Tag: Cultural Evolution

Categories
41. A Theory of Society Derived form the Principles of Systems, Psychology, Ecology & Evolution Part 4

A Theory of Society Derived from the Principles of Systems, Psychology, Ecology & Evolution, Part 4

Part 4 of this series of papers is open access and can be downloaded in pdf format free of charge at https://rational-understanding.com/my-books#theory-of-society-4

Part 1 discussed the structure of society, i.e., the relationships between human holons, such as individuals, organisations or nations, the various forms these relationships can take, and how they alter with time. It notes that, with a very few exceptions, human interactions are much the same as those encountered elsewhere in the animal world. Conventionally, the structure of society is taken to mean its network of cooperative relationships. However, in this series of papers, a much broader definition is used that includes non-cooperative ones. Thus, for example, ongoing wars are also considered a part of this structure. It is also acknowledged that it is not only human needs that dictate relationships and the way that they change but also the values, norms and beliefs held by the related parties. Thus, the subsequent Parts of this series discuss the latter in more detail.

Part 2 described the work of the English philosopher of science, Roy Bhaskar (1944 – 2014), and the English sociologist, Margaret Archer (1943 – 2023). Roy Bhaskar is regarded as the founder of Critical Realism, a philosophy that holds reality to exist and to be the source of truth. It also holds that our beliefs about reality are not necessarily true. Both Roy Bhaskar and Margaret Archer described how culture affects individual agency and how individual agency alters culture. Bhaskar referred to his model as the Transformational Model of Social Activity (TMSA), and Archer to her model as the Morphogenetic Cycle. Archer also described how reflexivity, i.e., an agent’s internal conversations, can lead to cultural and structural change.

Part 3 built on the work of Margaret Archer to describe the outcomes of those internal conversations in more detail. It explains that to satisfy our needs or to avoid contra-satisfiers, we can adopt, form and propagate beliefs that are not necessarily true, but ones thought likely to satisfy our needs. Furthermore, to avoid anxiety caused by circumstances beyond our control we can adopt beliefs that act as psychological defence mechanisms. These beliefs when propagated do, of course, influence culture and structure.

Part 4 now draws on the preceding three parts to discuss the nature of culture in more detail, together with the processes of cultural evolution, stagnation, regression and speciation.

Categories
39. Reactions to Dark Leadership

Reactions to Dark Leadership

In every nation or organisation, leaders with dark personality traits, i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, or Machiavellianism, are more likely to rise to power than others. The primary interest of leaders with these traits is self-interest, rather than the interest of members of the nation or organisation that they lead. This frees them from ethical constraints when competing for leadership positions. It also frees them from the same constraints when determining the actions of their nation or organisation.

The reactions of members of the nation or organisation to dark leadership are as follows (Challoner, 2024).

  • They can support the leader. This involves entering into an informal contract with him or her to provide support and assistance in return for the benefits of delegated power.
  • They can practice a psychological defence mechanism such as denial. That is a failure to acknowledge that the leader has dark personality traits, despite evidence to the contrary.
  • They can avoid the leader by, for example, emigrating to another nation or joining another organisation. This is also, a psychological defence mechanism.
  • They can oppose the leader. However, this brings with it the risk of contra-satisfiers such as coercion, threats, or punishments.

The relative proportions of people who react in these ways depends on the culture of the nation or organisation. So, for example, if a culture regards the leader’s behaviour as normal or acceptable, the proportion that support him or her will be greater than in a culture that does not.

However, the greater the proportion of the population that support a dark leader, the lower the proportion that opposes him or her, and the more overt and extreme his or her behaviour will be. Furthermore, if they die or are deposed, it is more likely that another dark leader will take their place. On the other hand, the greater the opposition to a dark leader, the less overt and extreme his or her behaviour. However, the greater the tendency for denial and avoidance. So, dark leadership can still exist in nations and organisations that generally oppose it.

The English philosopher of science, Roy Bhaskar’s Transformational Model of Social Activity (TMSA) recognises that society has two main strands: (a) the network of relationships and interactions between individuals and groups that forms the structure of society and is the subject of sociology; and (b) the individual human volition or agency that is the subject of psychology (Collier, 1994). A similar model, proposed by the English Sociologist, Margaret Archer, comprises three strands: Structure, Culture and Agency (Archer, 1995). In both models there is a feedback process in which society enculturates individuals and individuals enculture society. That is, society forms the individual’s role, values, norms, and beliefs through the processes of socialisation, social learning, cultural manipulation, etc. After a time delay and, sometimes, after alteration, individuals then propagate social structure along with their values, norms, and beliefs, into society. This process is continuously ongoing. Although it can result in social change, it is also possible for society to become trapped in a positive feedback loop in which, for example, a population’s reaction to dark leadership becomes ever more biassed towards support or opposition.

Examples are given in Daren Acemoglu and James A Robinson’s excellent and well researched book, “Why Nations Fail”. This book focuses on extractive, as opposed to inclusive institutions. That is, those institutions that extract wealth from a society for the benefit of a minority or external agents, as opposed to those that share it more equitably within the society. Institutions are groups or organisations that have values, norms, and beliefs. They also have a specific function in society, e.g., water supply or policing. So, an institution comprises both culture and structure. In much the same way as Bhaskar and Archer, Acemoglu and Robinson argue that there is a feedback loop between institutions and individuals that can trap a society in an extractive or an inclusive mode. They refer to the former as a vicious circle and the latter as a virtuous one.

However, extraction vs. inclusive institutions are just one example of vicious vs. virtuous circles. Other examples include: imperialism vs. respect for other nations; war vs. peaceful co-existence; corruption vs. integrity; elitism vs. egalitarianism; and extreme economic inequality vs. its alternative. Many nations and organisations currently behave in the former ways, and I will leave the reader to decide which. However, this behaviour is ultimately a result of support for dark leadership and the vicious circle that it creates. Pre-existing social structures, values, norms, and beliefs that allow these behaviours to flourish are learnt by individuals who, in turn, propagate them unaltered.

So, to avoid extraction, imperialism, war, corruption, extreme economic inequality, etc., it is necessary to alter the culture from one that supports it to one that opposes it. That change can be accomplished by demonstrating to those who support dark leadership that there is a better way to satisfy their needs. This, of course, means the provision of real opportunities for them to do so. In this way, the social structures, values, norms, and beliefs that prevent extraction, etc. from flourishing will be learnt and propagated, and a virtuous circle will be established. There will, of course, be resistance by established vested interests. So, the process will be a slow one requiring much care, patience, and persistence.

References

Acemoglu, D. and Robinson, J.A., 2012, “Why Nations Fail. The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty”. London, Profile Books.

Archer, M., 1995. “Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach”. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Challoner, J.A., 2024. “A Theory of Society Derived from the Principles of Systems, Psychology Ecology and Evolution (Parts 1, 2 & 3) ”. https://rationalunderstanding.com/my-books/

Collier, A. 1994. “Critical Realism. An Introduction to Roy Bhaskar’s Philosophy.” Verso, London, UK. ISBN 0-86091-437-2.

Categories
32. Evolution from a Social Systems Perspective (Part 1)

Evolution from a Social Systems Perspective

This article generalizes the principles of biological evolution so that their broader application can be seen more clearly, particularly in the context of human society and cultural evolution. I will begin with the definition of some general terms, then use these terms to describe general evolutionary principles.

Definitions

A living holon is any organism, any group of organisms, or any group of groups that work together with a common purpose. Human holons are a subset of living holons. They include individual people and organisations of all types from clubs, through businesses and nations, to the global community.

The principles of evolution apply to living things such as bacteria, trees, and people, and some of their artifacts such as factories and computers. They do not apply to other non-living things. This is because living things and their artifacts are derived from a design which can change. Other non-living things, such as planets, rocks, etc. may be derived from a design, but it does not change.

The design of something comprises the information necessary to create the physical manifestation of that thing. Thus, the genome of an organism can be regarded as its design and the phenotype as its physical manifestation.

Culture includes the values, norms, knowledge, and beliefs that govern the behaviour of a living holon. So, the culture of a living holon can be regarded as its design, and the set of behaviours or society of that living holon as its physical manifestation.

The genome of an organism and the culture of a living holon are passed on from generation to generation. Both are also subject to evolutionary change. Randon mutation can occur in the genome due to the influences of viruses, radiation, copying errors, and so on. Random mutations can also occur in culture due to new norms, values, knowledge, ideas, and beliefs.

Satisfiers are those external things that increase the level of satisfaction of the needs of a living holon. Contra-satisfiers, on the other hand, reduce that level of satisfaction. All living holons are motivated to acquire satisfiers and avoid contra-satisfiers. Random mutations in the genome or in the culture of a living holon make it either more or less able to acquire satisfiers or avoid contra-satisfiers.

The status of a satisfier or contra-satisfier can be any one of the following: absent; latent, i.e., promised or threatened; precarious, i.e., present but not necessarily so in the future; or entrenched, i.e., present and likely to remain so. This discussion concerns satisfiers and contra-satisfiers that are precarious or entrenched.

The principles of evolution apply to populations of living holons in the following ways.

Evolution under the effect of contra-satisfiers.

When a contra-satisfier that impacts on a living holon’s ability to survive and procreate is applied to a population of living holons, then those most able to avoid it are more likely to survive and procreate than those least able. This ability to avoid the contra-satisfier stems from the design of the holon, i.e., its genome or culture. Thus, genetic or cultural attributes that enable avoidance of the contra-satisfier are selected for, and the proportion of those better able to avoid it steadily increases. Advantageous genes or ideas will propagate through the population and disadvantageous ones will expire.

Evolution under the effect of shortages of satisfiers.

When a shortage of a satisfier that impacts on a living holon’s ability to survive and procreate is applied to a population, then those best able to acquire the satisfier are more likely to survive and procreate than those least able. Again, through natural selection, the proportion of those better able to acquire the satisfier steadily increases.

The evolution of cooperation.

Although this is not always the case, one way of becoming better able to acquire a satisfier is to form a co-operative group, and thus, a shortage of satisfiers can also lead to the evolution of cooperation. By acting together, it may be possible for more than one holon to acquire a mutual satisfier or avoid a mutual contra-satisfier from the environment. When the members of a holon act together in this way, they exchange satisfiers with the holon’s control component or leader. This often takes the form of information flowing upwards and instructions flowing downwards. It is also possible, but not necessarily so, for them to exchange satisfiers with one another. In this way, a cooperative group, and thus, a higher-level holon is formed which follows the same general laws as the original holons. Thus, the higher-level holon can act cooperatively with others to form yet higher-level ones. If holons benefit more, in terms of their survival and procreation, by acting together rather than independently, then the former are more likely to survive and procreate than the latter. So, the genetic or cultural attributes which lead to cooperation will steadily propagate through the population over time.

However, cooperation will of course fail if it does not lead to the desired result.

We tend to focus on our failures, and this obscures the fact that human beings are extraordinarily cooperative. Were this not the case then our societies which comprise millions of people, and sometimes even billions, would collapse.

This is the basis of multi-level selection theory, i.e., the survival and procreation of an organism depends on the survival of cooperative groups or holons to which it belongs. Furthermore, multi-level selection theory applies not only to individual organisms but also to higher level holons. The survival of any higher level holon also depends on the survival of yet higher level ones to which it belongs. Such holons are formed by their culture, and so, multi-level selection theory also applies to cultural evolution.

The existence of leaders with dark personality traits can also be explained by this process. The lower the level of a holon the more it contributes to the survival of the organisms that comprise it. Leaders with dark traits may be perceived as beneficial to the survival of that holon, and thus, the organisms that comprise it, even this is at the expense of potentially higher level holons. However, evolution cannot predict the future and the highest level holon, humanity, is now at risk from dark leaders. So, such leadership must not be allowed to continue if we are to survive.

Competitive co-evolution.

It is possible for two populations of living holons to compete to acquire the same satisfier or  avoid the same contra-satisfier. In this case, both populations evolve to become ever more capable. Ultimately, one may succeed and the other may expire. But until that time, neither fully succeeds because of the evolution of the other, and ongoing evolution causes the two to become ever more specialised.

As in the case of predation, where two populations A and B are involved, it is also possible for A to provide B with a contra-satisfier and for B to provide A with a satisfier. In other words, what may be a satisfier for one may be a contra-satisfier for the other. Evolution will result in population A becoming better able to acquire the satisfier and population B becoming better able to avoid the contra-satisfier.

Finally, as in the case of conflict, it is possible for the two populations of living holons to deliver contra-satisfiers to one another. Evolution will result in both being better able to deliver them, but also in being better able to avoid them. Ultimately, however, one party is likely to prevail and the other to expire.

Cooperative co-evolution.

Cooperation comprises the exchange of satisfiers between two parties. If the two parties have different functions, and the receipt of a satisfier from the other party affects their ability to survive and procreate, then cooperative co-evolution will occur. Genetic or cultural traits that better enable one party to acquire the satisfier from the other will propagate through the population. Genetic or cultural traits that enable one party to deliver the satisfier to the other more efficiently, i.e., using fewer resources, will also propagate through the population. Over time, this can result in both parties becoming highly specialised and dependent on one another.

Categories
09. Cultural Speciation (Part 2)

Cultural Speciation 2

Introduction

This article comprises the posts that I made in Facebook’s Cultural Speciation chat from 11/9/23 to 25/9/23.

During my work on social systems theory, I have been struck by similarities between the behaviour of individuals, organisations, and nations, i.e., by the isomorphisms. An example is, personal denial vs. cultural denial. The latter is also known as co-denial or conspiracy of silence. Because of these isomorphisms, I now treat the organisation, in in its most general sense, as the fundamental holon in social systems theory.

The phrase “cultural evolution” is often thought of as being merely metaphorical. However, very real isomorphisms do appear to exist between biological evolution and cultural evolution. Examples include cultural speciation, cultural co-evolution, sub-cultures vs. sub-species, and so on. As cultural evolutionary principles appear to explain much of what is going on in the world today, I would like to begin a discussion with a view to developing the concept further.

More on this topic can be found at: the World values Surveys website at https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/ ; and in the excellent book “Cultural Evolution” by Ronald Inglehart.

Cognitive Physicalist Philosophy.

I developed this philosophy during my 23 years of work on mathematical logic. It was the only approach that enabled me to join up the various branches of logic into a single, consistent, and relatively simple system. This philosophy underpins the steps that will follow.

The cognitive perspective holds that we are our minds and cannot escape the constraints imposed by their biology and evolutionary history. Nevertheless, human cognition is a reasonably accurate representation of reality. If it were not, then it is unlikely that our species would have survived to be as successful as it is. Physicalism holds that space-time comprises the whole of reality and that everything, including abstract concepts and information, exists within it. Nothing transcends the laws of nature or occupies somewhere other than space-time.

The Nature of Information.

Information is physical in nature. It is not merely conveyed by matter and energy; it is integral to it in the form of order and structure. Information exists at source i.e., within the original physical entity. It is formed of meaningful component parts within that entity and the relationships between them. For an entity to be meaningful it must be structured in a way that recurs. This is an evolutionary trait that enables us to recognise recurring entities and, when we encounter them in the future, predict their behaviour, including any opportunities or threats. If an entity is meaningful, we associate the information that it contains with a sense image (icon) and in a symbolic form compatible with our minds. This enables us to remember entities and the associations between them. Finally, we translate information in that form into a symbolic form that can be communicated to others, e.g., words, thereby sharing our knowledge of an entity’s behaviour. In this latter form information can be replicated.

The ability to recognise and process information in this way is a property that emerges with life. This property applies only to living beings and some of their artifacts. It does not apply to other non-living physical entities.

Information at source is, by definition, always true. However, there are many ways in which mentally processed and communicated information can become false.

Basic Biological Evolution.

There are two main features of an organism: its genotype, i.e., the genetic constitution of the organism, and its phenotype, i.e., the manifestation of that design and the observable characteristics of the organism. The organism’s genotype is information that can be replicated and translated. It is the organism’s design. The phenotype is a consequence of this design as influenced by environmental circumstances.

Biological evolution has two main components, random mutation, and natural selection. Random mutation acts on an organism’s genotype and can, for example, be caused by radiation, viruses or copying errors during replication. Most random mutations are harmful, many are neutral and a few beneficial.

Natural selection operates on the phenotype. Under selective pressures from the environment organisms with harmful mutations often expire or fail to reproduce whilst those with beneficial mutations tend to propagate. Neutral mutations can persist in a population’s variable genome and can manifest themselves in the form of sub-species. Later, if the organism’s environment changes, they may prove beneficial or harmful and either propagate or expire.

Isomorphism between Biological and Cultural Evolution.

Society has two main features which are very similar in nature to those of the organism. Firstly, there is its culture. This includes values or those things that we hold good or bad; norms or codes of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour; and beliefs. They are all information held in the mind and socially propagated. They comprise a society’s design and are the equivalent of the biological genome.

Secondly, there is the practical manifestation of culture, in the form of society itself. This manifestation is a consequence of both culture and environmental circumstances. So, the manifestation of society can be regarded as the equivalent of the biological phenotype.

Culture is also subject to mutation. This can be caused by new knowledge, ideas and understanding; changes in the social and natural environment; communication errors; and even deliberate interventions such as propaganda and advertising.

Again, some of these mutations are harmful, some neutral and others beneficial. Theoretically, social processes should tend to cause those that are beneficial to propagate, those that are harmful to expire, and those that are neutral to remain as variations. However, deliberate intervention can propagate harmful cultural mutations. It is noteworthy that our interventions have also been biological. We have deliberately intervened in the genome of some organisms via selective breeding and, more recently, direct genetic modification has become possible.

In some circles culture is known as a memeplex with individual parts known as memes. However, the meaning of the word meme has changed with the advent of the internet, so I now avoid using it.

Biological and Cultural Speciation.

Biological speciation is the formation of new and distinct species through the process of evolution. Two main factors are involved, the accumulation of viable genetic mutations and geographical or environmental separation. In the case of geographical separation, members of a species come to occupy different parts of the world and can no longer interbreed. In the case of environmental separation, they come to occupy different environments, e.g., the trunk or branches of a tree, and again can no longer interbreed. This allows different mutations to accumulate in each group.

Initially this can result in a sub-species. That is, a group of organisms with identifiable differences from the parent species, but which nevertheless hold most of their genome in common with it and remain able to interbreed with it. If separation ceases a sub-species may be absorbed into the parent species. If separation continues it may diverge from the parent species as genetic differences accumulate, and ultimately may be unable to interbreed with it, thus forming a separate species.

A similar process can occur in society. Geographical separation is the same but environmental separation can be social as well as physical. Initially, a sub-culture can form with its own distinct cultural features but nonetheless holding much in common with the parent culture. If geographical or social separation ceases, then the sub-culture can be re-absorbed into the parent culture, but if separation persists, cultural speciation can occur such that it becomes difficult for the two cultures to interact. Differences in language, values, and norms form the basis for these difficulties.

Other Support for Cultural Speciation

Another interesting parallel is as follows. Culture is held in the minds of individual people. Together these people form society. The genome is held within individual cells. Together these cells form the organism.

Cultural speciation is thought to precede biological speciation and to have occurred in early hominids. The Italian scientist, Fiorenzo Facchini suggests that “Culture probably played a double role in the process of human speciation: (1) in isolation and differentiation from other groups of hominids that did not have such behaviour; and (2) in adaptation to the environment and in communication between groups that had the same cultural behaviour, thus slowing down or preventing the conditions of isolation that lead to new species.” (Facchini, 2006)

Application of The Biological Evolution/ Cultural Evolution Isomorphism.

At present (Sept 2023) I am working on interactions in the natural world, both human and non-human. This is going well, and I am finding strong isomorphisms. The same small range of interactions exist between: different species; groups within a species, including human organisations and cultures; and individuals within a species, including people. These interactions, which include co-operation, are both consequences and drivers of the evolutionary process. So, it does appear possible to unite the social and biological sciences in a way that allows knowledge to be transferred between disciplines.

Regarding cultural evolution, this is often thought to be merely a metaphor. However, biological evolution and cultural evolution are so similar in nature that they are almost certainly the same process. So, it is likely that the knowledge that we have gained of biological evolution can be applied to society.

Finally, I should perhaps mention that, although humanity comprises different cultures, this is merely an observation. I make no value judgements as to which culture is better. In fact, such value judgements are themselves cultural.

Categories
11. The Cause and Benefits of Social Complexity

The Cause and Benefits of Social Complexity

Frustration

In physics, the term “frustration” refers to an entity that is subject to conflicting forces and there is uncertainty about which option it will settle upon. Professor Giorgio Parisi has carried out Nobel Prize winning work on frustration in spin-glasses, i.e., materials in which the magnetic orientation of the components are random, can alter below a particular temperature, but are frozen above it. This results in an amorphous structure that is one example of a complex system. Professor Parisi’s work has shown that reliable predictions on the statistical properties of a complex system can be obtained by modelling it several times and comparing how the different models behave.

Further details can be found in the following article in The Conversation online magazine: https://theconversation.com/my-phd-supervisor-just-won-the-nobel-prize-in-physics-heres-how-his-research-on-complex-systems-changed-science-169297

Professor Parisi’s website is at http://chimera.roma1.infn.it/GIORGIO/index.html and many of his papers can be downloaded free of charge from Academia.

The concept of frustration can be applied to society. It occurs when we are faced with situations in which different cultures apply. Different values and beliefs, forming a part of those cultures, will dictate different behaviours. This leads to cultural or ethical dilemmas that we must manage. In such circumstances the behaviour of an individual or organisation is unpredictable. However, whatever choice we make propagates through society and this is the principal cause of social complexity.

If we were all to behave in the same manner according to the same values and beliefs then, like a crystalline material such as diamond, society would be simple and relatively predictable. However, differing values and beliefs mean that we do not, and so, society is more like an amorphous material such as glass. It is complex and unpredictable.

Individuals or organisations often agree with the values and beliefs that prevail in their environment, e.g., with those of the business in which they work or the nation in which they live or operate. If so, they will usually remain within that environment and support it. However, they also often disagree with the prevailing values and beliefs. For example, in a vertical interaction, the rights given up by an individual or organisation may be thought too great or too little. Thus, the culture of an individual may conflict with that of a business in which he or she works. Also, for example, the culture of a business organisation may conflict with that of a nation in which it operates. In these circumstances “frustration” exists and the individual and business must find ways of dealing with it. There are several ways of doing so, and this leads to the complexity and unpredictability of society.

The individual may, for example, attempt to leave the business or the business may attempt to move to a culturally more compatible nation. However, if they are unable to do so, then the following alternatives exist.

  • We have true values and beliefs that have become internalised over time. We are also capable of presenting apparent values and beliefs to those with whom we interact, i.e., we wear a mask. This is true not only of individuals but also of organisations of any size. Thus, we may wear a mask for one aspect of the dilemma but act in accordance with the other. For example, we may give an outward display of compliance but, if safe to do so, practice non-compliance. For example, when Stalin died many Russians put up blackout curtains but celebrated behind them.
  • Alternatively, we may rationalize in favour of the value and belief system in which we are obliged to operate, attempt to internalize those values and beliefs, and thus, remove the dilemma.
  • Alternatively again, we may attempt to alter the culture in which we are obliged to operate. For example, organisations that disagree with the values and beliefs of the nation in which they operate can propagandise in favour of their own values and beliefs, thus altering the nation’s culture over time and removing the dilemma.

It is worth noting that a dissenting organisation will, knowingly or not, attract members who agree with its values and beliefs, thereby reinforcing them.

Cultural Evolution

Frustration in society has an evolutionary basis, and it is highly unlikely that it will ever be totally eliminated. It serves an evolutionary function and so it may, in fact, be undesirable to do so. Utopias stagnate.

An important aspect of biological evolution is random mutation. This gives us a variable genome that causes individuals to differ. These differences, in combination with differences in our environment, cause our cultures, and hence our values and beliefs, to differ. As explained above, these differences in values cause social complexity, part of which comprises dissenting sub-cultures. These sub-cultures are random mutations of a social nature and form an important aspect of cultural evolution. However, just like random mutation in biological evolution, social mutations are most often harmful, often neutral, and only occasionally beneficial. They exist within a broader social environment and, if they are seen to be harmful, they will become extinct. If they are neutral they will probably persist and perhaps become beneficial if the environment changes. However, if they are seen to be successful in satisfying human needs, then, because culture is information, they will propagate, ultimately altering the parent culture. Thus, providing frustration exists, society evolves in a similar way to biological organisms. Just as isolation and random mutation account for the great biodiversity in the world, isolation and frustration account for its great cultural diversity.

Points to note, however, are:

  • Success and failure can be falsified.
  • Success for one organisation can be failure for another.
  • If new values are consistent with those we already hold they will propagate more readily (Bartlett). If they are inconsistent, they will propagate more slowly (Kuhn).

Frustration is inevitable therefore, and something that we must learn to live with if society is to progress. Idealists should note however, that an ideal global society is neither possible nor desirable. Pragmatists, on the other hand, should note that this is not an excuse for failing to strive for one. This is a difficult concept to come to terms with but nevertheless represents the reality of the human situation.

Categories
11. National Cultural Evolution

National Cultural Evolution

Introduction

Culture comprises: values or those things that we hold good; norms or acceptable forms of behaviour; knowledge or beliefs; and symbols or things that identify us as belonging to a cultural group, such as ceremonies, forms of dress, and so on. Every organisation, no matter what its type, has a culture.

Culture evolves through a process of mutation and natural selection. The inception of a culture is largely based on geographical factors, such as climate, topography, and available resources. However, as a culture matures, social circumstances, particularly sub-cultures, begin to play a significant part. Cultural evolution is like biological evolution, but with two main differences. Firstly, cultural mutations are not necessarily random, but more commonly a consequence of prevailing circumstances. Secondly, because culture is learnt, it can change far more rapidly. Indeed, cultural evolution in humanity is thought to precede biological evolution, providing that the relevant aspects of the culture endure for enough time.

Ronald Inglehart and The World Values Survey

The World Values Survey (WVS) was begun in 1981 by its founder and first president, the American political scientist, Ronald Inglehart. The project measures the values, norms, and beliefs of the populations of 120 countries, and any changes, by carrying out extensive surveys every 5 years. The results are open access, used extensively by social and political scientists, and can be found at https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/wvs.jsp . Inglehart has also written an interpretation of the data in his 2018 book “Cultural Evolution”.

Nations can contain sub-cultures or counter-cultures. The values measured are, therefore, national averages and not those held by every individual or organisation. Nevertheless, these averages show very distinctive trends.

Cultural Dimensions

Inglehart and the WVS identified two independent dimensions to the values held by a culture. They are Traditional verses Secular-rational Values and Survival verses Self-expression Values. A change on one of these dimensions does not cause a change on the other, and they have different causes, therefore.

These values are explained below using quotes from Inglehart and the World Values Survey.

Traditional Values

  • Traditional values base morality on purported supernatural revelation or guidance (which is the source of religious ethics). (Inglehart)
  • “Traditional values emphasize the importance of religion, parent-child ties, deference to authority and traditional family values. People who embrace these values also reject divorce, abortion, euthanasia and suicide. These societies have high levels of national pride and a nationalistic outlook.” (WVS)

Secular-rational Values

  • Secular values base morality on human faculties such as logic, reason, or moral intuition. (Inglehart)
  • “Secular-rational values have the opposite preferences to the traditional values. These societies place less emphasis on religion, traditional family values and authority. Divorce, abortion, euthanasia and suicide are seen as relatively acceptable. (Suicide is not necessarily more common.)” (WVS)

Survival Values

  • Top priority is given to economic and physical safety. Inglehart calls this “the Authoritarian Reflex” and describes it as a deep-rooted human reaction to insecurity. Norms are linked with survival of the species or at least the in-group.
  • “Survival values place emphasis on economic and physical security. It is linked with a relatively ethnocentric outlook and low levels of trust and tolerance.” (WVS)

Examples include:

  • A tendency to seek strong authoritarian leadership to bind the community together into its survival endeavour.
  • A tendency towards obedience of leaders.
  • A tendency towards strong in-group solidarity.
  • A tendency towards conformity to group norms.
  • A tendency towards rigid adherence to traditional cultural norms.
  • Intolerance of difference.
  • Xenophobia.
  • An emphasis in child upbringing on hard work.

Self-expression Values

  • These values are linked with the pursuit of individual wellbeing and tend to be democratic, secular and ones of tolerance for differences.
  • “Self-expression values give high priority to environmental protection, growing tolerance of foreigners, gays and lesbians and gender equality, and rising demands for participation in decision-making in economic and political life.” (WVS)

Examples include:

  • An emphasis on gender equality.
  • Tolerance of LGBT people.
  • Tolerance of foreigners.
  • Tolerance of other outgroups.
  • Freedom of expression, e.g., speech.
  • Freedom of self-expression.
  • Freedom of choice on how to live one’s life.
  • Autonomy.
  • Creativity.
  • Participation in political and economic decision making.
  • Political activism.
  • The voice of the people.
  • Greater egalitarianism.
  • Equality of opportunity.
  • Openness to new ideas.
  • Openness to change.
  • Greater emphasis on environmental protection.
  • More tolerant of extramarital affairs.
  • More tolerant of suicide and euthanasia.
  • A rejection of hierarchical institutions.
  • Lack of deference to external authority.
  • Greater emphasis on the need for esteem.
  • Greater emphasis on aesthetic satisfaction.
  • An emphasis in child upbringing on imagination and tolerance.

Culture Mapping

Because the survival/self-expression and traditional/secular rational dimensions are almost entirely independent, Inglehart and the World Values Survey have been able to plot cultures as points on a graph. The most recent survey results are shown in the diagram below. Cultures with traditional and survival values are plotted in the bottom left and ones with secular-rational and self-expression values in the top right. This shows that countries cluster together to form cultural groups.

The Inglehart-Welzel World Cultural Map – World Values Survey 7 (2022). Source: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/

As one moves in a direction from bottom left to top right, one moves from economically poorer to richer countries. A country’s position in the graph reflects both its economic and its socio-cultural history. Values vary from individual to individual within those countries, of course. These variations are according to gender, generation, ethnicity, religious denomination, education, income and so forth. However, the standard deviation for an individual country is much smaller than the differences in position between rich and poor countries, and, in many cases, than between adjacent countries. Thus, the likelihood of a person in Sweden or the USA having the same values as a person in Nigeria or Jordan is very small. The predictive power of nationality is much stronger than that of income, education, region within the country, or gender.

If countries are mapped on this graph at different times, they show a distinct trajectory of cultural change. An animated graph can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiIpymGeGoo

An Interpretation of the WVS’s Findings

Cultural evolution is a relatively new concept and, whilst there is extensive data from recent years, its interpretation should be treated with caution. For example, is the shift in the West from a change in values on the Traditional/Secular dimension to a change in values on the Survival/Self-expression dimension a consequence of post-industrialism or a consequence of consumerism and advertising?

The German Political Scientist, Christian Welzel, provides one interpretation in his book “Freedom Rising”. His main points can be found at https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSContents.jsp. They include:

  1. “Since 1981, economic development, democratization, and rising social tolerance have increased the extent to which people perceive that they have free choice, which in turn has led to higher levels of happiness around the world.”
  2. “People’s priorities shift from traditional to secular-rational values as their sense of existential security increases…” and “The largest increase in existential security occurs with the transition from agrarian to industrial societies. Consequently, the largest shift from traditional towards secular-rational values happens in this phase.”
  3. “People’s priorities shift from survival to self-expression values as their sense of individual agency increases…” and “The largest increase in individual agency occurs with the transition from industrial to knowledge societies. Consequently, the largest shift from survival to self-expression values happens in this phase.”
Categories
06. Culture, Sub-cultures and Cultural Evolution

Culture, Sub-cultures, and Cultural Evolution

Introduction

As mentioned in a previous article, an organisation is any group of people who work together with a common purpose. Every organisation has a culture comprising values, norms, beliefs, operational knowledge, and symbols.

Sub-Cultures

In common parlance during the 1960’s, the word “sub-culture” was associated with rebellious, western, youth cultures. More recently, it has become associated with style-based cultures, predicated on fashions in music and clothing. However, these are merely the most overtly expressed sub-cultures. The more general definition used in this article is a group of individuals within a parent culture who, whilst largely subscribing to the latter, deviate from some of its norms, values, beliefs, and symbols in an identifiable way.

The parent culture can be that of an organisation of any scale, from a club, through a nation, to the global community. However, we most often tend to think of sub-cultures as being relative to national culture. The most significant national sub-cultures are political, ethnic, religious, regional, gender based, age based, occupation based, class based, and so on.

How Sub-cultures Arise

There are three main ways in which a sub-culture can arise.

  1. Organisational Emergence. A sub-culture can arise in the same way as any other organisation. A group of individuals who identify a common threat or opportunity come together with a common purpose. Within such a group, a common culture arises, and a leadership hierarchy can also arise. It is worth noting, however, that there also exist interest based sub-cultures, e.g., sports and hobbies, which do not necessarily become organized. Thus, whilst an organisation always has a culture, a culture is not necessarily part of an organisation.
  2. Cultural Migration. The anthropologist, Roland B Dixon, noted that ethnic migration can also result in cultural change. However, more general cultural migrations can also occur, for example, when one business is taken over or merged with another.
  3. Top-down Design. Present day marketing specialists are well aware of the importance of sub-cultures as consumers, and are capable of promoting a designed sub-culture via the internet and social media. Many, but not all, Western sub-cultures are now consumer based, therefore. This is an example of how an improved knowledge of social systems can alter a culture.

Counter-Cultures

In extreme cases, the parent culture can be regarded as a threat by a group of individuals. So, they may come together to form a counter-culture, which seeks to radically alter the parent culture. Counter-cultures are normally political in nature and organised.

Sub-cultures and Cultural Evolution

Sub-cultures play an important part in cultural evolution. A sub-culture may be relatively minor at first, but can grow and ultimately become absorbed by the parent culture. Recent examples in the West include the absorption of the following sub-cultures: women’s rights, LGBT rights, ethnic minority rights, religious rights and so on.

Historically, due to the prevalence of authoritarian regimes, sub-cultures tended to emerge in hiding at first. This is because authoritarian regimes tended to regard them as a threat to the status quo, and because sub-cultures were, initially, relatively powerless and easily eradicated. For example, in the dark ages, people who did not conform to religious norms, or who questioned the social hierarchy, could be burnt at the stake. However, the Renaissance sub-culture later emerged. It sought the reinstatement of knowledge lost following the collapse of the Roman Empire. This ultimately led to a more rational approach to theology, the natural world, and the arts. The Renaissance was followed by the Reformation, a reaction against the Catholic Church’s doctrine. It led not only to religious change but also to more general social change. It highlighted corruption in the Catholic Church hierarchy, afforded women a greater role in society, helped to spread literacy, and weakened the relationship between church and state. The subsequent Age of Enlightenment, in which philosophy, logic, and reason flourished, resulted in major political changes that formed the liberal democracies that we see in the Western world today. All of these changes originated with a sub-culture.

Alongside the decline of authoritarianism, there has been growing tolerance for sub-cultures.  Increasingly, they have been allowed to grow or expire with relatively little interference from established institutions. The effect of this has been to increase the pace of cultural evolution.

Despite this growing tolerance, social pressures remain. We all hold our culture in mental schemata, and these can cause us to behave towards others in a way that encourages them to adopt the same culture. That is, we aim for cultural homogeneity or the sharing of a common culture. Inevitably, the likelihood of such homogeneity decreases with organizational size.

On the other hand, cultural entrenchment, i.e., the unchangeability of an organisation’s culture, generally increases with size. Our cultural schema can also cause us to regard people who hold a different culture or sub-culture as a threat and we can, therefore, attempt to stifle emerging sub-cultures. The larger the group of people who hold a culture the more successful this will tend to be.

Categories
08. Belief System Emergence - Culture

Belief System Emergence – Culture

Worldviews were discussed in a previous article and tend to be a form of personal, rather than communal, belief system. I will now move on to discuss the latter, i.e., culture, therefore.

Community, whether it be a family, clan, organisation, or nation, is based on the economics of needs. It allows individuals to specialise and to create satisfiers more efficiently by developing specific tools, knowledge, and skills. In turn, this benefits all members of the community through the process of trading. One individual or group of individuals will provide a satisfier to address the needs of another, and in return, reasonable reciprocation is expected. The community can also satisfy the social needs of an individual member, and in return, that member is expected to contribute to the group. Community relies on the reciprocal satisfaction of one another’s needs and this reciprocation relies on trading in the social sense and not necessarily the commercial sense.

The majority but not all of us have an inherited predisposition to create and abide by the cultures which bind us together into co-operative groups. A culture comprises: norms or acceptable forms of behaviour; values or things held good by the community; beliefs or those things that the community holds true; and symbols, i.e., modes of dress, logos, rituals, and other physical things with a shared meaning which identify individuals as being members the community.

Norms and values are developed to ensure that satisfiers and resources are equitably traded and do, of course, include morality and ethics. They can be described as good or bad. For example, it is usually held bad simply to take or steal from others. Thus, what we sometimes refer to as the ethics and morals of a community do not have a religious source, but rather a practical secular one.

The norms, values, beliefs, and symbols of a community are initially of a pragmatic nature and are enforced through the process of socialisation. That is, members are rewarded for correct behaviour and receive disapproval for incorrect behaviour. However, with time, these norms may become formally established as laws.

The detail of a culture is not genetically inherited. The diversity of cultures across the world and the manner in which they can rapidly change from generation to generation suggest that cultures, and hence our morals and ethics, are acquired, respond to circumstances and are passed on via socialisation. As Richard Dawkins has pointed out, for a culture to be hereditary and change at the rate at which it does, it would be necessary for those who participate in it to breed far more rapidly and successfully than those who do not. This is clearly not the case. However, cultures do form memes, and there is a degree of competition for acceptance between them. This is more so in a global economy where contact between different cultures is greater than it has ever been.

In response to globalisation of the economy, culture in the West is currently moving from a more national/tribal one to a more global one. Many see the global economy as group co-operation on a grand scale, and as bringing great benefits to humanity. We are learning that it requires a more tolerant and inclusive attitude to enable us to co-operate successfully at that scale. However, this change is not without resistance from ideological and other interest groups concerned that they may lose what they currently hold. Difficulties have also been caused by the transfer of consumerism to nations without the infrastructure to support it.

Humanity also faces great risks at the global scale and the move from national/tribal to global morals and ethics needs to be encouraged so that we can better co-operate in tackling these risks.

The political scientist, Ronald Inglehart, using the extensive research of the World Values Survey, identified two key independent dimensions in national culture. These are:

  1. Traditional vs. Secular-rational values. The World Values Survey describes these values as follows. “Traditional values emphasize the importance of religion, parent-child ties, deference to authority and traditional family values. People who embrace these values also reject divorce, abortion, euthanasia and suicide. These societies have high levels of national pride and a nationalistic outlook.”. On the other hand, “Secular-rational values have the opposite preferences to the traditional values. These societies place less emphasis on religion, traditional family values and authority. Divorce, abortion, euthanasia and suicide are seen as relatively acceptable. (Suicide is not necessarily more common.)”
  2. Survival vs. Self Expression Values. Again, these are described by the World Values Survey as follows. “Survival values place emphasis on economic and physical security. It is linked with a relatively ethnocentric outlook and low levels of trust and tolerance.”. On the other hand, “Self-expression values give high priority to environmental protection, growing tolerance of foreigners, gays and lesbians and gender equality, and rising demands for participation in decision-making in economic and political life.”

It is argued that a national culture can be measured by assessing where it sits between the two extremes on the two dimensions. More details, including a fascinating map of where each nation currently sits on these two dimensions can be found at: https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/wvs.jsp.

Categories
07. Anti-social Needs and Behaviour

Anti-social Needs & Behaviour

Our normal needs have an evolutionary basis and are those which, in the past, best enabled us to survive and procreate. They are the result of order brought about by life’s struggle against entropy and can be likened to the sandcastle described in my first article “Schrodinger’s Other Paradox”. They have a basis in both genetic and cultural evolution.

Unfortunately, due to the same evolutionary processes, some individuals have anti-social needs which cause behaviour that is a contra-satisfier resulting in harm to others. Note that I do not regard simple differences of opinion or personality as being anti-social. Nor do I regard outrage or disapproval as a harm. There must be a genuine impact on the contra-needs of others. Anti-social needs are the inevitable effect of entropy both on society and on the human genome, and can take many forms, most of which are harmful. Their existence can be likened to the many ways in which the sandcastle can begin to decay into a random heap of sand.

In practice, both normal needs, anti-social needs, and the behaviour they cause are defined by laws, norms, and consensus. These differ from nation to nation, culture to culture, and time to time. Generally, however, crime is subject to laws and punishment by the state, for example, imprisonment for theft. Violation of moral and religious codes has been regarded as punishable by God. Historically, for example, hell has been the ultimate fate of sinners. In some highly religious societies, the state can also intervene and, for example, impose punishment for blasphemy. Violation of social norms is punishable by the community by, for example, shunning. However, acts that cause mental stress or psychological damage to the victim often receive no censure.

Our contra-needs, or those harms that we wish to avoid, also have an evolutionary basis and are largely universal. Any behaviour which impinges on them will, therefore, be regarded by the recipient as unacceptable. If social controls favour normal needs, then the tendency will be towards orderly and healthy societies. However, if religious dogmas, political ideologies, corruption, or any combination of the three gain undue influence, especially control of the state, then incompatibilities can occur. This results in a society which can only be sustained through force, coercion, and repression.

Although normal needs are relatively universal and based on what has best enabled human beings to survive and procreate, disorder can occur in infinite ways. The causes of anti-social needs are, therefore, boundless. Examples include heredity, biological disfunction, drugs, upbringing, poverty, social, political, and economic factors, and so on. Criminologists recognise, for example, that the causes of crime are unique to each individual and that a combination of several factors may be in play.

It is impossible, therefore, to categorise anti-social needs. Furthermore, because an actor with anti-social needs will usually disguise them to avoid social controls, and will not be forthcoming with researchers, it is also extremely difficult to assess the priority that he or she gives to them and to anticipate when anti-social behaviour will occur.

Anti-social needs do, however, lie on a scale of type, which can vary from extreme psychological disorder, to exaggerated normal needs. Once a need is adequately satisfied, we usually move on to the satisfaction of others. However, for a variety of reasons, such as social influences, force of habit, or personality traits, it is possible to become trapped in the satisfaction of a particular need, to the extent that it is indulged in to harmful excess. For example, the pursuit of excessive wealth, power, or celebrity.

Anti-social needs also lie on a scale of harmful intent. At one extreme lie psychopathy, paedophilia, narcissism, etc., where the need is only satisfied by deliberately causing harm to others. At the other extreme lie antisocial behaviour and Schadenfreude or pleasure at the misfortune of others. Anti-social behaviour, as we presently understand it, is inconsiderate behaviour. It incudes, for example, vandalism, graffiti, littering, and dumping rubbish.

Finally, anti-social needs lie on a scale of effect which depends on the priority given by the victim to the relevant contra-need. Death, for example, would be high in the list of a victim’s contra-needs.

Life is a struggle against entropy, and it is inevitable, therefore, that we will always be faced with anti-social needs. However, this does not mean that we should just accept them. They are entropic in nature, and we are compelled by evolution to fight against them.

Most criminologists recognise that the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. It is also the case that people are attracted to institutions, organisations, and individuals who they feel will satisfy their needs. Knowing this, risk assessment, deterrence, prevention, and mitigation, based on the priority of the relevant contra-needs and the number of people affected, could be a practical approach. This would, for example, involve assessing the risk of an institution being steered in a harmful direction, and taking measures to reduce the risk that an individual with relevant anti-social needs can take its reins.

Categories
06. The Influence of Group Level Natural Selection on Humanity

The Influence of Group Level Natural Selection on Humanity

One of the main criticisms of group level natural selection has been that we know relatively few examples in which group behaviour has led to biological evolution. However, among them is one now regarded as being a rare and significant evolutionary transition: the evolution of the human brain. Another objection has been that groups reproduce and die off at a far slower rate than individuals and, thus, biological evolution driven by group behaviour will take place at a similarly slow rate. However, this is contradicted by the relatively rapid evolution of our brain.

The human brain differs from that of our ancestors not only in size but also in attitudes and skills. Examples of the latter include our relative docility and reduced aggression, our language, the cognitive skills necessary for socialisation, and the ability to internalise norms. Traits associated with human morality are automatic and emotional rather than conscious and deliberative and so are also likely to be inherited. All cultures enjoy artistic expression, and this has all the hallmarks of a genetically evolved adaptation. Finally, Wilson, Timmel and Miller, in their study of cognitive co-operation found that groups perform better at problem solving tasks than individuals, and that the gap increases with the difficulty of the task. In other words, groups perform better than individuals when solving complex problems.

Large brains consume a great deal of energy, approximately 20% in humans. Their growth probably began approximately 2.6 million years ago, when our previously vegetarian ancestors shifted to a higher reliance on meat. At the same time, it became more efficient to occupy a campsite and send out hunters than for the entire tribe to hunt. In return, the hunters benefitted from the protection of the campsite in which their young were raised. Family based social groups did exist prior to the shift to meat eating but the changes brought about by meat consumption began a process of increasing co-operation between families, initiating a shift to less kin-reliant groups.

An important factor in whether a group forms is its ability to benefit its members. Unlike kin selection, each member requires reassurance that the others have a similar outlook and takes their reciprocal support as evidence. Co-operation requires the individual to have an understanding of other group members and their motives together with considerable negotiating skills. It also requires an ability to recognise exploitation of the group by individual members; this necessitates moral systems, and processes for dealing with intransigence. It is important to mention that competition between individual group members and families is not extinguished but merely suppressed.

Within groups a culture develops comprising several memes, i.e., agreed values, norms, beliefs, and symbols. Values are those things that we hold “good”, norms are forms of behaviour expected from group members, beliefs those things that we hold true, and symbols are ceremonies, ornamentation, etc., which identify us as being members of the group. Memes are subject to a process like that of gene selection. They will survive and propagate if they are fit for their environment or fall into disuse if they are not. It is not necessary, however, for a group to become extinct for a culture to expire. Nor is a culture necessarily linked to an ethnic group as multi-ethnic cultures are also possible.

Culture propagates from generation to generation but, unlike biological inheritance, it can also propagate from group to group through socialisation. If a culture is successful, it can be transferred by imitataion or by coercion. Thus, cultural evolution takes place through the exchange of ideas and practices, with the most successful cultures surviving and propagating whilst the less successful ones expire. This process is far more rapid and adaptive to changing circumstances than biological evolution. Significant changes can occur within a few generations or less. This has, for example, allowed us to populate different environmental niches, from the arctic to the desert.

The evolution of our large brains has been very rapid and is thought to have been brought about by a process of positive feedback between cultural evolution and biological evolution with the former taking the lead. As groups became more complex and effective, they needed the greater skills and pro-social tendencies provided by larger brains. These, in turn, enabled groups to become yet more complex and effective. Because groups that co-operated well were more successful than those that did not, the individuals with the brains, skills, and attitudes needed to facilitate this were subject to natural selection and, thus, came to predominate. Although this process is speculative, mathematical modelling by Luke Rendell et al., of the University of St. Andrews, has shown it to be capable of producing strong selection pressures and the rapid evolution of biological traits.

Successful group co-operation relies on individuals knowing one another and limits on an organism’s ability to do so mean that there is a maximum group size which varies from species to species. In the 1990s, the anthropologist and evolutionary psychologist, Robin Dunbar, found a correlation, in primates, between brain size and social group size. From this he proposed a maximum social group size for humans of about 150.

In the last 5000 years, human society has become more complex. It now comprises numerous inter-dependent groups, each with its own specific purpose. They are not necessarily kin groups and are often based entirely on mutual co-operation. Some even prohibit nepotism. Most of us now occupy cities whose populations can be in the tens of millions. Cities are co-operative groups on a very large scale. We even describe them as organisms, using phrases such as “the beating heart” or “the veins and arteries”. There is no doubt that urbanisation, and the greater specialisation and co-operation that it brings, have resulted in an explosion in our population. Although this is probably a result of cultural evolution, in time, biological adaptations may follow.

Most of the changes arising from group behaviour that we can observe This raises many questions about our future, of course, such as “Is the process accelerating?” and “Where will it ultimately lead?”.