Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T03:42:06.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The music and social bonding hypothesis does require multilevel selection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2021

Dustin Eirdosh Open the ORCID record for Dustin Eirdosh [Opens in a new window]  and
Susan Hanisch Open the ORCID record for Susan Hanisch [Opens in a new window]
Dustin Eirdosh
Affiliation:
Department of Comparative Cultural Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, 04103Leipzig, [email protected]://www.eva.mpg.de/comparative-cultural-psychology/staff/dustin-eirdosh/
Susan Hanisch
Affiliation:
Department of Comparative Cultural Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, 04103Leipzig, [email protected]://www.eva.mpg.de/comparative-cultural-psychology/staff/dustin-eirdosh/ Faculty of Education, Department of Primary School Science Education, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. [email protected]://www.uni-leipzig.de/en/profile/mitarbeiter/dr-susan-hanisch/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Is musicality an individual level adaptation? The authors of this target article reject the need for group selection within their model, yet their arguments do not fulfill the conceptual requirements for justifying such a rejection. Further analysis can highlight the explanatory value of embracing multilevel selection theory as a foundational element of the music and social bonding (MSB) hypothesis.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 44 , 2021 , e69
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2011). A cooperative species. Human reciprocity and its evolution. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Eldakar, O. T., & Wilson, D. S. (2011). Eight criticisms not to make about group selection. Evolution: International Journal of Organic Evolution, 65(6), 1523–1526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, M. A., Waring, T. M., & Salerno, J. (2018). Designing cultural multilevel selection research for sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 13(1), 9–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richerson, P. (2012). Comment on Steven Pinker's Edge Essay. This View of Life. The Evolution Institute. https://evolution-institute.org/commentary/peter-j-richerson-comment-on-steven-pinkers-edge-essay/.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. S. (2018). Multilevel selection and Tomasello's a natural history of human morality: A translation manual. Philosophical Psychology, 31(5), 669–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. S. (2019) Group Selection in Every Way Except Using the Words: A Critique of “The Goodness Paradox” by Richard Wrangham. This View of Life. The Evolution Institute. https://evolution-institute.org/group-selection-in-every-way-except-using-the-words-a-critique-of-the-goodness-paradox-by-richard-wrangham/.Google Scholar