Sterelny Kim
Philosophy Program, Research School of the Social Sciences, Australian National University, 0200 Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2007 Apr 29;362(1480):719-30. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.2006.
This paper is about the evolution of hominin intelligence. I agree with defenders of the social intelligence hypothesis in thinking that externalist models of hominin intelligence are not plausible: such models cannot explain the unique cognition and cooperation explosion in our lineage, for changes in the external environment (e.g. increasing environmental unpredictability) affect many lineages. Both the social intelligence hypothesis and the social intelligence-ecological complexity hybrid I outline here are niche construction models. Hominin evolution is hominin response to selective environments that earlier hominins have made. In contrast to social intelligence models, I argue that hominins have both created and responded to a unique foraging mode; a mode that is both social in itself and which has further effects on hominin social environments. In contrast to some social intelligence models, on this view, hominin encounters with their ecological environments continue to have profound selective effects. However, though the ecological environment selects, it does not select on its own. Accidents and their consequences, differential success and failure, result from the combination of the ecological environment an agent faces and the social features that enhance some opportunities and suppress others and that exacerbate some dangers and lessen others. Individuals do not face the ecological filters on their environment alone, but with others, and with the technology, information and misinformation that their social world provides.
本文探讨了古人类智力的演化。我赞同社会智力假说的支持者的观点,认为古人类智力的外在主义模型不太合理:这类模型无法解释我们这一谱系中独特的认知和合作的爆发式发展,因为外部环境的变化(例如环境不可预测性的增加)会影响许多谱系。社会智力假说以及我在此概述的社会智力 - 生态复杂性混合假说都是生态位构建模型。古人类的进化是古人类对早期古人类所创造的选择性环境的反应。与社会智力模型不同,我认为古人类既创造了一种独特的觅食模式,又对其做出了反应;这种模式本身具有社会性,并且对古人类的社会环境产生了进一步的影响。与一些社会智力模型不同,从这个角度来看,古人类与生态环境的接触仍然具有深远的选择作用。然而,尽管生态环境具有选择性,但它并非独自进行选择。意外事件及其后果、不同的成功与失败,是由个体所面对的生态环境与那些增强某些机会、抑制其他机会、加剧某些危险并减轻其他危险的社会特征共同作用的结果。个体并非独自面对其环境的生态筛选,而是与他人一起,以及与他们的社会世界所提供的技术、信息和错误信息共同面对。