Human cultural adaptability helped our species get through several extreme environmental crises during the 200,000 year history of Homo sapiens. Richerson, Boyd and Henrich (2010) argue that this adaptability is a product of gene-culture coevolution. Much has been written about cultural evolution, but relatively little attention has been paid to the role human neurobiology plays in this process. I argue here that neuroscience can make important contributions to understanding human behavior within highly evolved social systems. This can help inform us as to how a transition to sustainability might be possible as we struggle to make it through the population, climate change, and resource bottlenecks of the 21st century. I argue further than the idea of homeostasis can serve as an organizing principle to understand individual, social and ecological sustainability.Creation-Date: 2010-11

John M. Gowdy

English

Research Papers in Economics

Rensselaer 
Working Papers in Economics 
Department of Economics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 110 8th Street, Troy, NY, 12180, USA. Tel: +1- 
518-276-6387; Fax: +1-518-276-2235; URL: http://www.rpi.edu/dept/economics/; E-Mail: heimj@rpi.edu 
 
 
 
NEUROSCIENCE CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND 
SOCIAL TRANSITIONS 
 
 
 
 
John Gowdy 
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Number 1009 
 
December 2010 Neuroscience Can Help Us Understand Social Transitions 
 
Abstract: Human cultural adaptability helped our species get through several extreme 
environmental crises during the 200,000 year history of Homo sapiens. Richerson, Boyd and 
Henrich (2010) argue that this adaptability is a product of gene-culture coevolution. Much has 
been written about cultural evolution, but relatively little attention has been paid to the role 
human neurobiology plays in this process. I argue here that neuroscience can make important 
contributions to understanding human behavior within highly evolved social systems. This can 
help inform us as to how a transition to sustainability might be possible as we struggle to make it 
through the population, climate change, and resource bottlenecks of the 21
st century. I argue 
further than the idea of homeostasis can serve as an organizing principle to understand 
individual, social and ecological sustainability. 
 
Introduction 
  A growing body of evidence indicates that the human species is unique among 
mammals in its degree of sociality (Henrich et al. 2004, Wilson 2007).  Evidence suggests that 
cultural adaptation gave humans a unique advantage in managing transitions during past rapid 
environmental changes. The ability to adapt customs and technology to changing conditions 
allowed humans to more quickly adapt to a changing food resource base compared to other 
animals that depended on more purely genetic adaptation. For example, Richerson and Boyd 
(2005) argue that culture and complex brains were an evolutionary advantage for humans during 
the extreme climate volatility of past ice age transitions. The ability to use culture as an adaption 
mechanism creates another source of variety—in addition to genes—upon which natural 
selection can work. The ability of humans to adapt culturally-conditioned behavior to changing 
conditions is perhaps the critical factor in successfully managing social transitions.  Far from 
leading to genetic determinism, modern evolutionary theory has shown that human behavior is a 
combination of genetic, developmental and cultural factors. Neither of these can be understood 
in isolation. Neuroscience can help us understand these links and this understanding can give 
insights into behavioral adjustments and policy formulation to manage societal transitions.   Neuroscience has Confirmed the Existence of the Social Brain   
Many mammals are highly social animals with a variety of behavioral attributes that 
evolved to facilitate social interaction, but humans seem to be unique in their degree of 
sociability. Two features of the human brain are particularly important to human sociality and to 
gene-culture coevolution: brain plasticity and the existence of Von Economo neurons. 
One of the most remarkable findings from neuroscience is that most of the neurons in the 
human brain develop after birth and the way they are configured depends critically on how a 
child is socialized. It is another way that variability can be introduced into evolutionary mix. 
Wexler (2006, 3) writes about the evolutionary advantages of brain plasticity: 
There is an evolutionary advantage for life forms that reproduce sexually because mixing 
of genetic material from parents produces variety in their offspring. Thus, different 
individuals have different characteristics, which increases the likelihood that some 
members of the group will be able to function and reproduce even when the environment 
in which the group lives changes. In an analogous manner, the distinctive postnatal shaping 
of each individual’s brain function through interaction with other people, and through his 
or her own mix of sensory inputs, creates an endless variety of individuals with different 
functional characteristics. This broadens the range of adaptive and problem-solving 
capabilities well beyond the variability achieved by sexual reproduction.   
 
A related insight is also important for successful societal transitions. Humans alter the 
environment that shapes culture and brain development to an unprecedented degree.  
These human alterations in the shared social environment include physical structures, laws 
and other codes of behavior, food and clothes, spoken and written language, and music and 
other arts…It is this ability to shape the environment that in turn shapes our brains that has 
allowed human adaptability and capability to develop at a much faster rate than is possible 
through alteration of the genetic code itself. (Wexler 2006, 3) 
 
Evolutionary biologists call this niche construction (Laland, Odling-Smee and Myles 
2010). Most of the world’s population (although certainly not all) live in a material environment 
almost entirely created by humans. Very little of our well-being comes directly from the natural 
world (although ultimately, of course, it all does). We have also adapted technologically, 
socially, and perhaps even neurologically in ways that shield us from the negative effects of our activities on the earth’s life support systems. This is called counteractive niche construction 
(Laland, Odling-Smee and Myles 2010).  The ability of humans to buffer themselves from past 
negative environmental change makes it difficult to get public support for policies to prevent 
climate change and biodiversity loss. For most people rapid environmental change is something 
in the distant future affecting people in distant lands, not them. But the good news is that humans 
have an unrivaled ability to adapt to new situations and meet new challenges. The importance of 
post-natal brain development in humans means that we have the innate ability to change our 
attitudes and ways of living both to reduce our pressure on the environment and to adapt to the 
inevitable changes we have set in motion.  
Another remarkable finding from neuroscience is the presence in the human brain of Von 
Economo or spindle neurons that apparently evolved to enable people to make rapid decisions in 
social context. Sherwood, Subiaul, and Zadwidski 2008, 433) write: 
Based on the location, neurochemistry, and morphological characteristics of Von Economo 
neurons, it has been hypothesized that they transmit rapid outputs to subcortical regions 
(Allman et al. 2005). It is interesting that these specialized projection neuron types have 
been identified in cortical areas that are positioned at the interface between emotional and 
cognitive processing. Given their characteristics, it has been speculated that Von Economo 
neutrons are designed for quick signaling of an appropriate response in the context of 
social ambiguity (Allman et al. 2005). Enhancements of this ability would be particularly 
important in the context of fission-fusion communities, such as those of panids and 
possibly the LCA [last common ancestor], with complex networks of social interactions 
and potential uncertainties at reunions. 
 
Allman et al. (2005, 370) argue that these neurons help humans to adjust quickly to rapidly 
changing social situations: 
We hypothesize that the VENs and associated circuitry enable us to reduce complex social 
and cultural dimensions of decision-making into a single dimension that facilitates the 
rapid execution of decisions. Other animals are not encumbered by such elaborate social 
and cultural contingencies to their decision-making and thus do not require such a system 
for rapid intuitive choice.  
 Von Economo neurons are also found (in much smaller numbers) in great apes and whales and 
dolphins, other highly intelligent species with complex social systems. In humans, most of these 
neurons are formed after birth, again pointing to the blurred line between heredity and 
socialization. Again, the latest neurological evidence suggests that human behavior is uniquely 
social. Understanding the social nature of decision making (the importance of reference groups, 
for example) is critical both to formulating successful social and environmental policies and to 
gaining public acceptance of these policies.  
Neuroscience has Identified the Importance of Homeostasis in Brain Structure and 
Function and this may be a Key to Understanding Sustainability   
Homeostasis is an important feature of living organisms as well as living systems. It is 
the ability (or even the goal) of living systems to maintain balance through a complex, highly 
evolved system of interacting processes. It can be used as a conceptual framework to link 
individual behavior, social stability and ecosystem resilience. 
Homeostatis and the individual - One of the most interesting things about how the brain works is 
how it is intricately structured (physically, chemically, neurologically) to keep living organisms 
in physical and emotional balance. Traditionally, economists have seen behavior in terms of 
“satisfying preferences.” People know what they want and rationally choose the things that will 
best satisfy these wants. A more accurate way to look at “wants” is to view them as one of 
several mechanisms to maintain homeostasis in the human mind and body.  Camerer, 
Lowenstein and Prelec (2005, 27) write:  
As economists, we are used to thinking of preferences as the starting point for human 
behavior and behavior as the ending point. A neuroscience perspective, in contrast, views 
explicit behavior as only one of many mechanisms that the brain uses to maintain 
homeostasis, and preferences as transient state variables that ensure survival and 
reproduction. The traditional economic account of behavior, which assumes that humans 
act so as to maximally satisfy their preferences, starts in the middle (or perhaps even toward the end) of the neuroscience account. Rather than viewing pleasure as the goal of 
human behavior, a more realistic account would view pleasure as a homeostatic cue-an 
informational signal. 
 
“Consumption” for example, is one of many kinds of behavior that may move an individual 
toward, or away from, emotional balance. It is a response to social and neurological signals, not 
an end in itself.   
Homeostasis in human societies - It can be argued that a sustainable human society is also 
characterized by homeostasis. Viability was the term Georgescu used for a sustainable economy. 
An economy was viable if (1) it uses technologies that do not draw down irreplaceable stocks, 
and (2) it does not impair the ability of fund factors (labor, capital, and land) to maintain 
themselves through time. Human labor power, for example, must be maintained through 
adequate nutrition, support of family and friends and other healthy social relationships.  
Homeostasis and ecosystems - Homeostasis is related to the concept of “resilience” in 
ecosystems (Hollings 1973). Maintaining diversity and evolutionary potential is essential to 
preserving ecosystem integrity. The unsustainability of the current path of ecosystem use by 
humans is apparent from the catastrophic loss of biodiversity and the destabilization of the 
earth’s climate regime—both a direct result of pursuing one goal, namely, exponential economic 
growth. 
   These hierarchies of homeostasis--individual, social and ecosystem—are closely 
intertwined. Identifying feedback mechanisms leading to, or away from, homeostasis (balance) 
within and among these three hierarchies is a rich research area for understanding the transition 
to a sustainable society. The evolutionary context of homeostasis is critical. Evolutionary 
processes often result in traits that are maladaptive when conditions change. For example, 
nutritional adaptations such as a craving for fat and sugar among hunters and gatherers were once adaptive but are now mismatched to current sedentary societies. Cultural traits that for a 
time worked to create prosperous, unified societies sometimes led to disastrous long-term 
consequences as in the Maoi (human statue) cult of Easter Islanders.  But cultural evolution, like 
biological evolution, is also subject to the problem of “mismatch.” Traits that were successful 
under one set of environmental circumstances may prove to be maladaptive as conditions 
change.  
Conclusion 
Neuroscience has confirmed the fact that human behavior is a complex outcome of the 
interactions between “nature” and “nurture”. There is no hard and fast separation between the 
two. Behavior and the neurological structure of the brain have co-evolved over eons to solve 
some basic survival problems. Generalized Darwinian selection (Hodgson 2010) of cultural 
behavioral traits gave humans an evolutionary advantage over other species in the fact of rapid 
environmental change. Our understanding how cultural traits are generated, propagated, and 
selected can be greatly enhanced by current advances in neuroscience. This understanding may 
be crucial in surviving the inevitable rapid environmental and cultural changes of this century. 
 
The author would like to thank George Kallis, Pete Richerson, Jeroen van den Bergh, and Bruce 
Wexler for comments on an earlier draft. 
 
References 
Allman, J., T. McLaughlin, A. Hakeem. 2005. Intuition and autism: a possible role for Von 
Economo neurons. Trends in Cognitive Science 9, 367-373. 
 
Camerer, C., G. Loewenstein, D. Prelec. 2005. Neuroeconomics: How Neuroscience can Inform 
Economics. Journal of Economic Literature XLIII, 9-64.  
 Geogescu-Roegen, N. 1965. The institutional aspects of peasant communities. In Energy and 
Economic Myths, Pergamon Press, San Francisco: 199-231. 
 
Gowdy, J. 2005. “Toward a New Welfare Foundation for Sustainability” Ecological Economics 
53, 211-222. 
Henrich, J., R. Boyd, S. Bowles, C. Camerer, E. Fehr, H. Gintis. 2004. Foundations of Human 
Sociality. New York: Oxford. 
Hodgson, G., T. Knudsen. 2010. Darwin’s Conjecture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 
Hollings, E. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and 
Systematics 4 , 1-23. 
Laland, K., J. Odling-Smee, and S. Myles. 2010. How culture shaped the human genome: 
bringing genetics and the human sciences together. Nature Reviews/Genetics 11, 137-148. 
Richerson, P. and R. Boyd. 2005. Not by Genes Alone. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 
 
Richerson, P., R. Boyd, and J. Henrich. 2010. Gene-culture coevolution in the age of genomics. 
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 107, 8985-8992. Supporting information at 
10.1073/pnas.0914631107. 
 
Sherwood, C., F. Subiaul and T. Zadiszki 2008. A natural history of the human mind: tracing 
evolutionary changes in brain and cognition. Journal of Anatomy 212, 426-454. 
 
Wexler, B. E. 2006. Brain and Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 
 
Wilson, D. S. 2007. Evolution for Everyone. New York: Random House. 
 
 
 
 

A natural history of the human mind: tracing evolutionary changes in brain and cognition.

Brain and Culture.

Darwin’s Conjecture.

Evolution for Everyone.

Foundations of Human Sociality.

Gene-culture coevolution in the age of genomics.

How culture shaped the human genome: bringing genetics and the human sciences together.

Neuroscience Can Help Us Understand Social Transitions

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics