#1: Lemma: Replicator-selection works only through genes; that is, there is no such thing as group selection; from a reproduction perspective, the only which matters, is delta-reproduction-fitness increase.
#2: Lemma: Technologies, and techniques doesn’t require gene-transfer. Once someone comes up with a new idea, that idea can freely spread across the entire population. Therefore, technologies, and techniques doesn’t offer delta-reproduction-fitness increase.
#3: Observation: Some people appear to be interested more in things (as observed in Scientists, engineers; think “flow”), as opposed to other people (as predicted by the Machiavellian Intelligence Hypothesis )
For the purpose of this thread, I’m not interested in discussing lemma #1, and #2. Assume these to be axiomatic. How can #3 still increase delta-reproduction-fitness?
The benefits of technology and techniques don’t spread right across the whole population immediately—the primary benefit goes to the inventor and those near to them.
So, in the ancestral environment, if inventing a new kind of pointy rock to better kill dinosaurs gives you +1 fitness points, and lying around watching stone-age TV until your neighbour makes a pointy rock then stealing it gives you +2, then genes for inventing will spread until everyone has a 1⁄2 chance of having an inventor for a neighbour, at which point equilibrium is reached and both gene types will do equally well.
Here’s an evolutionary psychology question:
#1: Lemma: Replicator-selection works only through genes; that is, there is no such thing as group selection; from a reproduction perspective, the only which matters, is delta-reproduction-fitness increase.
#2: Lemma: Technologies, and techniques doesn’t require gene-transfer. Once someone comes up with a new idea, that idea can freely spread across the entire population. Therefore, technologies, and techniques doesn’t offer delta-reproduction-fitness increase.
#3: Observation: Some people appear to be interested more in things (as observed in Scientists, engineers; think “flow”), as opposed to other people (as predicted by the Machiavellian Intelligence Hypothesis )
For the purpose of this thread, I’m not interested in discussing lemma #1, and #2. Assume these to be axiomatic. How can #3 still increase delta-reproduction-fitness?
Warning: worthless evidence-free armchair evopsych speculation coming up:
The benefits of technology and techniques don’t spread right across the whole population immediately—the primary benefit goes to the inventor and those near to them.
So, in the ancestral environment, if inventing a new kind of pointy rock to better kill dinosaurs gives you +1 fitness points, and lying around watching stone-age TV until your neighbour makes a pointy rock then stealing it gives you +2, then genes for inventing will spread until everyone has a 1⁄2 chance of having an inventor for a neighbour, at which point equilibrium is reached and both gene types will do equally well.