Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!phri!lewando
From: lewando@phri.UUCP (Mark Lewandoski)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Why are Humans as Smart as They Are?
Message-ID: <2851@phri.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 15-Aug-87 18:28:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: phri.2851
Posted: Sat Aug 15 18:28:20 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Aug-87 11:50:15 EDT
References: <1041@ttidca.TTI.COM>
Organization: Public Health Research Institute, NYC, NY
Lines: 56
Summary: Culture is Destiny

In article <1041@ttidca.TTI.COM>, jackson@ttidca.TTI.COM (Dick Jackson) writes:
> This is a question which has intrigued me for a long time, I wonder if
> anyone has any thoughts?
> 
> Assume that humans have succeeded in evolutionary terms by exploiting the
> "niche" of intelligence, i.e. being capable of rational planning.  Assume
> that homo sap evolved gradually from some pre-homo with only apelike
> reasoning powers.
> 
> Also I have to remember that this growth of "intelligence" didn't just
> happen, there was environmental pressure driving it, i.e. at some point it
> became an evolutionary advantage to be a little bit smarter than your
> peers, you survived preferentially to have more children who inherited
> your smartness, and so on.

    Thanks for the thoughtful question. I suggest a book for you called
_The Interpretation of Culture_ by Clifford Geertz. He is a very 
thought-provoking, talented anthropologist and writer. In the book's first
chapter he runs this argument which addresses your question, _somewhat_...

     What is basic human nature (under the overlay of a paerticular culture)? 
Many schools of thought have proposed 
different answer to this: noble savage or savage killer. And over this
basic core of human nature is our culture: American, Iranian, Yanamato
or whatever...
     Then he looks at the fossil record and it shows that culture began 
_before_ the modern human brain developed. By culture, we mean the use
of language and symbols to make meaning of the world and to pass on 
information. The evidence of culture is carving, paintings, symbols,
remnants of burial ceremonies, etc. OK, so this occurs and then sometime
afterwards (I read this a while ago) the modern human brain development...
(based on skulls found...ie our protohuman ancestors had rudiments of
culture and language).

SO this pivot of his thesis is this: the ability to use culture (ie
useful information passed on in symbols, signs and signals) was a
selective force in the evolution of the human brain and nervous system.
Those creatures that were better able to use the growing culture-bound\
information, because they were born brains better suited to this, 
had a selective advantage...Until we get the modern brain which _requires_
cultural information to function. So the original question: what is the
basic human nature under the superficial overlay of our particular culture?
is a meaningless question: the basic human nature is to have a nervous system
which requires a particular culture to function. Strip away that
culture amd you have a nonworking monstrosity. (I dont mean "function" 
in the physiological sense, I mean without culture there is no thinking,
intelligence and emotion)

I think this has some bearing on your question vis a vis the evolution
of human intelligence. In order to evolve such interlligence in intergrated
with the development of culture. And culture, while limited by biology
because it's units are persons, is not a genetical controlled phenomena,
like the ability to split a certain sugar or grow wings on certain
parts of the body.

Hope this helps.                       Mark Lewandoski