Abstract
The Baldwin effect is a process by which learnt traits become integrated into the genome through a non-Lamarckian mechanism. It has been hypothesized that behaviours characterized by positive frequency dependence – namely, behaviours whose fitness increases with the proportion of individuals in the population adopting it – offer fertile grounds for Baldwinization. We argue that positive complementarities, like the ones exhibited by this type of behaviour, are neither necessary nor sufficient for the Baldwin effect to occur. We offer a taxonomy of frequency dependent interactions to assess the relative likelihood of Baldwinization.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Baldwin effect is not limited to behavioral traits as opposed to physiological traits. Environmentally-induced physiological adaptations also count as an instance of Baldwinization.
- 2.
Note that mutations are not strictly necessary. Hidden variations may suffice for assimilation.
- 3.
Hinton and Nowlan [18] develop a computational model that explores the interplay between the benefits and costs of learning and the impact of these variables upon adaptive evolution.
- 4.
This example is analyzed in Papineau [19].
- 5.
For simplicity, we deal with pairwise interactions instead of the more realistic set-up in which phenotypes play the field. But our argument about evolutionary stability holds in any case.
- 6.
The payoffs to adoption and non-adoption assume that the new technology to open coconuts allows adopters to eat more than non-adopters per unit of time and that this larger intake enhances their reproductive survival.
- 7.
Adaptive dynamics are dynamics by which strategies whose fitness is higher than the average fitness of the population, grow.
- 8.
- 9.
As stated above, the rules guiding the interaction of the individuals, most prominently the type of spatial interaction, will also affect the evolutionary dynamics of those games.
References
Wilson, E.: Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1975)
Barkow, J.H., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J. (eds.): The Adapted Mind. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1992)
Krebs, J., Davies, N.: An Introduction to Behavioral Ecology. Blackwell, Oxford (1982)
Boyd, R., Richerson, P.: Culture and the Evolutionary Process. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1985)
Durham, W.: Co-evolution. Stanford University Press, Stanford (1991)
Baldwin, J.: A new factor in evolution. Am. Natl. 30, 441–451, (1896)
Watkins, J.: A note on the Baldwin effect. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 50, 417–423 (1999)
Kuechle, G., Rios, D.: A game-theoretic analysis of the Baldwin effect. Erkenntnis (forthcoming)
Deacon, T.: The Symbolic Species. Norton, New York (2007)
Godfrey-Smith, P.: Between Baldwin skepticism and Baldwin boosterism. In: Weber, B., Depew, D. (eds.) Evolution and Learning: The Baldwin Effect Reconsidered. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)
Zollman, K., Smead, R.: Plasticity and language: an example of the Baldwin effect? Phil. Stud. 147:7–2 (2010)
Ewer, R.: Imprinting in animal behaviour. Nature 177, 227–228 (1956)
Avital, E., Jablonka, E.: Animal Traditions: Behavioral Inheritance in Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)
Wimsatt, W.: Re-engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2007)
Diamond, J.: Guns, Germs and Steel. Norton & Company, New York (1997)
Godfrey-Smith, P.: Complexity and the Function of Mind in Nature. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)
Stephens, D.: Change, regularity and value in the evolution of animal learning. Behav. Ecol. 2, 77–89 (1991)
Hinton, G., Nowlan, S.: How learning can guide evolution. Compl. Syst. 1, 495–502 (1987)
Papineau, D.: Social learning and the Baldwin effect. In: Zilhao, A. (ed.) Evolution, Rationality and Cognition: A Cognitive science for the Twenty-first Century. Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon (2005)
Suzuki, R., Arita, T.: How learning can guide the evolution of communication. Proceedings of Artificial Life XI, pp. 608–615 (2008)
Suzuki, R., Arita, T., Watanabe, Y.: Language, evolution and the Baldwin effect. Artif. Life Robot. XII(1), 65–69 (2008)
Odling-Smee, J., et al.: Niche Construction: The Neglected Process in Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)
Lewis, D.: Convention. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1969)
Skyms, B.: The Evolution of the Social Contract. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1966)
Skyms, B.: Signals, evolution and the explanatory power of transient Information. Philos. Sci. 69, 407–428 (2002)
Huttegger, S.: On robustness in signalling games. Philos. Sci. 74, 839–847 (2007)
Skyrms, B.: The Stag Hunt and the Evolution of Social Structure. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)
Alexander, J.M., Skyrms, B.: Bargaining with neighbors: is justice contagious? J. Philos. 96, 588–598 (1999)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kuechle, G., Rios, D. (2012). Frequency Dependence Arguments for the Co-evolution of Genes and Culture. In: Brinkworth, M., Weinert, F. (eds) Evolution 2.0. The Frontiers Collection. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20496-8_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20496-8_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-20495-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-20496-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)