Vertical transmission takes place between related individuals (e.g., parent–offspring). TransmissionĬavalli-Sforza and Feldman ( 1981) distinguish vertical from oblique and horizontal transmission of cultural traits.
A functional variant may nevertheless fail to be transmitted because human designers lack clairvoyance (Mesoudi et al. Boyd and Richerson ( 1985) refer to this as guided variation. This individual “teleology” assures that variants are functional.
Cultural transmission is not exact copying but imitation in combination with human goals. Producers do not reproduce artifacts faithfully or vary them blindly. VariationĬultural variation is neither blind (mutation) nor clairvoyant. Dissimilarities concern variation, transmission, and selection. Conceptual FrameworkĪrtifact production is analogous to development (ontogeny), and artifact history is analogous to natural history (evolution). At the outset, however, a conceptual framework is needed. In the end, part I illustrates why each of Behe’s conclusions is false and part II, why the pros and cons of material culture evolution can, nevertheless, be freely discussed without feeling pressed to either side by creationist claims. Here, mouse traps can cover the middle ground between artifacts that are made of only one part (e.g., stone tools) and highly sophisticated machines with a large number of parts (e.g., steam engines, cars, and computers), and they can bridge the time from the Bronze Age to the present.
Giant mouse trap street full#
This discussion is currently in full swing concerning evolutionary archeology (e.g., O’Brien and Lyman 2004 Gabora 2006). Part II ( Material Culture Evolution) lays the groundwork for a case study in material culture change. (3) All prerequisites for evolution occur in mouse trap populations. (2) Mouse trap history is continuous and very old. Part I ( Refuting Behe’s Triple-Jump Conclusions) of this contribution proves Behe’s conclusions wrong each step: (1) The seminal precursor of current flat snap traps had one part less.
This anti-Darwinian challenge makes a closer look at mouse trap history particularly pertinent to the study of material culture. From this simple fact, called irreducible complexity, Behe drew a triple-jump conclusion: (1) irreducibly complex systems can have no working precursor with one part less (2) therefore, they can have no continuous history (3) therefore, they cannot evolve. These traps cannot catch mice with any one part missing. This ignorance allowed Michael Behe ( 1996) to claim the ubiquitous flat snap trap as an example for a system that ostensibly cannot have evolved. Mouse trap history is not (yet) an established subject of research in the history of material culture. Three important conclusions can be drawn: (1) reticulate phylogenies of artifact systems may be resolvable as overlapping, but branching, phylogenies of parts (2) homologous ideas may be realized by analogous material, that is, phylogenies of information do not necessarily coincide with those of material parts (3) recombination of parts between different artifact systems increases the cumulative nature of cultural evolution. An evolutionary account of mouse trap history also has academic merits beyond its educational value. There is no, in principle, impossibility for mouse traps to evolve. Hence, Behe’s triple-jump conclusion about mouse traps is false each step. Thirdly, all prerequisites for evolution (variation, transmission, and selection) abound in mouse trap populations. Secondly, historical records that reach back into the Bronze Age suggest that its history continued for a very long time. The patented and seminal precursor of current flat snap traps, however, had one part less, because spring and striker were formed of one wire. Michael Behe argued that mouse traps cannot trap mice with any part missing therefore, they cannot have a precursor with one part less, therefore, cannot have a continuous history, and therefore, cannot have evolved. On the other hand, a case study of mouse trap history may contribute insights to the academic discussion about material culture evolution. On the one hand, debunking ID claims about mouse traps and, by implication, also about other irreducibly complex systems has a high educational value. Since intelligent design (ID) advocates claimed the ubiquitous mouse trap as an example of systems that cannot have evolved, mouse trap history is doubly relevant to studying material culture.
0 kommentar(er)
