- Email: [email protected]
Intelligence and evolutionary biology
about, what kin selection means, etc., which is only appropriate if each chapter is considered individually. In other words, the collection could have been both trimmed, and knitted together more as a whole. There is also a lack of consensus amongst the contributors as to how far we can go in applying sociobiology to human behaviour, what the limits are, how biology and culture interact or even to what extent the issue needs to be considered. This is perhaps an inevitable state of affairs at the moment, but it also makes the total volume less coherent. Nevertheless, the book is an important achievement: not easy reading, but thought-provoking and necessary reading for anyone who believes that sociobiology can help us understand human behaviour ~ or for anyone who believes that it cannot. Peter K. Smith Uniuersity
of Sheffield
H.J. JERISON and I. JERISON (Eds.), Intelligence and Evolutionary (NATO ASI Series G.: Ecological Sciences Nr. 17. Springer-Verlag. 1988) pp. xii + 481, DM 198.00.
Biology
Berlin,
The study of human behavioural and psychological evolution is a rapidly developing area, and its momentum promises to accelerate further as practitioners of an increasing number of disciplines and subdisciplines find themselves drawn into the debate. This particular volume will, in the reviewer’s opinion, prove to be an important landmark in the emergence of a more integrated “palaeopsychology”. For once we have have contributions ranging from palaeontology (often neglected by sociobiologists) to AI, and from neurology to linguistics, thereby providing a basis for the reader to begin making a balanced evaluation of the respective merits and shortcomings of these various perspectives. Having said that, of the 22 papers comprising the volume two-thirds may be said to be firmly biological or physiological in approach. The underlying problem which seems to be emerging is that of bringing into a fruitful interaction the detailed neurophysiological work on the one hand and increasingly elaborate theoretical models (of both intelligence itself and evolutionary processes in general) on the other. To do this perhaps requires rather more input from the non-physiological psychology and anthropology end of the spectrum than is represented here, although H.C. Plotkin “An Evolutionary Epistemology approach to the evolution of intelligence” is, as H.J. Jerison enthusiastically acknowledges, making great headway in providing the requisite integrated theoretical framework.
The reader’s own personal biases and interests will largely determine which papers are found most valuab!e. Among the papers most likely to appeal to readers of this journal are Terrence W. Deacon’s two-part review of human brain evolution, V. Csanyi’s “Contribution of the genetical and neural memory to animal intelligence”. and D. Kruska’s “Mammalian domestication and its effect on brain structure and behavior”. Deacon’s first paper concerns the evolution of language circuits and provides a detailed summary of current knowledge and its implications, finally laying to rest Chomsky’s notion of a “language organ” and emphasising the homologies between primate and human brain structure in the cortical areas controlling language. His second paper, on embryology and allometry, enables him to amplify this account of human brain evolution in general and language in particular: The focal point for this analysis now becomes the changes in the relative number of cells and projections comprising the neural pathways involved in the interrelation of auditory, facial, lingual and laryngeal functions. . efferent projections from [the prefrontal area] are far more numerous with respect to target areas than in non-human primates. Some of these target areas include motor cortex, Wernicke’;s area. the anterior cingulate vocalization center, and brainstem nuclei indirectly involved in vocalization. (p. 407) This approach promises to articulate fruitfully with the model proposed by Robin Allott at the recent (1988) NATO AS1 Conference on The Origin of Language (in press) in which the focus is on the cross-modal transferability of basic motor-programmes. Csanyi’s paper is a highly original attempt at formulating a dynamic model in which, at the neurone-level of representation. concepts themselves are continually being selected and modified in the light of cyclical behaviour. enabling ontogenetic variability to emerge from common genetic foundations. It is difficult, though. to do justice to his paper in a few lines. Csanyi draws on psychological. neurological and ecological evidence in formulating his model. One might remark in passing that it is also nice to see an East European (in this case Hungarian) researcher being given a hearing. Kruska’s more specialised paper is extremely valuable in drawing together all the evidence relating to the neurological and behavioural consequences of domestication. This text will surely become a locus c/ussicus for all future researchers in this area. It also raises some interesting questions about capacity to learn, for although (with the exception of rodents and lagomorphs) domestication involves a reduction in brain size between 17.6 and 33.6% (pp. 214-215) learning ability in domesticated animals is often higher than in their wild counterparts. This may well be due to the breakdown of the elaborate “ wired-in” programmes required for a self-sufficient natural existence, involving highly channelised attention and so forth, in contrast to the domesticated
and attentive behavior is depressed as a consespecies in which “sensory quence of reduced brain size and changed brain proportions. If this turns out to be true, then larger brains seem to be a handicap rather than an advantage in special environments or altered situations (p. 224). (One cannot help wondering then about those above-modern-average Neanderthal brains!) Psychologists will also be pleased to see here papers by Margeret Boden (“Artifical intelligence and biological intelligence”), Philip Lieberman (“Language, intelligence, and rule-governed behaviour”), R.J. Schusterman and Robert Gisiner (“Animal language research: Marine mammals re-enter the update) and H.C. Plotkin (op. cit.). Martin controversy” - an important Pickford’s “The evolution of intelligence: A palaeontological perspective” will hopefully facilitate a more direct connection between theories in this area and the fossil facts than has tended to be the case in the past, and Paul Harvey’s “Allometric analysis and brain size” usefully reiterates the conceptual complexity of answering such simple questions as “What is a big brain?“. Michael Ruse and Paul Thompson give introductory theoretical-cum-philosophical papers articulating the rationale for the sociobiological perspective, but how many of these papers actually entail their author’s commitment to hard “sociobiology” as now understood? With one or two exceptions the standard of the papers is extremely high and H.J. Jerison’s opening and closing chapters draw together many threads in a most helpful fashion. The pitfalls of the unexamined platitude still, alas, occasionally surface; Michel Hofman (“Brain, mind and reality: An evolutionary approach to biological intelligence”) blithely tells us” . . . with the evolution of intelligence organisms became more and more independent of their environments by modifying the environments according to their needs”. A moment’s thought would have told him that “environmental modification” is highly idiosyncratic, appearing at many points in the evolutionary tree (if such it be), from ants and bees to beavers. while many species with highly evolved intelligence hardly manifest it at all ~ how a wild dolphin could modify its environment eludes me completely. All in all then, this is a very welcome contribution to a rapidly changing and developing area of multi-disciplinary concern. Although perhaps a little weak at the non-physiological end of the spectrum (the ideas of Sue T. Parker and Kathleen R. Gibson or Ralph L. Holloway, for example, do not seem to receive much attention), this is offset by the inclusion of at least four papers which will, I predict, become essential reading. Not a bad ratio for a book of Conference Proceedings. Perhaps in the new atmosphere in international detente NATO will find even more funds to devote to enterprises of this nature? Graham Richards The Polytechnic of East Lotjdon
of Sheffield
H.J. JERISON and I. JERISON (Eds.), Intelligence and Evolutionary (NATO ASI Series G.: Ecological Sciences Nr. 17. Springer-Verlag. 1988) pp. xii + 481, DM 198.00.
Biology
Berlin,
The study of human behavioural and psychological evolution is a rapidly developing area, and its momentum promises to accelerate further as practitioners of an increasing number of disciplines and subdisciplines find themselves drawn into the debate. This particular volume will, in the reviewer’s opinion, prove to be an important landmark in the emergence of a more integrated “palaeopsychology”. For once we have have contributions ranging from palaeontology (often neglected by sociobiologists) to AI, and from neurology to linguistics, thereby providing a basis for the reader to begin making a balanced evaluation of the respective merits and shortcomings of these various perspectives. Having said that, of the 22 papers comprising the volume two-thirds may be said to be firmly biological or physiological in approach. The underlying problem which seems to be emerging is that of bringing into a fruitful interaction the detailed neurophysiological work on the one hand and increasingly elaborate theoretical models (of both intelligence itself and evolutionary processes in general) on the other. To do this perhaps requires rather more input from the non-physiological psychology and anthropology end of the spectrum than is represented here, although H.C. Plotkin “An Evolutionary Epistemology approach to the evolution of intelligence” is, as H.J. Jerison enthusiastically acknowledges, making great headway in providing the requisite integrated theoretical framework.
The reader’s own personal biases and interests will largely determine which papers are found most valuab!e. Among the papers most likely to appeal to readers of this journal are Terrence W. Deacon’s two-part review of human brain evolution, V. Csanyi’s “Contribution of the genetical and neural memory to animal intelligence”. and D. Kruska’s “Mammalian domestication and its effect on brain structure and behavior”. Deacon’s first paper concerns the evolution of language circuits and provides a detailed summary of current knowledge and its implications, finally laying to rest Chomsky’s notion of a “language organ” and emphasising the homologies between primate and human brain structure in the cortical areas controlling language. His second paper, on embryology and allometry, enables him to amplify this account of human brain evolution in general and language in particular: The focal point for this analysis now becomes the changes in the relative number of cells and projections comprising the neural pathways involved in the interrelation of auditory, facial, lingual and laryngeal functions. . efferent projections from [the prefrontal area] are far more numerous with respect to target areas than in non-human primates. Some of these target areas include motor cortex, Wernicke’;s area. the anterior cingulate vocalization center, and brainstem nuclei indirectly involved in vocalization. (p. 407) This approach promises to articulate fruitfully with the model proposed by Robin Allott at the recent (1988) NATO AS1 Conference on The Origin of Language (in press) in which the focus is on the cross-modal transferability of basic motor-programmes. Csanyi’s paper is a highly original attempt at formulating a dynamic model in which, at the neurone-level of representation. concepts themselves are continually being selected and modified in the light of cyclical behaviour. enabling ontogenetic variability to emerge from common genetic foundations. It is difficult, though. to do justice to his paper in a few lines. Csanyi draws on psychological. neurological and ecological evidence in formulating his model. One might remark in passing that it is also nice to see an East European (in this case Hungarian) researcher being given a hearing. Kruska’s more specialised paper is extremely valuable in drawing together all the evidence relating to the neurological and behavioural consequences of domestication. This text will surely become a locus c/ussicus for all future researchers in this area. It also raises some interesting questions about capacity to learn, for although (with the exception of rodents and lagomorphs) domestication involves a reduction in brain size between 17.6 and 33.6% (pp. 214-215) learning ability in domesticated animals is often higher than in their wild counterparts. This may well be due to the breakdown of the elaborate “ wired-in” programmes required for a self-sufficient natural existence, involving highly channelised attention and so forth, in contrast to the domesticated
and attentive behavior is depressed as a consespecies in which “sensory quence of reduced brain size and changed brain proportions. If this turns out to be true, then larger brains seem to be a handicap rather than an advantage in special environments or altered situations (p. 224). (One cannot help wondering then about those above-modern-average Neanderthal brains!) Psychologists will also be pleased to see here papers by Margeret Boden (“Artifical intelligence and biological intelligence”), Philip Lieberman (“Language, intelligence, and rule-governed behaviour”), R.J. Schusterman and Robert Gisiner (“Animal language research: Marine mammals re-enter the update) and H.C. Plotkin (op. cit.). Martin controversy” - an important Pickford’s “The evolution of intelligence: A palaeontological perspective” will hopefully facilitate a more direct connection between theories in this area and the fossil facts than has tended to be the case in the past, and Paul Harvey’s “Allometric analysis and brain size” usefully reiterates the conceptual complexity of answering such simple questions as “What is a big brain?“. Michael Ruse and Paul Thompson give introductory theoretical-cum-philosophical papers articulating the rationale for the sociobiological perspective, but how many of these papers actually entail their author’s commitment to hard “sociobiology” as now understood? With one or two exceptions the standard of the papers is extremely high and H.J. Jerison’s opening and closing chapters draw together many threads in a most helpful fashion. The pitfalls of the unexamined platitude still, alas, occasionally surface; Michel Hofman (“Brain, mind and reality: An evolutionary approach to biological intelligence”) blithely tells us” . . . with the evolution of intelligence organisms became more and more independent of their environments by modifying the environments according to their needs”. A moment’s thought would have told him that “environmental modification” is highly idiosyncratic, appearing at many points in the evolutionary tree (if such it be), from ants and bees to beavers. while many species with highly evolved intelligence hardly manifest it at all ~ how a wild dolphin could modify its environment eludes me completely. All in all then, this is a very welcome contribution to a rapidly changing and developing area of multi-disciplinary concern. Although perhaps a little weak at the non-physiological end of the spectrum (the ideas of Sue T. Parker and Kathleen R. Gibson or Ralph L. Holloway, for example, do not seem to receive much attention), this is offset by the inclusion of at least four papers which will, I predict, become essential reading. Not a bad ratio for a book of Conference Proceedings. Perhaps in the new atmosphere in international detente NATO will find even more funds to devote to enterprises of this nature? Graham Richards The Polytechnic of East Lotjdon