Chimera, spandrel, or adaptation

Human Nature 6 (2):99-117 (1995)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In every known human society, some kind—usually many kinds—of art is practiced, frequently with much vigor and pleasure, so that one could at least hypothesize that “artifying” or “artification” is a characteristic behavior of our species. Yet human ethologists and sociobiologists have been conspicuously unforthcoming about this observably widespread and valued practice, for a number of stated and unstated reasons. The present essay is a position paper that offers an overview and analysis of conceptual issues and problems inherent in viewing art and/or aesthetics as adaptive, and it presents a speculative account of a human behavior of art.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/bf02734173

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Why Art Is not a Spandrel.S. Davies - 2010 - British Journal of Aesthetics 50 (4):333-341.
The intertwined roles of genes and culture in human evolution.William Irons - 2009 - Zygon 44 (2):347-354.
The arts and human nature: evolutionary aesthetics and the evolutionary status of art behaviours: Stephen Davies: The artful species: aesthetics, art, and evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012.Anton Killin - 2013 - Biology and Philosophy 28 (4):703-718.
Human tool behavior is species-specific and remains unique.Susan Cachel - 2012 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 35 (4):222-222.
Can Sociobiology Adapt to Cultural Selection?Sandra D. Mitchell - 1986 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:87 - 96.
What the human annals tell us.Gwen J. Broude - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):888-888.
Ancestral roots: modern living and human evolution.Timothy Clack - 2009 - New York: Macmillan.
Evolutionary psychology, adaptation and design.Stephen M. Downes - 2015 - In Thomas Heams, Philippe Huneman, Guillaume Lecointre & Marc Silberstein (eds.), Handbook of Evolutionary Thinking in the Sciences. Springer. pp. 659-673.
The basic components of the human mind were not solidified during the Pleistocene epoch.Stephen M. Downes - 2010 - In Francisco José Ayala & Robert Arp (eds.), Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 243–252.
Limits to action, the allocation of individual behavior.J. E. R. Staddon (ed.) - 1980 - New York: Academic Press.
I. is art purely cultural or does it centrally involve a biological component?Stephen Davies - unknown
What the biological sciences can and cannot contribute to ethics.Francisco J. Ayala - 2010 - In Francisco José Ayala & Robert Arp (eds.), Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 316–336.
The Artful Species: Aesthetics, Art, and Evolution.Stephen Davies - 2012 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Chimeras and human dignity.Inmaculada de Melo-Martín - 2008 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (4):pp. 331-346.
Developmental decomposition and the future of human behavioral ecology.Philip Kitcher - 1990 - Philosophy of Science 57 (1):96-117.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-24

Downloads
13 (#1,010,467)

6 months
6 (#504,917)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Verse form.John Constable - 1997 - Human Nature 8 (2):171-203.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex.Charles Darwin - 1898 - New York: Plume. Edited by Carl Zimmer.
Biophilia.Edward O. Wilson (ed.) - 2009 - Harvard University Press.
Magic, Science and Religion.Bronislaw Malinowski & Robert Redfield - 1949 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 10 (2):298-300.
Human facial beauty.Randy Thornhill & Steven W. Gangestad - 1993 - Human Nature 4 (3):237-269.

View all 11 references / Add more references