The Seven Sins of Evolutionary Psychology - Konrad Lorenz Institute

Shulamith Kreitlercognitive processes and attributes to cognition a rolein survival (KOVÁ Č 2000; LORENZ 1977; PLOTKIN1997; RIEDL 1980, 1987).Accordingly, CO is a behavior-oriented theory,which means that whatever the role of cognition,CO is not a theory of cognition but of motivationand the focus is always on behavior. The purpose ofapplying cognition is to understand, describe, predictor change behavior.In addition to the basic thesis about the involvementof cognition in motivation, the CO theory assumesthat there is a basic distinction between themotivational disposition for behavior and the performanceof behavior. Both are indispensable for anyact, at least on the human level. The disposition providesthe directionality and answers, as it were, thequestions “Why did this behavior occur?” or “Whydid the behavior occur specifically in this direction?”The performance of behavior is the operational manifestationof the directionality and answers, as itwere, questions, such as “Why did behavior take theform that it did?”, “Why was the behavior executedspecifically in this manner or with these means?”The distinction between the directionality of behaviorand the manner of its enactment is evident alsoon lower evolutionary levels, even in regard to reflexes,defensive responses and tropisms. Referring,for example, to the flight of bees, GALLISTEL (1990,pp527–528) writes: “The behavioral purpose is establishedby the bee’s motivational state, which is conceivedof as a set of signals that selectively potentiatesa functionally cohesive set of acts” (see ibid alsopp87–88 concerning the migration of birds). The distinctionitself, its sharpness and manifestations arean evolutionary product (see “Evolutionary aspectsof the CO theory”).The motivational disposition and the performanceof behavior differ greatly in their components,structure, and dynamics. Also, the involvementof cognition in motivation differs in regard tothe disposition and the performance, as will becomeevident in the next section.The last general characteristic of the CO theory tobe mentioned in this context concerns the multilevelednessof its structure and functioning. Ratherthan assuming a dominant single course of actionon a relatively high level, according to the CO modelthe input is first addressed in terms of the lower andsimpler levels of functioning, that are replaced bymore complex ones only if they fail to deal with thesituation, according to concurrent or previous experience.The lower and simpler levels of functioningcorrespond to those that may be identified in lowerevolutionary levels. They persist in more advancedspecies, such as the human, possibly in order to handlesimpler situations or more basic survival tasks. Beit as it may, the persistence of the lower levels sideby side with the higher levels as functional optionswithin the same organism are in accord with thebasic evolutionary principle whereby higher developmentalproducts do not necessarily displace or replacelower ones, but may rather complement, transformand limit their scope. An example is providedby the different stages of evolution contained withinthe brain of homo sapiens, sometimes called the reptilian,mammalian and human brain (MCLEAN1973). This phenomenon may be called “preservationof the fittest”. Moreover, the CO theory assumesthat issues are handled first on the lower levels, oralternately, that whatever can be handled on a lowerlevel is not handled on a higher level. This set ofprinciples built into the CO model demonstrates theextent to which the evolutionary perspective hasbeen built into the theory down to its fundamentals.The CO Theory: How Does It Function?Major Theoretical StagesIn the present context only a brief presentation ofthe CO model of behavior is provided. It will bedescribed in its original form, as it applies on thehuman level. Later sections will focus on evolutionaryaspects.The CO theory provides detailed descriptions ofthe processes intervening between input and output.These can be grouped into four stages, eachcharacterized by metaphorical questions and answers.The first stage is initiated by an external orinternal input and is focused on the question “Whatis it?” It consists in identifying the input in terms ofa limited and primary ‘initial meaning’ as one of thefollowing: (a) a signal for a defensive, adaptive orconditioned response, or (b) a signal for molar action,or (c) as irrelevant in the present situation, or(d) as new or especially significant, and hence as asignal for an orienting response.The first alternative consists in the evocation of adefensive or adaptive response, unconditioned orconditioned. If feedback indicates that the input hasbeen properly handled, the behavioral act is broughtto an end. The second alternative consists in theemergence of a meaning that identifies the input outfrom the start as one that cannot be handled bymeans of a conditioned or unconditioned responseand calls for a response on a higher level (viz. molar),that requires more preparatory elaboration. TheEvolution and Cognition ❘ 84 ❘ 2001, Vol. 7, No. 1