Five clarifications about cultural evolution

TL;DR

This paper clarifies misconceptions about cultural evolution, emphasizing the distributed nature of cultural representations, the distinction between genetic and cultural transmission, and arguing that natural selection is not suitable for explaining cultural change.

Contribution

It provides a detailed critique of applying biological natural selection models to culture, highlighting key differences and proposing a more nuanced understanding of cultural dynamics.

Findings

Cultural representations are distributed across neural microfeatures.

Replicator dynamics do not guarantee natural selection in culture.

Natural selection is an inappropriate framework for cultural evolution.

Abstract

This paper reviews and clarifies five misunderstandings about cultural evolution identified by Henrich, Boyd, and Richerson (2008). First, cultural representations are neither discrete nor continuous; they are distributed across neurons that respond to microfeatures. This enables associations to be made, and cultural change to be generated. Second, 'replicator dynamics' do not ensure natural selection. The replicator notion does not capture the distinction between actively interpreted self-assembly code and passively copied self-description, which leads to a fundamental principle of natural selection: inherited information is transmitted, whereas acquired information is not. Third, this principle is violated in culture by the ubiquity of acquired change. Moreover, biased transmission is less important to culture than the creative processes by which novelty is generated. Fourth, there is no objective basis for determining cultural fitness. Fifth, the necessity of randomness is discussed. It is concluded that natural selection is inappropriate as an explanatory framework for culture.