Scholarlink

<p>We counter two broad claims offered by Lala and Feldman (L&amp;F) in support of what they call <i>Contemporary Gene-Culture Coevolution</i> (CGCC): (1) <i>Cultural transmission pathways confound and inflate heritability estimates for a range of traits</i>: This is tackled via a meta-analysis of behavior-genetic studies that estimate vertical cultural transmission effects on trait variance for a wide variety of phenotypes. We find that this pathway plays only a very small role (relative to genetic effects) in conditioning phenotypic variance. (2) <i>GCC only works narrowly on functionally well-circumscribed genes; in the case of&#xa0;complex polygenic traits drift mechanics&#xa0;prevent the emergence of population differences as there is an extremely low probability of coherence involving drift direction across many genes favoring&#xa0;(in terms of associated trait means) one population over another; purely cultural forms of evolution are therefore sufficient to account for cross-cultural variability in the means of certain traits</i>: We conduct a cross-cultural sociogenetic analysis of the causes of variation in life history characteristics and find indications that culture-gene coevolution (but not purely cultural evolution) best describes the distribution of these traits. Drift is also ruled out as a cause of the underlying genetic variegation among our units of analysis. Multiple other contrary lines of evidence are also reviewed in light of the <i>biocultural dynamics</i> research program, which we posit as an alternative to CGCC. We also highlight meta-political activism latent in L&amp;F’s selection and interpretation of evidence, concluding that this risks anti-scientific censorship and fails to address the political issues that concern them.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Obsolete Science and Egalitarian Meta-political Activism in Contemporary Gene-Culture Coevolution: A Response to Lala and Feldman (2024)

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月15日

查看全文
  • Aurelio José Figueredo,
  • Mateo Peñaherrera-Aguirre,
  • Michael A. Woodley of Menie

摘要

We counter two broad claims offered by Lala and Feldman (L&F) in support of what they call Contemporary Gene-Culture Coevolution (CGCC): (1) Cultural transmission pathways confound and inflate heritability estimates for a range of traits: This is tackled via a meta-analysis of behavior-genetic studies that estimate vertical cultural transmission effects on trait variance for a wide variety of phenotypes. We find that this pathway plays only a very small role (relative to genetic effects) in conditioning phenotypic variance. (2) GCC only works narrowly on functionally well-circumscribed genes; in the case of complex polygenic traits drift mechanics prevent the emergence of population differences as there is an extremely low probability of coherence involving drift direction across many genes favoring (in terms of associated trait means) one population over another; purely cultural forms of evolution are therefore sufficient to account for cross-cultural variability in the means of certain traits: We conduct a cross-cultural sociogenetic analysis of the causes of variation in life history characteristics and find indications that culture-gene coevolution (but not purely cultural evolution) best describes the distribution of these traits. Drift is also ruled out as a cause of the underlying genetic variegation among our units of analysis. Multiple other contrary lines of evidence are also reviewed in light of the biocultural dynamics research program, which we posit as an alternative to CGCC. We also highlight meta-political activism latent in L&F’s selection and interpretation of evidence, concluding that this risks anti-scientific censorship and fails to address the political issues that concern them.