debate, and discussion for all those interested in the evolution of human nature and the potential for an evolutionary humanism. james s. chisholm is Associate Professor in the Department of Anatomy and Human Biology at the University of Western Australia in Perth, Australia. His previous publications include Navajo Infancy: An Ethological Study of Child Development (1983). Death, Hope and Sex Steps to an Evolutionary Ecology of Mind and Morality James S. Chisholm The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia Ruiz de Alarcón 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa http://www.cambridge.org © James S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ethological Approach to Aggression1
    Psychological Medicine, 1980,10, 607-609 Printed in Great Britain EDITORIAL The ethological approach to aggression1 There are several ways in which ethology, the biological study of behaviour, can contribute to our understanding of aggression. First of all, by studying animals we can get some idea of what aggression is and how it relates to other, similar patterns of behaviour. We can also begin to grasp the reasons why natural selection has led to the widespread appearance of apparently destructive behaviour. To come to grips with this question requires the study of animals in their natural environment, for this is the environment to which they are adapted and only in it can the survival value of their behaviour be appreciated. By contrast, a final contribution of ethology, that of understanding the causal mechanisms underlying aggression, usually comes from work in the laboratory, for such research requires carefully controlled experiments. Ethology has shed light on all these topics, perhaps parti- cularly in the 15 years since Konrad Lorenz, one of the founding fathers of the discipline, discussed the subject in his book On Aggression. Lorenz's views were widely publicized and had great popular appeal: the fact that few ethologists agreed with what he said may explain why so many have since devoted time to studying aggression. The result, as I shall argue here, is that ethologists now have a much better insight into what aggression is, how it is caused and what functions it serves, and it is an insight sharply at odds with the ideas put forward by Lorenz.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropological Evolutionary Ecology: a Critique
    Journal of Ecological Anthropology Volume 4 Issue 1 Volume 4, Issue 1 (2000) Article 1 2000 Anthropological Evolutionary Ecology: A Critique Suzanne Joseph University of Georgia, Department of Anthropology Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/jea Recommended Citation Joseph, Suzanne. "Anthropological Evolutionary Ecology: A Critique." Journal of Ecological Anthropology 4, no. 1 (2000): 6-30. Available at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/jea/vol4/iss1/1 This Research Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Anthropology at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Ecological Anthropology by an authorized editor of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 6 Journal of Ecological Anthropology Vol. 4 2000 ARTICLES Anthropological Evolutionary Ecology: A Critique SUZANNE JOSEPH1 Abstract The goal of this paper is to critically evaluate Anthropological Evolutionary Ecology (AEE) as a paradigm by utilizing the method for theory framework developed by Pickett et al. (1994). While AEE can contribute in some ways to our understanding of human behavior through methods and techniques derived from neo- Darwinian theory (as well as current approaches in animal behavior and decision theory), AEE as a para- digm remains theoretically ill-equipped for the study of human ecology. This critique will focus on Anthropo- logical Evolutionary Ecology, however, references will be made to Biological Evolutionary Ecology (BEE) since AEE relies heavily on theoretical components derived from BEE. Introduction A critique of Anthropological Evolution- increasing completeness of theory. Box 1 de- ary Ecology (AEE) as a theoretical paradigm scribes the major components of theory that are should begin with a definition of paradigm.
    [Show full text]
  • Primate Aggression and Evolution: an Overview of Sociobiological and Anthropological Perspectives JAMES J
    Primate Aggression and Evolution: An Overview of Sociobiological and Anthropological Perspectives JAMES J. McKENNA Attempts to explain the nature and causes of human aggression are hand­ icapped primarily because aggression is anything but a unitary concept. Aggression has no single etiology, no matter which mammalian species we consider or what kind of causation (developmental or evolutionary) we stress. Nevertheless, forensic psychiatrists are asked to evaluate instances of human aggression in ways that would send shivers up the spines of researchers who have been wrestling with the issue for over fifty years. This is not to say forensic psychiatry should be abolished nor to suggest be­ havioral scientists have not made progress in discovering causes of species aggression in genera}l and human violence in particular.2 But especially when predictive models are considered it does mean we are far from achiev­ ing highly reliable results.:l Particularly when one person is asked to assess the motivational state of another who has committed a serious aggressive act it becomes more evident just how much more data we need. Strangely, if a forensic psychia­ trist were asked to testify in a case in which, let us say, one monkey attacked another, the testimony would be based on more complete information than a case involving a human. This is because a plethora of context-specific data on nonhuman primates are available. These data illuminate a wide range of social, ecological, and endocrinological circumstances under which animals will be expected to act aggressively. Data on humans are much more complex, and sometimes they are absent altogether.
    [Show full text]
  • Warfare in an Evolutionary Perspective
    Received: 26 November 2018 Revised: 7 May 2019 Accepted: 18 September 2019 DOI: 10.1002/evan.21806 REVIEW ARTICLE Warfare in an evolutionary perspective Bonaventura Majolo School of Psychology, University of Lincoln, Sarah Swift Building, Lincoln, UK Abstract The importance of warfare for human evolution is hotly debated in anthropology. Correspondence Bonaventura Majolo, School of Psychology, Some authors hypothesize that warfare emerged at least 200,000–100,000 years BP, University of Lincoln, Sarah Swift Building, was frequent, and significantly shaped human social evolution. Other authors claim Brayford Wharf East, Lincoln LN5 7AT, UK. Email: [email protected] that warfare is a recent phenomenon, linked to the emergence of agriculture, and mostly explained by cultural rather than evolutionary forces. Here I highlight and crit- ically evaluate six controversial points on the evolutionary bases of warfare. I argue that cultural and evolutionary explanations on the emergence of warfare are not alternative but analyze biological diversity at two distinct levels. An evolved propen- sity to act aggressively toward outgroup individuals may emerge irrespective of whether warfare appeared early/late during human evolution. Finally, I argue that lethal violence and aggression toward outgroup individuals are two linked but distinct phenomena, and that war and peace are complementary and should not always be treated as two mutually exclusive behavioral responses. KEYWORDS aggression, competition, conflict, cooperation, peace, social evolution, violence, war 1 | INTRODUCTION and others on the importance of organized/cooperative actions among members of one social group against members of the opposing The question of whether humans are innately peaceful or aggressive group.5 Clearly, how we define warfare affects how deep we can go has fascinated scientists and philosophers for centuries.1,2 Wars, eth- back in time in human evolution to investigate its emergence and evo- nic or religious contests, and intra-group or intra-family violence are lutionary bases.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Work on Human Nature: Beyond Traditional Essences
    Philosophy Compass 9/9 (2014): 642–652, 10.1111/phc3.12159 Recent Work on Human Nature: Beyond Traditional Essences Maria Kronfeldner1*,NeilRoughley2 and Georg Toepfer3 1Bielefeld University 2University of Duisburg-Essen 3Berlin Centre for Literary and Cultural Research Abstract Recent philosophical work on the concept of human nature disagrees on how to respond to the Darwinian challenge, according to which biological species do not have traditional essences. Three broad kinds of reactions can be distinguished: (1) conservative intrinsic essentialism,whichdefends essences in the traditional sense, (2) eliminativism, which suggests dropping the concept of human nature altogether, and (3) constructive approaches, which argue that revisions can generate sensible concepts of human nature beyond traditional essences. The different constructive approaches pick out one or two of the three epistemic roles that are fused in traditional essentialist conceptions of human nature: descriptive (descriptivism), explanatory (explanativism), definitional (taxonomic relationalism), or explanatory and definitional (property cluster essentialism). These turns towards diverging epistemic roles are best interpreted pluralistically: there is a plurality of concepts of human nature that have to be clearly distinguished, each with a legitimate role in respective scientific contexts. 1. Two Dimensions Talk of human nature traditionally picks out intricate theoretical and also deep practical philosophical issues. It is the boundaries towards animals on the one side and machines or superhuman creatures like gods on the other side that historically created the space of under- standing important for the concept of human nature. Talk of ‘human nature’ thus marks a self-understanding that is anchored by our deepest fears (bestiality) and hopes (salvation), in part even within science, as Proctor (2003) indicates for questions about the origin of humans.
    [Show full text]