To copy or not to copy? That is the question! From chimpanzees to the foundation of human technological culture

IF 13.7 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
Héctor M. Manrique , Michael J. Walker
{"title":"To copy or not to copy? That is the question! From chimpanzees to the foundation of human technological culture","authors":"Héctor M. Manrique ,&nbsp;Michael J. Walker","doi":"10.1016/j.plrev.2023.02.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A prerequisite for copying innovative behaviour faithfully is the capacity of observers' brains, regarded as ‘hierarchically mechanistic minds’, to overcome cognitive ‘surprisal’ (see 2.), by maximising the evidence for their internal models, through active inference. Unlike modern humans, chimpanzees and other great apes show considerable limitations in their ability, or ‘Zone of Bounded Surprisal’, to overcome cognitive surprisal induced by innovative or unorthodox behaviour that rarely, therefore, is copied precisely or accurately. Most can copy adequately what is within their phenotypically habitual behavioural repertoire, in which technology plays scant part. Widespread intra- and intergenerational social transmission of complex technological innovations is not a hall-mark of great-ape taxa. 3 Ma, precursors of the genus Homo made stone artefacts, and stone-flaking likely was habitual before 2 Ma. After that time, early Homo erectus has left traces of technological innovations, though faithful copying of these and their intra- and intergenerational social transmission were rare before 1 Ma. This likely owed to a cerebral infrastructure of interconnected neuronal systems more limited than ours. Brains were smaller in size than ours, and cerebral neuronal systems ceased to develop when early Homo erectus attained full adult maturity by the mid-teen years, whereas its development continues until our mid-twenties nowadays. Pleistocene Homo underwent remarkable evolutionary adaptation of neurobiological propensities, and cerebral aspects are discussed that, it is proposed here, plausibly, were fundamental for faithful copying, which underpinned social transmission of technologies, cumulative learning, and culture. Here, observers' responses to an innovation are more important for ensuring its transmission than is an innovator's production of it, because, by themselves, the minimal cognitive prerequisites that are needed for encoding and assimilating innovations are insufficient for practical outcomes to accumulate and spread intra- and intergenerationally.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":403,"journal":{"name":"Physics of Life Reviews","volume":"45 ","pages":"Pages 6-24"},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physics of Life Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S157106452300026X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

A prerequisite for copying innovative behaviour faithfully is the capacity of observers' brains, regarded as ‘hierarchically mechanistic minds’, to overcome cognitive ‘surprisal’ (see 2.), by maximising the evidence for their internal models, through active inference. Unlike modern humans, chimpanzees and other great apes show considerable limitations in their ability, or ‘Zone of Bounded Surprisal’, to overcome cognitive surprisal induced by innovative or unorthodox behaviour that rarely, therefore, is copied precisely or accurately. Most can copy adequately what is within their phenotypically habitual behavioural repertoire, in which technology plays scant part. Widespread intra- and intergenerational social transmission of complex technological innovations is not a hall-mark of great-ape taxa. 3 Ma, precursors of the genus Homo made stone artefacts, and stone-flaking likely was habitual before 2 Ma. After that time, early Homo erectus has left traces of technological innovations, though faithful copying of these and their intra- and intergenerational social transmission were rare before 1 Ma. This likely owed to a cerebral infrastructure of interconnected neuronal systems more limited than ours. Brains were smaller in size than ours, and cerebral neuronal systems ceased to develop when early Homo erectus attained full adult maturity by the mid-teen years, whereas its development continues until our mid-twenties nowadays. Pleistocene Homo underwent remarkable evolutionary adaptation of neurobiological propensities, and cerebral aspects are discussed that, it is proposed here, plausibly, were fundamental for faithful copying, which underpinned social transmission of technologies, cumulative learning, and culture. Here, observers' responses to an innovation are more important for ensuring its transmission than is an innovator's production of it, because, by themselves, the minimal cognitive prerequisites that are needed for encoding and assimilating innovations are insufficient for practical outcomes to accumulate and spread intra- and intergenerationally.

复制还是不复制?这就是问题所在!从黑猩猩到人类科技文化的基础
忠实地复制创新行为的一个先决条件是观察者的大脑的能力,被认为是“层次机械思维”,通过积极的推理,最大化他们内部模型的证据,来克服认知上的“惊讶”(见2)。与现代人类不同,黑猩猩和其他类人猿在克服由创新或非正统行为引起的认知惊喜方面表现出相当大的局限性,或者说“有限惊喜区”,因此,这些行为很少被精确或准确地复制。大多数人都能充分复制他们的显性习惯行为,而技术在其中起不到什么作用。复杂技术创新的广泛的内部和代际社会传递并不是类人猿类群的标志。公元3世纪,人属的祖先制造了石器制品,而在公元2世纪之前,石头剥落很可能是一种习惯。在那之后,早期的直立人留下了技术创新的痕迹,尽管在1ma之前,忠实地复制这些以及它们的内部和代际社会传播是罕见的。这可能是由于相互连接的神经系统的大脑基础设施比我们的更有限。早期直立人的大脑比我们的小,当他们在十几岁左右达到完全成熟时,大脑神经系统就停止了发育,而现在他们的发育一直持续到我们二十五六岁。更新世人类经历了显著的神经生物学倾向的进化适应,而大脑方面的讨论似乎是忠实复制的基础,这是技术、累积学习和文化的社会传播的基础。在这里,观察者对创新的反应比创新者对创新的生产对确保创新的传播更重要,因为,就其本身而言,编码和吸收创新所需的最低认知先决条件不足以使实际成果在代际和代际内积累和传播。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Physics of Life Reviews
Physics of Life Reviews 生物-生物物理
CiteScore
20.30
自引率
14.50%
发文量
52
审稿时长
8 days
期刊介绍: Physics of Life Reviews, published quarterly, is an international journal dedicated to review articles on the physics of living systems, complex phenomena in biological systems, and related fields including artificial life, robotics, mathematical bio-semiotics, and artificial intelligent systems. Serving as a unifying force across disciplines, the journal explores living systems comprehensively—from molecules to populations, genetics to mind, and artificial systems modeling these phenomena. Inviting reviews from actively engaged researchers, the journal seeks broad, critical, and accessible contributions that address recent progress and sometimes controversial accounts in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信