Thought in a Hostile World: The Evolution of Human Cognition

4 Responses to “Thought in a Hostile World: The Evolution of Human Cognition”

1. Herbert Gintis says:

   September 28, 2010 at 6:29 am

   When I studied philosophy in college many years ago, it was an article of faith that one need not, indeed ought not, refer to any `facts’ derived from natural or behavioral science in erecting theories of mind or morality. It was considered legitimate to draw upon the `facts’ of everyday life as well as the insights derived from introspection, I was taught, but any serious dependence of philosophical theory upon the findings of contemporary sciences, except of course in dealing with the philosophy of that science, is to make a category error. Probably this accounts in part for the equally hostile treatment given to philosophy in the sciences. I recall that when, as a graduate student in economics at Harvard in 1963 or so

   Thankfully, that prejudice lies largely in the past, contemporary philosophers dealing with the nature of being human having becomes rather attentive to current scientific findings. Kim Sterelny, whose formal training is in philosophy and is both Professor of Philosophy at Victoria University and a member of the Research School of the Social Sciences at the Australian National University, exemplifies the best of the new breed of research-savvy philosophers. Plotting in a hostile world is a brilliant book that sifts through effectively all areas of modern research into human behavior, and synthesizes a coherent picture of the nature of human cognition. The synthesis is right to the facts but is sufficiently speculative to make his thought both exciting and imaginative. I happen to agree with Sterelny on effectively all points, and some of his more imaginative sallies have forced me to rethink several major points that I had plotting to have already nailed down. This book is quite accessible to the novice, but should be read quite carefully as well by evolutionary biologists, economists, sociologists, and all others caught up in the behavioral sciences.

   Sterelny has two major goals this ambitious book. The first is to offer an explicit and substantive theory of the evolution of human intelligence [Homo sapiens is by far the most intelligent of species, and the gap between ourselves and other intelligent species is stunningly large]. The second is to clarify the relationship between “folk psychology” as exhibited in effectively all know societies, and an “integrated scientific conception of human cognition.” (p. viii) Sterelny handles the first goal by developing three critical modeling tools: group selection, niche construction, and phenotypic plasticity. All of these depend on the fact that humans are the only known species to sustain cumulative cultural evolution. Because culture can be maintained across generations, groups can be selected on the basis of the extent to which their cultural practices are biological fitness enhancing. Niche construction for humans takes the form of humans making the very environment to which their own genetic development is subjected, so the combination of group selection and cumulative culture leads to gene-culture coevolution [Sterelny does not use this term], the dynamic phenomenon that accounts for human nature. Phenotypic plasticity means that the neuronal and cognitive structure of the individual are theme to environmental influence, so the human brain does not simply deal with a given evolved architecture, but emerges during individual development according to the nature of its early experiences. Phenotypic plasticity also includes an immense capacity to learn technical ways of understanding and dominating nature, and the internalization of culturally specific ethical norms, making humans effectively “programmable,” like computers, with socially valuable goals, such as honesty, hard work, constancy, piety, and the like.

   Sterelny’s study suggests that the “massively modular” view of human cognition promulgated so assiduously by the Evolutionary Psychologists is radically incorrect (see also David C. Geary, The Origin of Mind: Evolution of Brain, Cognition, and General Intelligence (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2005). Massive modularity is simply incompatible with phenotypic plasticity and the multi-modal manner that humans react to novel environments, allowing us to occupy a wider variety of ecological niches than any other vertebrate.

   Probably the most innovative argument in Plotting in a Hostile World is Sterelny’s defense of the “folk psychology” develop of human cognition, according to which human behavior can be clarified by humans having (a) preferences, (b) constraints, and (c) beliefs, so that behavior consists of choosing the behavior that is most favorable to preferences, given the individuals beliefs as regards the structure and dynamics of the outside world, and theme to the time, effort, and other material constraints that the individual faces. Sterelny presents compelling arguments that this “folk psychology” is effectively universal, and has evolved biologically because it is a basically right develop of human behavior that allows people to predict and know the behavior others, thus enhancing their biological fitness. In recent years several researchers have found that humans have a “theory of mind” not possessed by most creatures, that facilitates social learning and strategic interaction (Baron-Cohen, Frith and Frith, Pinker, Tomasello, Povinelli). Sterelny adds to this to human “theory of mind” power a highly sophisticated “develop of behavior” based on motives, beliefs, and constraints.

   Sterelny’s “folk psychology” develop is of course the rational actor develop of standard economic theory, although Sterelny defends a sophisticated version of the develop proposed by Jerry Fodor’s The Language of Plotting (1975). Fodor proposes what he calls the “Simple Coordination Thesis,” which holds that human successfully predict the behavior of others in complex situations because their develop of mind, based on preferences, beliefs, and constraints, is an right representation of how humans really reckon. Now, of course, there are limits to this argument. Humans also have a “folk physics” that they use to successfully manipulate the world, but some of its principles are simply incorrect. Indeed, modern physics took off when it replaced fake folk notions (e.g., an object tends to slow down unless it is continually acted upon) by more sophisticated and non-intuitive notions (e.g., Galilean likeness). We probably can guess the same from sophisticated alternatives to folk psychology, but as Leonard Savage showed in his Foundations of Statistics (1954), highly simplified axioms that can be expected to hold for most living creatures generate something very close to the folk psychology develop, which thus holds not only for humans but for most other creatures as well, although with “beliefs” replaced by simpler notions of how the external world is represented internally to the creature. Sterelny argues also, reasonably enough, that simple organisms simply have “sensations,” even as complex animals have “preferences,” which are themselves highly complex representations of categories of objects that satisfy specific needs. This argument is reminiscent of the Lancaster-Intriligator develop of consumption, a develop that makes much more sense than the habitual consumer develop.

   Rating: 5 / 5
2. humanorganism says:

   September 28, 2010 at 9:21 am

   On pages 148-9 (paperback), Sterelny writes–

   “Once we appreciate the significance of ecological engineering, our conception of natural selction and evolution is transformed. Natural selection is often conceived as a administer by which lineages are shaped to fit the environments in which they live, as a key-cutter shapes a key to a lock. Organisms answer to environmental challenges by adapting to new conditions, apt more fire-proof or drought resistant. This picture is sometimes apt. … But often it is not. Lineages can answer to environmental challenges in two other ways. They can answer spatially by tracking their preferred conditons. And they can resond as ecological engineers, by modifying their own environments to buffer or transform the ways they are affected by their corporal, biological and social environments. … Some lineages partially hypothesis their own niches. They are envronmental engineers.”

   There is a footnote here that reads–

   “These thoughts were first developed by Richard Lewontin (1978, 1982, 1985), but see also Brandon 1990; Jones et al. 1997, More recently they have been most systematically developed by Kevin Laland, John Odling-Smee, and their colleagues; see Odling-Smee et al 1996, and especially Odling-Smee et al in the offing. [2003]”

   Sterelny goes on to situate human cogniton in this complex interation between biology and environment.

   He exposes the systemic weaknesses in both evolutionary psychology and human behavioral ecology.

   What I most appreciated in Sterelny is his sincere concern for explanation. He has no ideological axe to grind in this book. This quality is most encouraging, and I look forward to learning more work of this kind.
   Rating: 5 / 5
3. Jake Keenan says:

   September 28, 2010 at 12:06 pm

   The previous reviewer is just so aptly. The book is incredible. The book is, as of this review date, the latest in a quickly changing field of understanding mind naturalistically through the latest research in biology. Sterelny and Peter Godfrey-Smith are leaders in this promising effort. Sterelny attacks his investigation of the attributes of mind from evidence from any field available. Besides the ones mentioned by the previous reviewer, Sterelny works niche construction and developmental theory. The treatment of animal cognition and early hominid evolution is exciting. I hope that the book and this direction of plotting are getting the attention merited.
   Rating: 5 / 5
4. Philosophy Prof says:

   September 28, 2010 at 1:03 pm

   I was just checking out this site and saw that no one had written a review. I don’t have time to write a full review, but let me just say: this book is incredible! Sterelny lays out the nature and history of human cognitive faculties in an simple-to-read, thorough, and well-argued way. I found the material on the evolution of cooperation, the way humans epistemically engineer their environment, and plasticity enlightening.
   Rating: 5 / 5