Correspondence

Nature 459, 506 (28 May 2009) | doi:10.1038/459506a; Published online 27 May 2009

Cognition: evolution does help to explain how minds work

Lewis Wolpert1

  1. Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
    Email: l.wolpert@ucl.ac.uk

Sir

In their Essay 'Can evolution explain how minds work?' (Nature 458, 832–833; 2009), Johan Bolhuis and Clive Wynne use Darwin's claim that there is “no fundamental difference between man and the higher mammals in their mental faculties” to explain how people have gone down the wrong path in studying cognition. But in homing in on examples of convergent evolution, in which humans and some distantly related species such as songbirds seem to have come up with similar solutions to the same problem, Bolhuis and Wynne neglect one key feature that distinguishes humans from all other animals.

The feature that is peculiar to humans is their understanding about the causal interactions between physical objects (see, for example, L. Wolpert Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast; Faber, 2006). For example, children realize from an early age that one moving object can make another move on impact. It is this primitive concept of mechanics that is a crucial feature of causal belief, and that conferred an advantage in tool-making and the use of tools — which, in turn, drove human evolution.

Animals, by contrast, have very limited causal beliefs, although they can learn to carry out complex tasks. According to Michael Tomasello (The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition; Harvard Univ. Press, 1999), only human primates understand the causal and intentional relations that hold among external entities. Tomasello illustrates this point for non-human primates with the claim that even though they might watch the wind shaking a branch until its fruit falls, they would never shake the branch themselves to obtain the fruit. Some primates are, nevertheless, at the edge of having causal understanding.

Once causal belief evolved in relation to tools and language, it was inevitable that people would want to understand the causes of all the events that might affect their lives — such as illness, changes in climate and death itself. Once there was a concept of cause and effect, ignorance was no longer bliss, and this could have led to the development of religious beliefs.

See also:
Cognition: theories of mind in animals and humans


Readers' Comments

If you find something abusive or inappropriate or which does not otherwise comply with our Terms and Conditions or Community Guidelines, please select the relevant 'Report this comment' link.

There are currently no comments.

Add your own comment

This is a public forum. Please keep to our Community Guidelines. You can be controversial, but please don't get personal or offensive and do keep it brief. Remember our threads are for feedback and discussion - not for publishing papers, press releases or advertisements.

You need to be registered with Nature and agree to our Community Guidelines to leave a comment. Please log in or register as a new user. You will be re-directed back to this page.