The theory of evolution continues to benefit biologists in understanding life and its development since it was first published in The origin of species by Charles Darwin. However, is it only exclusively relevant to biological organisms? Dr Alex Mesoudi from Queen Mary University of London argues otherwise! Dr Mesoudi says Darwinian principles can also apply to various fields including philosophy, psychology and even transmission of information. In fact he claims “there is no reason why we shouldn’t be able to explain cultural changes within an evolutionary framework”.
He admits unifying the theory of evolution by natural selection to culture which includes a vast array of beliefs, knowledge and artifacts has had its fair share of criticism and hostility. Mainly as cultural units of inheritance sometimes called ‘memes’ cannot be separated to discrete particles that emulate our biological genes. In defence against this argument cultural evolutionist claim that they are embarking on a path which Darwin walked on, as when the theory of evolution by natural selection was first proposed, Darwin had no understanding of the unit of inheritance we now call genes. Dr Mesoudi asserts that many sceptics are rejecting Darwinian cultural evolution on the same reasoning that would have led them to reject the fundamental case made for evolution by natural selection.
What is cultural evolution?
Culture is acquired information, such as knowledge, beliefs and values, that is inherited though social learning, and expressed in behaviour and artifacts. Cultural evolution is therefore the idea that what constitutes culture gradually changes with the retention of favourable cultural variants, similar to how species change though natural selection. Cultural section and natural selection are closely linked, for example, the frequency of smoking may increase or decrease depending on cultural selection, but it can also influence natural selection on the basis of how many smokers survive. In The Origin Darwin explained his theory through 3 main principles of Variation, Competition and Inheritance. However does cultural evolution in essence follow these principles?
Variation
Differences within a population provide natural selection with the ability to accumulate beneficial modifications. Cultural traits such as beliefs, skills, attitude and knowledge vary within a population. With over 6800 languages spoken worldwide, it is obvious that cultural selection has favoured and continues to favour some of these languages over others. Darwin argued that biological variation is produced without regard to the consequences, what we now call random mutations. In relation to cultural evolution, variation maybe the result of directed foresight such as the trial and error method employed by Watson and Crick in deciphering the molecular structure of the double helix. In addition, it can also be undirected and in fact unintentional, such as the accidental discovery of X-rays, penicillin, vaccination, electromagnetism and anaesthesia to name a few.
In comparison of cultural and natural evolution it is also worth noting that even biological variation is to a certain extent directed. As any potential variation depends on an organisms present form which is therefore determined by the species history of selection and therefore only random within such limits. It is clear that cultural variation follows the same principles as natural variation, and it is of little importance to the Darwinian process how this variation arises than its actual presence and therefore selection.
Competition
As there is a limited amount of resources, an increase in population will induce competition between variants. Likewise individuals are not able to adopt and express all possible varieties in culture, so there is competition for their expression in humans. Interestingly, Darwin himself used language as an example of competition, since words that are better, shorter and easier to remember usually gain the advantage of their regular use.
Darwin pointed towards fossils in highlighting the competition between variants and their survival. To a certain extent competition within cultural evolution is easier to notice. For example, if we were to just look at the evolution of aeroplanes. Within the last century, a vast array of designs has been proposed and only those with the most favourable characteristics were kept and consequently improved in subsequent generations.
Inheritance
Darwin made it clear that advantageous traits are kept and inherited by subsequent generations, although he had no idea how such a mechanism functions. Natural selection functions within the framework of biological traits being passed down from parent to offspring. Cultural selection is not inherited as such, so a better term is perhaps ‘transmission’ or ‘replication’ as opposed to inheritance. Vertical transmission was shown in a study by Cavalli-Sforza who surveyed students and their parents from Stanford University finding a high parent-offspring correlations for religion, politics, superstitious beliefs and entertainment.
Transmission bias of culture may even lead to spread of traits that are less specific to their function. The quick spread of VHS video formats, since it was more popular as opposed to the better quality less famous Betamax recorder, with consumers demonstrating a clear frequency-dependent conformist bias.
Some are uncomfortable in applying Darwinian evolution to culture, since culture displays a sort of Lamarckian inheritance, with acquisition of phenotypic traits. However since culture is not transmitted genetically, Dr Mesoudi claims the term ‘Lamarckian’ does not refute the concept of cultural evolution.
So what’s the point?
Even if we agree that culture evolves via Darwinian principles, what benefit or interest does it have? Well, firstly cultural evolutionists can use sophisticated methods that track gene frequencies to analyse culture and provide a better understanding of their origin and development. Secondly it can operate as a framework as it has done for evolutionary biology to integrate several disciplines into coherent research objectives. Just as Darwin unified data from zoology, physiology, geology, botany and paleantology, cultural evolution has the ability to integrate anthropology, psychology, sociology, linguistics and history to name a few. Thirdly, perhaps we can learn from 150 years of evolutionary biology and take short cuts in getting a better understanding of the enormous topic of culture.
Darwinian evolution has proven its influence over natural sciences and now with cultural evolution it can likewise enrich the social sciences. Although some are still adamantly opposed to the concept of cultural evolution, since culture is stored and transmitted differently to genetic information, Dr Mesoudi says this makes his work on cultural evolution ever more fascinating.
For further information please see:
Mesoudi, A., Whiten, A. & Laland, K.N. (2004). Is human cultural evolution Darwinian? Evidence reviewed from the perspective of The Origin of Species. Evolution, 58(1), 1-11.
