The Seven Sins of Evolutionary Psychology - Konrad Lorenz Institute

An Evolutionary Perspective on Cognitive Orientationthe blueprint of evolutionary aspects involved inthe cognitive guidance of behavior.General developmental trends. The first and possiblythe most important trend is the differentiationof action and motivation. This differentiation doesnot seem to exist at the lowest evolutionary levels.On these levels we find actions, which may beprompted by inner or outer states that are not differentiatedfrom the action and cannot be identified assuch. As stated most precisely by WIMMER (1995,p43), “information about [homeostatic] disturbanceand motoric pattern are combined in a unit whichbecomes segregated at higher levels of organization,e.g., taxis behavior”. The differentiation occurswhen we first obtain some kind of representation ofthe inner or outer stimulus. This constitutes the basisfor the development of motivation in later phases,as distinct from action. The two arms—of motivationand of action—undergo different transformationsand development in the course of evolution.The development of motivation depends largely onmeaning, whereas the development of action dependslargely on structures.Accordingly, the second basic trend is the evolutionof meaning. This evolution takes differentforms, some of which overlap, whereas others occurin a sequence. The development is partly structuraland partly dynamic. The structural developmentconsists basically in shaping the major outlines ofthe meaning system. This entails differentiating thecontents of the meaning values into subsets whichwe call meaning dimensions, differentiating the relationsof the contents to the referents in terms ofdirectness, generality, positivity and the nature ofthe relation (propositional, normative, desired), andmoving from the nonverbal actional means of expressionto the use of diversified nonverbal and verbalmeans of expressing meaning values and meaningunits. On higher levels, the whole system splitsinto two major branches of the interpersonallysharedmeaning and the subjective–personal meaning,which may intertwine and interact to differentdegrees. The more dynamic development consists inmoving from meaning values to meaning units(each of which includes a meaning value centeredaround a referent), from meaning action to meaninggeneration, and from surface or label meaning toelaboration of the deeper underlying meanings. Thelatter development brings aboutan increasing involvementof personal–subjective meaning in additionto the interpersonally-shared one which dominatesthe surface-label meaning.A special line of development is taken by meaningunits. It will be mentioned because it is of particularimportance for the cognitive guidance of motivation.This line leads from meaning units to beliefs.Both meaning units and beliefs share the basic structureof a referent related to a meaning value. However,they differ in function. Meaning unit is a conceptfrom the domain of meaning and its functionis the expression or communication of meaning perse. In contrast, belief is a concept from the domainof action or behavior, and its function is to expressor communicate some cognitive contents—e.g., astatement, a view, an attitude, an opinion, an information,a value, an expectation etc.—with behavioralimplications.The primary meaning unit is a belief which statesa fact, namely, the relation of the meaning value tothe referent is factual, existential. Hence, it could beeither a belief about self or a general belief. It is difficultto decide which one was the first. But in viewof the primary focusing on oneself it seems likelythat the belief about self preceded the general belief.Be it as it may, each of these primary units split toform by differentiation two distinct varieties. Thus,the belief about self differentiated into a belief aboutgoals and a belief about self, both of which share the‘I’ as a referent and differ only in the kind of relationbetween the meaning value and the referent (viz.desired vs. factual, respectively). Similarly, the generalbelief differentiated into a belief about normsand a general belief, both of which share the non–Ias a referent and differ only in the kind of relationbetween the meaning value and the referent (viz.normative/desirable vs. factual, respectively). As aresult, four types of beliefs emerged.Complementing the evolution of meaning is thethird trend, which refers to the evolution of action.The major characteristics of evolution in this spherehave been extensively studied. One characteristicconsists in increased variety of action units. On thelower evolutionary levels we find genetically and innatelydetermined units of action that are rigidly enactedin a specific manner. New units are added tothe repertory which modify the innately given actionalunits or combine with them in different waysand thus form, for example, conditioned responsesand habits. Further, the units of action which initiallymay be bound to specific inputs or situationsbecome gradually free of such constraints, and maybe used in a variety of contexts, or for the attainmentof purposes completely divorced from those withwhich they may have been related when acquired.Another characteristic development consists in in-Evolution and Cognition ❘ 89 ❘ 2001, Vol. 7, No. 1