Cognitive Innovation, Cumulative Cultural Evolution, and Enculturation

Abstract

Cognitive innovation has shaped and transformed our cognitive capacities throughout history. Until recently, cognitive innovation has not received much attention by empirical and conceptual research in the cognitive sciences. This paper is a first attempt to help close this gap. It will be argued that cognitive innovation is best understood in connection with cumulative cultural evolution and enculturation. Cumulative cultural evolution plays a vital role for the inter-generational transmission of the products of cognitive innovation. Furthermore, there are at least two important functions of enculturation for cognitive innovation. First, enculturation is responsible for the ontogenetic acquisition of cognitive practices governing the interaction with innovative products. Second, successful processes of enculturation provide opportunities for subsequent innovative processes. The trans-generational trajectory of calculation from mathematical symbol systems to the first digital computers will serve as a paradigm example of the delicate interplay of cognitive innovation, cumulative cultural evolution, and enculturation.

History of Memory Artifacts

“…So, once an artifact or representational system is developed, the next generation does not have to develop it again. Instead, that generation can improve it and pass the improvements on to the next generation (Fabry 2017;Madary 2022;Buskell 2022). Donald points out that "The memory repositories of culture allow our species to transmit across generations the codes, habits, institutional structures, and symbolic memory systems that are needed to operate a significant portion of the processes of modern cognition in human culture" (2010, p. 20).…”

The Tools of Enculturation

“…Each generation does not need to reinvent the wheel. Instead, gradual accumulations of incremental and small innovations and lucky advances can lead to composites that could not have been achieved by an individual within a single lifetime (Boyd, Richerson, & Henrich, 2011 ; Fabry, 2017 ; Henrich, 2016 ). Considering the challenges of spatial navigation, Hutchins ( 1995 ) points out that when agents tackle new challenges in their environment, they often do not start from scratch but rather build from the basis of the cultural knowledge and accumulated practices, strategies, and cognitive tools that they have.…”

“…This is an example of virtual collaboration in which cognitive potential is harnessed at a populational level. The basic problems have been tackled by a vast array of individuals across multiple generations, and this has reorganized the task space through the incremental creation and refinement of tools to help solve aspects of the task space (Hutchins, 1995 ; also see Boyd et al., 2011 ; Fabry, 2017 ; Gillett, 2018 ; Henrich, 2016 ; Sterelny, 2003 ; Tomasello, 1999 ). Hutchins identifies three main features of the cultural niche of navigation in the Western tradition: the increasing use of physical artifacts, digital measurement, and the importance of maps as the central cognitive tool (1995, pp.…”

Enhancing thoughts: Culture, technology, and the evolution of human cognitive uniqueness

“…These questions have not yet been cogently answered. While technology, RDM, and CL have been investigated individually, and while some connections between these three have been pointed out before (see, e.g., Tomasello, 1999; Sterelny, 2012; Heyes, 2018; Boyd & Richerson, 2005; Fabry, 2017; Clark, 1997; Schulz, 2018; Klein & Edgar, 2002; Legare, 2019; Tennie & Over, 2012; van Schaik & Pradhan, 2003; Fogarty & Creanza, 2017; Reindl, Bandini & Tennie, 2018; Muthukrishna & Henrich, 2016; Osiurak & Reynaud, 2019), there is a set of mutually reinforcing interactions among the three that has not yet been clearly documented. As I show what follows, laying out this set of mutually reinforcing interactions is key for getting at cogent answers to each of the above three questions.…”

“…In some cases, the use of these concepts themselves is underwritten by the use of technology. For an obvious example, much of science (in a broad sense) is and has been conducted with the aid of written symbols—including (especially) mathematical ones—and computational devices (Fabry, 2017; Hutto & Myin, 2012; Menary, 2007). However, many other examples can be cited as well, from making representationally difficult investment decisions (Benbasat & Dexter, 1982; Todd & Benbasat, 1992) (including in Babylonian times—Sugden, 1981) to determining where a ship is located (Pacey, 1992).…”