Why Humans Have Cultures PDF

# Why Humans Have Cultures ## Author(s) - Michael Carrithers ## Source - Man, New Series, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Jun., 1990), pp. 189-206 ## Publisher - Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland ## Stable URL - http://www.jstor.org/stable/2804560 ## Accessed - 27-06-2016 03...

# Why Humans Have Cultures ## Author(s) - Michael Carrithers ## Source - Man, New Series, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Jun., 1990), pp. 189-206 ## Publisher - Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland ## Stable URL - http://www.jstor.org/stable/2804560 ## Accessed - 27-06-2016 03:58 UTC ## Description of the Image The image is a scan of a page from a journal. The page contains the title of the article "Why Humans Have Cultures" with the author listed as Michael Carrithers. It also includes the source, publisher, stable url and date of access. ## Socio-cultural Anthropology - must explain not just the fact of varying cultures and societies, but also the human capacity to create, maintain and alter social forms over time - sociality is the selective advantage of cultural variability - sociality consists of a package of social capacities: higher order intentionality, pedagogy, narrativity, creativity, speech ## Evolutionary Biology - sociality made possible an increasing division of labor - these social capacities grew, they gave rise to distinctively human history - distinctively human history is characterized by the forms of social, political, economic and cultural causation which create ever-new variations on the theme of social existence ## Connecting the Perspectives - there is a need for a way to comprehend human history that does not reduce the themes to those used in prior chapters - there is something genuinely new in each chapter of natural history ## Anthropological Requirements - anthropologists would demand clarification of the immense variability of human social arrangements and forms of life - an evolutionary view of humans could not afford to ignore the variability of human practices and the social institutions which have developed over time - anthropologists look for an explanation of variation, not just an explanation of how specific variations came about ## The Anthropological Perspective - the human capacity for symbolic thought is traditionally seen as the main source of variation in human social arrangements - symbolic thought is mutable and differs from setting to setting - this does not explain how variation occurs or how cultures and societies could change - a conservative, a-chronic view of societies has made it difficult for anthropologists to perceive change, let alone explain it - there is a need to recognize that institutions possess causal histories that feature distinctly human forms of causation. - intentional and unintentional forms of causation lead humans to create new patterns in collective life - anthropology is joining historians in accounting for the temporal dimension of human life - this move leads to the question of the general causes which allow such variation ## The Biological Perspective - the concept of sociality among behavioral biologists seems thoroughly sociological. - Wilson's conception of sociality is focused on group characteristics, not individual characteristics. - however, this traditional conception of sociality is not sufficiently biological or Darwinian. - the concept of sociality must be given a strictly evolutionary meaning. - sociality must be an inherited trait or traits carried by individuals. - this is attributable to the frequencies of certain genes in a population. - this is established through the force of natural selection on a population. - there are two salient requirements for an evolutionary explanation of sociality: - an 'ambitious' evolutionary explanation which specifies not only the changes that take place along an evolving lineage but the causes of such changes - the notion that sociality is a trait of individuals. - there are three distinct but closely related kinds of history. - genetic history - an account of gene frequencies, the rise and extinction of species, and the fixation or disappearance of traits - ecological history - an account of the environment, population dynamics, ecology and community ecology - human history - ecological history is understood as the causes driving genetic history - groups must necessarily play a leading role in an evolutionary history of sociality, but the groups themselves have a history that is not genetic, but first ecological, and later also human. - the tempos of ecological and human history are quicker than the tempo of genetic history and so the former are (in the short and medium term) more often explanatory while the genetic history presents the problem to be explained. ## The Primary Social Skill - Humphrey argues that social intelligence is a primary requirement for humans and social primates. - social primates are required by the very nature of their system to be calculating beings. - this means that social primates must be able to calculate the consequences of their own behavior, calculate the likely behavior of others, and calculate the balance of advantage and loss, all in a context where the evidence on which their calculations are based is ephemeral, ambiguous and liable to change ( Humphrey, 1976, 309). - Humphrey argues that the adaptive advantage of the intellect associated with sociality does not lie in technical invention (Humphrey, 1976). - most advanced technologies are largely tests of knowledge rather than imaginative reasoning. - techniques are either trial-and-error, which are not very effective, or are learned from others. - human sociality is dependent on maintaining successful relations with elders from whom techniques are acquired. - sociality functions in the first instance as a sort of polytechnic school to teach simple subsistence skills. - this process requires a long period of dependence in which the young experiment and learn. - The increasing range of ages and relative positions in a group leads to growing complexity of differing interests. - this setting is ripe for considerable political strife. - to do well for oneself while remaining within the social contract requires remarkable reasonableness. - this explains why humans who demonstrate the longest period of dependence, most complex kinship strictures, and the widest overlap of generations within society, are more intelligent than chimpanzees, and chimpanzees for the same reasons more intelligent than cercopithecids ( 1976: 310). ## A Fuller Model - there is a need to assume that the complex sociality of chimpanzees was established and that it was capable of developing given the requisite circumstances. - this is the starting point for understanding the evolution of human sociality. - there are many promising avenues which might be explored but there is a need to start with the known and the possible. - there are three key steps in this historical process: 1. there must have been directed selection for social intelligence, but only coincidental selection of instrumental, technical intelligence (Wynn, 1988). - natural selection has likely been the main mechanism associated with human sociality. - the earliest identified stone tools could be made by present-day chimpanzees. - reasoning appropriate to understanding people could be applied to the material world (Dennett, 1987). - sociality need not have lain only in the preservation and transmission of technology. - knowledge of the landscape is as necessary as a knowledge of simple technology for hominids. 2. there must have been a transmissible and increasing division of labour (Stammbach, 1988), that is, a system where individuals contribute in different ways. This division of labor and the ways in which it is organized would have been a selective force. - complexity in the division of labor would have rendered it relatively complex. - individuals would be required to have greater 'reasonableness' in order to navigate the social milieu, including the fluidity between groups and relations between complex groups. 3. As individuals increased in 'reasonableness' others would follow, potentially leading to an evolutionary spiral of Machiavellian cleverness (Whiten and Byrne, 1988a: 9). - sociality is a process where individuals faced two problems: -the complexity of the group configuration -the capacities of others in the group - this may give rise to the potential for deception and exploitation. - this does not mean that deception is the only social strategy that arises. - reciprocal altruism is also advantageous. - this leads us to the notion of an 'ambitious' evolutionary story, one that accounts for the 'causes of change' and goes beyond 'narrow', 'unambitious' stories, which simply 'recount the changes' (Kitcher, 1985). - the changes in sociality were a gradual process and the ecological history of groups must have exerted a continual effect, which the evolutionary process tracked through genetic change. - genetic change was matched by an increase in intricacy of collective life and a greater complexity of social organization. ## The Anatomy of Sociality - there are six key features of human sociality: 1. the basis of human sociality is higher-order intentionality. - this is the ability to have a representation of oneself and others. - this requires a sophisticated consciousness. - this includes higher-order intentionality which involves representing another's representation of a certain issue. 2. higher-order intentionality is part of what Premack has called 'pedagogy' (Premack, 1984, 1986). - pedagogy involves observing another individual, judging them according to a standard, and intervening to bring the novice's behavior into conformity with the standard. - this standard is an aesthetic standard that goes beyond both simple training and imitative learning. - this includes the need for the pedagogue to invest time in training without an immediate return. - this involves the pedagogue representing the difference between their own ability and that of the novice. - this can be considered as a 'social contract game' where the pedagogue will cooperate, punish anyone who defects, and join in punishing anyone who defects. - this requires a 'social standard' against which to judge behavior. 3. The consequences of pedagogy lie in the capacity among humans to transmit an aesthetic standard. - this standard is an aesthetic standard that concerns actions towards others and not objects. - it is specifically social and is the basis for differing standards between groups. - this standard may manifest itself in terms of social rules or morality, culture, or 'habitus' (Bourdieu, 1977). Although the term habitus may convey an inappropriate certainty or predictability, it is better to think of an aesthetic standard is flexible, allowing for leeway and requiring judgement and imagination. - this underdetermination creates a range of actions that can be explained by 'emotionally oriented themes and images' which, in turn, maintain a sense of consistency for people (Rosaldo, 1980). - these themes and images are empowered by people who interpret them in a way that makes sense to them. - 'cultural scenarios' show how people work reality into intelligible forms. - the aesthetic standard is flexible because it is not simply the sum of all its parts. - this can be seen in relatively recently acquired, but nonetheless important, ceremonies. 4. Higher-order intentionality is primarily focused on what is operating in the immediate present. - pedagogy extends the horizon into the past and future. - what is needed is another kind of social capacity, 'narrativity' (Bruner, 1986: 14). - the idea is that stories embody a unique mode of cognition. - this involves the ability to cognise both immediate relations between people and the long-term interactions between human characters and their actions. - narrativiy: - involves understanding the long-term consequences of a series of actions and aesthetic evaluations - is a complex process that involves understanding characters and their actions as well as plots. - involves considering the perspective of others and the fact that individuals belong to types, and individuals as having idiosyncratic histories and intentions - this is based on social abstractions or an understanding of social roles and status, but also a recognition of the particularity of one person rather than another. - involves a sense of plot and a sense of history. - involves an 'imaginative power of memory and of anticipation', as well as 'human causality' (a set of reasonable actions that are likely to follow). - this is important to the evolution of exchange and the use of speech. - this allows us to see that aesthetic standards are vividly conveyed in human history. - narrativiy allows for an understanding of aesthetic standards that is not necessarily limited to language. 5. Just as the aesthetic standard is underdetermining, so narrativity must not be thought of a wholly accurate understanding. - narrativity involves a further capacity, 'creativity'. - without creativity there would be no sociocultural change. - creativity is inherent in many mundane activities. - this creative capacity is similar to how human social intellect operates. 6. Sociality includes another feature which is not merely cognitive (Trevarthen, 19) - 'intersubjectivity'. - this is the sense in which 'human abilities are being directed towards other individuals'. - this is a form of sociality that involves a sense of openness towards conspecifics, and a sense of dependence upon other people. - humans are only fully developed within a social environment. - sociality is about more than just cognition, there is also an emotional dimension. - this is the capacity for empathy and the fact that the self is intertwined with other people as well as the social world. - this can be thought of as a 'network of processors' or computers working to solve a single problem (Bullock, 1987). - this can be seen in the phenotypic expression of sociality as a process where humans learn and use what is distributed across a broader social network. 7. Sociality is intertwined with speech. - the notion that disembodied cerebration in symbols and language alone are the markers of human distinctiveness is misleading (Carrithers, in press). - speech is just one component of sociality, it is not an ontological marker of the difference between humans and other animals. - speech is a mutual, intersubjective activity that includes promise, threat, ask, pronounce, warn, reassure, describe and many other things. - the 'language game' (Bullock, 1987) is a key component of speech. - speech is a form of social action that is often overlooked in favor of an 'intellectual' or 'cognitive' approach. - it is also important to remember that the cognitive processes that lead to language and speech are themselves social. - a sense of social interaction is necessary for communication to be possible. - language and speech are important tools for maintaining successful relationships and conveying social norms. - communication and language are not simply 'syntactic' or 'semantic' skills, but involve a sense of what to say. - it is not merely about manipulating ideas, but about manipulating people and the social matrix. ## Putting it All Together - all of the components of human sociality are intertwined, and their social effects are real and important. - even though the cognitive ethologists or psychologists might explore these differences between primate species, human sociality is fundamentally different. - it is a complex phenomenon that is based on a variety of capacities. - it is not a simple matter of just recognizing these capacities, it requires an understanding of how they work together and what their consequences might be. - human sociality is an ongoing process in which we create, maintain, and change forms of social life. - this process is not one that is simply governed by cognition-- there is also an emotional and social dimension to it. - these capacities are not simply 'individual,' they are 'intersubjective,' because they are realized through interaction with others. - this process is also 'creative', because our capacity for sociality enables us to constantly invent and reinvent forms of social life. - this process of 'change' is not merely a matter of individual innovation, but involves the shared cultural evolution of our species. - the study of sociality enables us to understand not just the ways in which humans live, but also how those ways of life change. - it allows us to understand the history of our sociality and the ways in which culture has evolved. - it provides an important set of tools for thinking about the complexities of human society.