van der Schyff Dylan, Schiavio Andrea
Faculty of Education, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.
Faculty of Music, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Front Neurosci. 2017 Sep 29;11:519. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00519. eCollection 2017.
Despite evolutionary musicology's interdisciplinary nature, and the diverse methods it employs, the field has nevertheless tended to divide into two main positions. Some argue that music should be understood as a naturally selected adaptation, while others claim that music is a product of culture with little or no relevance for the survival of the species. We review these arguments, suggesting that while interesting and well-reasoned positions have been offered on both sides of the debate, the nature-or-culture (or adaptation vs. non-adaptation) assumptions that have traditionally driven the discussion have resulted in a problematic dichotomy. We then consider an alternative "biocultural" proposal that appears to offer a way forward. As we discuss, this approach draws on a range of research in theoretical biology, archeology, neuroscience, embodied and ecological cognition, and dynamical systems theory (DST), positing a more integrated model that sees biological and cultural dimensions as aspects of the same evolving system. Following this, we outline the enactive approach to cognition, discussing the ways it aligns with the biocultural perspective. Put simply, the enactive approach posits a deep continuity between mind and life, where cognitive processes are explored in terms of how self-organizing living systems enact relationships with the environment that are relevant to their survival and well-being. It highlights the embodied and ecologically situated nature of living agents, as well as the active role they play in their own developmental processes. Importantly, the enactive approach sees cognitive and evolutionary processes as driven by a range of interacting factors, including the socio-cultural forms of activity that characterize the lives of more complex creatures such as ourselves. We offer some suggestions for how this approach might enhance and extend the biocultural model. To conclude we briefly consider the implications of this approach for practical areas such as music education.
尽管进化音乐学具有跨学科性质,且采用了多样的方法,但该领域仍倾向于分为两种主要立场。一些人认为音乐应被理解为一种自然选择的适应方式,而另一些人则声称音乐是文化的产物,与物种的生存几乎没有关联或完全无关。我们审视这些论点,认为虽然辩论双方都提出了有趣且有充分理由的立场,但传统上驱动这场讨论的自然或文化(或适应与非适应)假设导致了一种有问题的二分法。然后我们考虑一种替代性的“生物文化”提议,它似乎提供了一条前进的道路。正如我们所讨论的,这种方法借鉴了理论生物学、考古学、神经科学、具身与生态认知以及动力系统理论(DST)等一系列研究,提出了一个更综合的模型,将生物和文化维度视为同一进化系统的不同方面。在此之后,我们概述认知的生成方法,讨论它与生物文化视角的契合方式。简而言之,生成方法假定心智与生命之间存在深刻的连续性,认知过程是根据自组织生命系统如何与对其生存和福祉至关重要的环境建立关系来探索的。它强调了生命主体具身且处于生态环境中的本质,以及它们在自身发展过程中所发挥的积极作用。重要的是,生成方法认为认知和进化过程是由一系列相互作用的因素驱动的,包括表征像我们这样更复杂生物生活的社会文化活动形式。我们就这种方法如何增强和扩展生物文化模型提出了一些建议。最后,我们简要考虑这种方法对音乐教育等实际领域的影响。