Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- Evolutionary Ethics and Contemporary Biology
- Introduction
- PART I THE LIMITS OF EVOLUTIONARY EXPLANATIONS AND JUSTIFICATIONS OF ETHICS
- PART II METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES CONCERNING EVOLUTIONARY ACCOUNTS OF ETHICS
- 3 Are Human Beings Part of the Rest of Nature?
- 4 The Nature of Resemblance: Homologues in the Nervous System and Behavioral Correspondence
- PART III HOW BIOLOGICAL RESULTS CAN HELP EXPLAIN MORALLY RELEVANT HUMAN CAPACITIES
- PART IV HOW BIOLOGICAL RESULTS CAN HELP EXPLAIN MORAL SYSTEMS
- Index
- Cambridge Cultural Social Studies
- References
4 - The Nature of Resemblance: Homologues in the Nervous System and Behavioral Correspondence
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 July 2009
By
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- Evolutionary Ethics and Contemporary Biology
- Introduction
- PART I THE LIMITS OF EVOLUTIONARY EXPLANATIONS AND JUSTIFICATIONS OF ETHICS
- PART II METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES CONCERNING EVOLUTIONARY ACCOUNTS OF ETHICS
- 3 Are Human Beings Part of the Rest of Nature?
- 4 The Nature of Resemblance: Homologues in the Nervous System and Behavioral Correspondence
- PART III HOW BIOLOGICAL RESULTS CAN HELP EXPLAIN MORALLY RELEVANT HUMAN CAPACITIES
- PART IV HOW BIOLOGICAL RESULTS CAN HELP EXPLAIN MORAL SYSTEMS
- Index
- Cambridge Cultural Social Studies
- References
Summary
It would be very difficult for any one with even much more knowledge than I possess, to determine how far animals exhibit any traces of … high mental powers. This difficulty arises from the impossibility of judging what passes through the mind of an animal; and again, the fact that writers differ to a great extent in the meaning which they attribute to the above terms, causes a further difficulty.
Darwin 1871, p. 85INTRODUCTION
Morality is related variously to behavioral tendencies and cognitive capacities. In this chapter, I do not discuss what the forms and modes of these relations can be. Instead, I focus on the topic of the homologues in the nervous system and then consider whether and to what extent the capacities that are relevant for morality can be explained through biological comparisons. Nevertheless, the quest for the biological basis of behavior and cognition must rely on a sound comparative approach, satisfying Theodor Bullock's three Rs requirement (roots, rules, relevance; cf. Bullock 1983) for the study of cognition and highly integrated behavior. The satisfaction of this requirement, indeed, seems to be the only way to discern scientifically plausible biological hypotheses from merely intriguing scientifically sounding metaphors.
In what follows, I argue that any attempt to explain (human) ethics through considerations concerning animal behavior is hopeless, unless we manage to individuate strict homological correspondences among all the feasible generic analogies between human behavior and animal behavior.
This conclusion is reached through an argument that involves five theses.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Evolutionary Ethics and Contemporary Biology , pp. 56 - 74Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2006
References
1997. Developmental Genetics and Homology: A Hierarchical Approach. Trends Ecol. Evol. 12: 405–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and 2000. Mosaic Evolution of Brain Structure in Mammals. Nature 405: 1055–1058.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1882. On Numerical Variation in Teeth with a Discussion of the Conception of Homology. Proc. Zool. Soc. London: 102–115.Google Scholar
Bateson, W. 1884. Materials for Study of Variation. Reprint, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.
, and 2003. The Origin of the Human Nature: Evolutionary Developmental Psychology. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Bullock, T. H. 1983. Implications for Neuroethology from Comparative Neurophysiology. In Advances in Vertebrate Neuroethology, ed. , , and , 53–75. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1996. Comparative Vertebrate Neuroanatomy: Evolution and Adaptation. New York: Wiley-Liss.Google Scholar
, and 2000. Defining Sameness: Historical, Biological and Generative Homology. BioEssays 22: 846–853.3.0.CO;2-R>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2000. Cortical Organization in Insectivora: The Parallel Evolution of Sensory Cortex and the Brain. Brain Behavior and Evolution 55: 311–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J. 1992. Cognitive Adaptations for Social Exchange. In The Adapted Mind, ed. , , and , 163–228. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Deacon, T. W. 1995. On Telling Growth from Parcellation in Brain Evolution. In Behavioural Brain Research in Naturalistic and Seminaturalistic Settings: Possibilities and Perspectives, ed. , , , , and , 37–72. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997. The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
2000. Evolutionary Perspectives on Language and Brain Plasticity. J. Commun. Disord. 33: 273–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1987. Neural Darwinism: The Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
1993. Neural Darwinism: Selection and Reentrant Signaling in Higher Brain Function. Neuron 10: 115–125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2002. Intra- and Interspecific Variation in Primate Gene Expression Patterns. Science 296: 340–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fasolo, A., and Malacarne, G. 1988. Comparing the Structure of Brains: Implications for Behavioral Homologies. In Intelligence and Evolutionary Biology, ed. and , 119–142. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 2001. Developmental Structure in Brain Evolution. Behav. Brain. Sci. 24: 263–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1998. Of Mice and Genes: Evolution of Vertebrate Brain Development. Brain. Behav. Evol. 52(4–5): 207–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and 2001. Homologies of Process and Modular Elements of Embryonic Construction. J. Exp. Zool. 291(1): 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodwin, B. C. 1984. Changing from an Evolutionary to a Generative Paradigm. In Evolutionary Theory: Paths into the Future, ed. , 99–120. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
2002. The Structure of the Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
, and 1994. Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1999. Conserved Genetic Programs in Insect and Mammalian Brain Development. BioEssays 21: 677–684.3.0.CO;2-8>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodos, W. 1976. The Concept of Homology and the Evolution of Behavior. In Evolution, Brain and Behavior: Persistent Problems, ed. , , and , 153–167. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence A Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Houle, D. 2001. Characters as the Units of Evolutionary Change. In The Character Concept in Evolutionary Biology, ed. , 109–140. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1981. Prospects for Interspecific Comparison in Sociobiology. In Current Problems in Sociobiology, ed. King's College Sociobiology Group, Cambridge, 323–342. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jerison, H. J. 1991. Brain Size and the Evolution of Mind. The 59th James Arthur Lecture on the Evolution of the Human Brain. American Museum of Natural History, New York.
Kaas, J. H. 2000. Organizing Principles of Sensory Representations. In Evolutionary Developmental Biology of the Cerebral Cortex, ed. and . Novartis Foundation Symposium 228: 188–189. Chichester: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1992. Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
, and 1999. The Evolution of Neuronal Circuits Underlying Species-Specific Behavior. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 9(5): 628–633.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, J., and Kim, M. 2001. The Mathematical Structure of Characters and Modularity. In The Character Concept in Evolutionary Biology, ed. , 215–236. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1995. The Organization of Neocortex in Mammals: Are Species Differences Really So Different?Trends in Neuroscience 18: 408–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and 1999. Do Birds Possess Homologues of Mammalian Primary Visual Somatosensory and Motor Cortices?Trends in Neuroscience 23: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. Molecules, Developmental Modules, and Phenotypes: A Combinatorial Approach to Homology. Molec. Phylog. Evol. 3: 340–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, G. B., and Newman, S. A. 1999. Generation, Integration, Autonomy: Three Steps in the Evolution of Homology. In Homology, ed. and . Novartis Foundation Symposium 222: 65–79. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Nieuwenhuys, R. 1998. Comparative Neuroanatomy: Place, Principles and Program. In The Central Nervous System of Vertebrates, ed. , , and , 273–326. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1981. Evolution of the Telencephalon in Nonmammals. Ann. Rev. Neurosci. 4: 301–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1984. Evolution of the Vertebrate Central Nervous System: Patterns and Processes. Amer. Zool. 24: 701–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2001. Evolution of the Nervous System. Changing Views of Brain Evolution. Brain Research Bulletin 55: 663–674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and 1995. The Emergence and Evolution of Mammalian Neocortex. Trends in Neuroscience 18: 373–379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and 2002. Patterning Centers, Regulatory Genes and Extrinsic Mechanisms Controlling Arealization of the Neocortex. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 12: 14–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patterson, C. 1982. Morphological Characters and Homology. In Problems of Phylogenetic Reconstruction, ed. and , 21–74. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
, and 1995. Theory of Mind: Evolutionary History of a Cognitive Specialization. Trends in Neuroscience 18: 418–424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Preuss, T. M. 1995. The Argument from Animals to Humans in Cognitive Neuroscience. In The Cognitive Neurosciences, ed. , 1127–1241. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
, and 2002. Field Homology as a Way to Reconcile Genetic and Developmental Variability with Adult Homology. Brain Research Bulletin 57: 243–255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1994. Neural Activity and the Growth of the Brain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
, and 2001. Modularity in Vertebrate Brain Development and Evolution. BioEssays 23: 1100–1111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1995. The Evolution of Primate Intelligence. Harvard Brain, vol. 2. http://hcs.harvard.edu/~husn/BRAIN/vol2/Primate.html.Google Scholar
, , and 2002. Motor and Cognitive Functions of the Ventral Premotor Cortex. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 12: 149–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
. 2002. Functional Neuroanatomical Differences between Adults and School-Age Children in the Processing of Single Words. Science 296: 1476–1479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1998. Brain Mapping in Animals and Humans. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 8: 188–194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1998. Stepping into the Same River Twice: Homologues as Recurrent Attractors in Epigenetic Landscapes. Brain Behav. Evolution 38: 177–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002. Brain Homology and Function: An Uneasy Alliance. Brain Research Bulletin 57: 239–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tooby, J., and Cosmides, L. 1995. Mapping the Evolved Functional Organization of Brain and Mind. In The Cognitive Neurosciences, ed. , 1185–1198. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, G. P. 1994. Homology and the Mechanisms of Development. In Homology: The Hierarchical Basis of Comparative Biology, ed. , 274–301. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1996. Homologues, Natural Kinds and the Evolution of Modularity. Am. Zool. 36: 36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 1996. Complex Adaptations and the Evolution of Evolvability. Evolution 50: 967–976.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagner, G. P., Mezey, J., and Calabretta, R. 2005. Natural Selection and the Origin of Modules. In Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Complex Natural Systems, ed. and , 33–49. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wake, D. B. 1999. Homoplasy, Homology and the Problem of “Sameness” in Biology. In Homology, ed. and . Novartis Foundation Symposium 222: 24–46. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
1981. Phylogenetics: The Theory and Practice of Phylogenetic Systematics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
1966. Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, G. A. 1999. Evolutionary Dissociations between Homologous Genes and Homologous Structures. In Homology, ed. and . Novartis Foundation Symposium 222: 189–203. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by