Is Music an Evolutionary Adaptation?

Abstract

In contemplating the function and origin of music, a number of scholars have considered whether music might be an evolutionary adaptation. This article reviews the basic arguments related to evolutionary claims for music. Although evolutionary theories about music remain wholly speculative, musical behaviors satisfy a number of basic conditions, which suggests that there is indeed merit in pursuing possible evolutionary accounts. KEYWORDS: Evolutionary theories of music; Music industry; Evolutionary origin of language; Music and social bonding; Oxytocin; Mood regulationAddressing the question of music's origins has a long history and is patently speculative. Although several cultures have provided colorful stories describing how people acquired the capacity for music, most contemporary scholars have focused on possible psychological, social, and cultural beginnings. In this article, I propose to offer a social account of music's origins that is explicitly linked to one of the most successful theories yet devised: the theory of evolution by natural selection.Evolution is often thought of in purely physiological rather than psychological terms. 1-5 It is not simply that evolution has shaped immune systems, digestive tracts, and knee caps. Evolution has also shaped our attitudes, dispositions, emotions, perceptions, and cognitive functions. Some of our deepest convictions can be traced to plausible evolutionary origins: we love life, we fear death, and we nurture our children because these dispositions better ensure the propagation of our genes.The theory of evolution by natural selection is a distal theory. It is not a theory that explains specific behaviors, such as why you chose to cook ravioli for dinner last night, or why you parked in a particular parking spot this morning. Similarly, if music is an evolutionary adaptation, this will not allow us to account for particular musical acts, such as Mendelssohn's writing of the Scottish Symphony. Evolution proceeds by selecting traits that are adaptive to an organism's environment. For example, evolution did not "originate" or "create" the phenomenon of altruism. Instead, given a certain environment, natural selection favored individuals who exhibited certain altruistic traits. Evolution does not dictate our behavior: it selects which behaviors are likely to be passed on to subsequent generations-and it selects only those behaviors that have a genetic component. So in discussing possible evolutionary origins for musical behaviors, the question is not, What caused people to make music? but rather, How might music-making behaviors have escaped the hatchet of natural selection? or more precisely, What advantage is conferred on those individuals who exhibit musical behaviors over those who do not?

The capacity for music: What is it, and what’s special about it?

“…To be sure, what one finds easy to imagine is not always correct, and there is considerable dispute in the literature about the existence and richness of a narrow language capacity and the succession of events behind its evolution (compare Hauser, Chomsky, & Fitch, 2002with Pinker & Jackendoff, 2005; for example). But whatever one may imagine about language, by comparison we find far less compelling the imaginable pressures that would favor the evolution of a narrow musical capacity (not that the literature lacks hypotheses, e.g., Cross, 2003;Huron, 2003; many papers in Wallin, Merker, & Brown, 2000). All else being equal, it is desirable, because it assumes less, to explain as much of the musical capacity as possible in terms of broader capacities, i.e., to treat the music capacity as an only slightly elaborated ''spandrel'' in the sense of Gould and Lewontin (1979).…”

The biology and evolution of music: A comparative perspective

“…The situation was precisely summarized by Darwin, who concludes: ''As neither the enjoyment nor the capacity of producing musical notes are faculties of the least use to man in reference to his daily habits of life, they must be ranked amongst the most mysterious with which he is endowed'' (Darwin, 1871). Some commentators see this question as being central to the biology and evolution of language (Balter, 2004;Huron, 2001), and since Darwin posed the question, few stones have been left unturned as to potential functions of music. This older literature is reviewed by (Révész, 1941;Roederer, 1984), and a brief synopsis given in English by (Kunst, 1959).…”

“…The strongest arguments against the cheesecake hypothesis are its age (at least 40,000 years) and the sheer quantity of musical behaviour that humans produce (Huron, 2001). Unlike cheesecake, music and dance are found in all cultures, and have been for many thousands of years.…”

“…Because the question ''is music an adaptation?'' is unlikely to receive satisfactory empirical answers, I suggest that the nascent field of biomusicology should not be sidetracked by taking this as its primary research question (e.g., Balter, 2004;Huron, 2001;Roederer, 1984). The field is more likely to make progress by focusing on the many open and empirically resolvable issues than if researchers interested in the biology and evolution of music allow themselves to be preoccupied with questions about past adaptive function.…”

Without it no music: cognition, biology and evolution of musicality

“…528-529]. These words, including the reference to music as 'auditory cheesecake'-a mere pleasure-producing substance-revitalized interest in the origins of music and its relevance for the biological and cognitive sciences [7][8][9][10][11].…”