Cultural evolution can create selection pressures stronger than natural ones

Evidence

Not only has culture driven specific genes to high frequency in some populations in the last ten millennia, but in fact, sometimes cultural evolution can create selection pressures more powerful than seen elsewhere in nature. Sometimes, culture catalyzes and drives more rapid genetic evolution. — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success, 282

The point of this example is this: cultural evolution can shape our environments, and consequently, it can drive genetic evolution. In cases of recent culture-gene coevolution, in which the relevant genes have not spread to replace all or most competing genetic variants, we can isolate the causes and effects and sometimes even finger the specific genes being favored. This is important because some researchers have argued that culture could never be strong enough for long enough to drive genetic evolution. Recently, however, new mathematical models and mounting evidence from the human genome provide a clear, if only preliminary, answer. Not only has culture driven specific genes to high frequency in some populations in the last ten millennia, but in fact, sometimes cultural evolution can create selection pressures more powerful than seen elsewhere in nature. Sometimes, culture catalyzes and drives more rapid genetic evolution. — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success, 283

Culture can exert a powerful force on genes, driving genetic evolution. Gene-culture packages emerge and spread rapidly, as with milk-drinking, blue eyes, and booze avoidance. … In fact, the selection pressures created by culture can be among the most powerful observed in nature, and broad genetic sweeps can occur in tens of thousands of years. Culture-gene coevolution can be remarkably fast. … Once cultural evolution creates the selection pressures, natural selection often manages to find and favor several different genetic variants to address the challenge. … However, sometimes cultural evolution can sap the strength of selection, as we saw for populations who rapidly developed cheese-and yogurt-making technology. — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success, 303

Categorization

• XREF: Directly opposed to the common-genetic-drift framing in Steven Pinker and classical population-genetics accounts; useful to hold against ‘gene-culture coevolution is negligible’ skepticism elsewhere in this book’s own review literature. — connects to: Light-colored eyes exist only because agriculture created selection for pale skin — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 281; US policy promoted milk to people who could not digest it from 1946 onward — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 300; The onset date of rice agriculture predicts half the ADH1B gene variation — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 288 (+26 more)
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 282; Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 283; Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 303
• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source

Broader Connections

• Cultural evolution has been the central driver of human genetic evolution for eons. #expands (0.80) — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success, 1015
• The boundary between biological and cultural evolution is dissolving #expands (0.75) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 493
• Sexual selection can be far stronger than natural selection and drives weapon extremes #corroborates (0.75) — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 177
• Sexual selection is uniquely directional because the social environment itself evolves with the weapons #corroborates (0.72)
• Cultural evolution can lock groups into maladaptive equilibria, not just prosocial ones #qualifies (0.70)