Human evolution selected for learnability and behavioral malleability, not fixedness
Evidence
The rapid pace of social change causes even thornier problems for the biologically deterministic view. People have changed little genetically over the past millennium, but they have changed markedly in their beliefs, mores, social and occupational roles, cohabitating arrangements, family practices, and styles of behavior even within the past decades through rapid cultural and technological evolution. Dobzhansky (1972) has argued eloquently over the years that humans are a generalist species that was selected for learnability and malleability of behavior, not for behavioral fixedness. — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 178
Categorization
Category: Contrarian or Surprising Claims
- XREF: Connects to the Nature vs Nurture debates in existentialist and pragmatist thought; also echoes the malleability assumptions underlying dramatic social change in recent centuries.
Related
- Humans were selected for behavioral malleability, not fixedness (similarity 0.94)
- Human malleability itself depends on evolved neurobiological structures (similarity 0.82)
- Views of human nature as fixed versus malleable map onto conservative versus progressive policy (similarity 0.81)
- Human diversity of societies proves culture is not tightly biologically fixed (similarity 0.79)
- Conformist bias evolution requires less environmental stability than social learning evolution itself. (similarity 0.79)
- Culture is not tightly constrained by genetic nature. (similarity 0.79)
- Humans now create biological natures directly instead of waiting on natural evolution. (similarity 0.78)