Nature vs. nurture? Both are important, anthropologist argues


Share post:

Evolutionary science stresses the contributions biology makes to our behavior. Some anthropologists try to understand how societies and histories construct our identities, and others ask about how genes and the environment do the same thing. Which is the better approach? Both are needed, argues Agustin Fuentes, University of Notre Dame biological anthropologist.

Nature vs. nurture? Both are important, anthropologist argues

“Seeing bodies and evolutionary histories as things that can be measured separate from the human cultural experience is a poor approach and bad science,” Fuentes said. “Seeing cultural perceptions and the human experience as unconnected to biology and evolutionary history is equally misguided. Data from a vast array of sources tell us that we need an integrative approach to best understand what it means to become and be human.”

In a forthcoming paper in the journal Current Anthropology, Fuentes builds on the extended evolutionary synthesis of biologist Kevin Laland of the University of St. Andrews and colleagues.

“The extended evolutionary synthesis is basically an update of what we know about how evolution works,” Fuentes said. “Most people think ‘survival of the fittest’ is all that happens in evolution and that DNA and genes are all that really matters. Both counts are wrong. Evolution is an awesome mix of bodies, ecologies, behaviors, chemistry and history. We know more about how life works, and the range of systems that impact it, than ever before. Organisms are constructed in development, not simply ‘programmed’ to develop by genes. Things don’t ‘evolve’ to fit into environments. They co-construct and co-evolve with their environments.”

Fuentes argues in the paper that anthropologists can, and should, combine evolutionary science, cultural analysis and ethnographic research.

“In the extended evolutionary synthesis, what we think, feel and do can be as relevant as our DNA, the shape of our bones and the density of muscles … Many of those things are connected,” he said. “This makes evolution approaches to why humans do what they do more exciting and more accessible to a wide range of researchers, but it also makes our jobs a lot harder.

“We need more collaboration across areas in anthropology, more interaction with those outside anthropology and the development of more complex, but much better, answers about being human.”

Author: William G. Gilroy | Source: University of Notre Dame [May 19, 2016]



Related articles

A galaxy blooming with new stars

The VLT Survey Telescope (VST) has captured the beauty of the nearby spiral galaxy NGC 253. The new...

90 million year old tooth unearthed in Japan may provide clues on mammal evolution in Asia

A fossilized tooth of an extinct mammal thought to be a close relative of marsupials has been unearthed...

Researchers home in on roots of Caribbean populations using new DNA analysis method

Those of us who want to learn about our ancestors—who they were, where they came from and how...

A global approach to monitoring biodiversity loss

In contrast to climate change, there is no coordinated global system in place for measuring and reporting on...

Archaeologists in Alaska find 11,500-year-old grave with cremated child

An archaeological dig in Alaska has uncovered the oldest human remains ever found in Arctic or Subarctic...

Epilepsy blamed for Chopin's dark hallucinations

The prolific musician and composer Frederic Chopin was a giant of the Romantic Era, known for writing passionate...

Earthquake damaged Kos sites and monuments, archaeological service reports

There has been damage to monuments and archaeological sites on Kos as a result of the strong earthquake...

Planets in the habitable zone around most stars, calculate researchers

Astronomers have discovered thousands of exoplanets in our galaxy, the Milky Way, using the Kepler satellite and many...