Prospective Fruitfulness as a Criterion for Theory-Change and Research-Strategy Option

This paper aims at emphasizing that “prospective fruitfulness” (i.e., the general ability of a theoretical approach to disclose future promising perspectives for the understanding of nature) could serve as one of the epistemological criteria for evaluating a theory and for orienting scientists’ choice among theoretical alternatives. I will first try to show how some twentieth-century developments in philosophy of science may (at least implicitly) hint at such a notion. Then, I will argue that a non-naïve realistic understanding of science centred on the interaction with nature and on the tendency toward truth in the long run, confers further epistemological relevance to prospective fruitfulness. A subsequent section will be dedicated to a current development in cognitive neurosciences (the so-called “neural re-use”), which may seemingly exemplify prospective fruitfulness and its roles in scientific research. Then, I will summarize some key aspects of prospective fruitfulness. Finally, the connections of this notion with the theme of philosophy of nature will be briefly addressed

Extending Epigenesis: From Phenotypic Plasticity to the Bio-Cultural Feedback

The paper aims at proposing an extended notion of epigenesis acknowledging an actual causal import to the phenotypic dimension for the evolutionary diversification of life forms. Section 1 offers introductory remarks on the issue of epigenesis contrasting it with ancient and modern preformationist views. In Section 2 we propose to intend epigenesis as a process of phenotypic formation and diversification a) dependent on environmental influences, b) independent of changes in the genomic nucleotide sequence, and c) occurring during the whole life span. Then, Section 3 focuses on phenotypic plasticity and offers an overview of basic properties (like robustness, modularity and degeneracy) that allows biological systems to be evolvable – i.e. to have the potentiality of producing phenotypic variation. Successively (Section 4), the emphasis is put on environmentally-induced modification in the regulation of gene expression giving rise to phenotypic variation and diversification. After some brief considerations on the debated issue of epigenetic inheritance (Section 5), the issue of culture (kept in the background of the preceding sections) is considered. The key point is that, in the case of humans and of the evolutionary history of the genus Homo at least, the environment is also, importantly, the cultural environment. Thus, Section 6 argues that a bio-cultural feedback should be acknowledged in the “epigenic” processes leading to phenotypic diversification and innovation in Homo evolution. Finally, Section 7 introduces the notion of “cultural neural reuse”, which refers to phenotypic/neural modifications induced by specific features of the cultural environment that are effective in human cultural evolution without involving genetic changes. Therefore, cultural neural reuse may be regarded as a key instance of the bio-cultural feedback and ultimately of the extended notion of epigenesis proposed in this work

Extending Epigenesis: From Phenotypic Plasticity to the Bio-Cultural Feedback

The paper aims at proposing an extended notion of epigenesis acknowledging an actual causal import to the phenotypic dimension for the evolutionary diversification of life forms. Section 1 offers introductory remarks on the issue of epigenesis contrasting it with ancient and modern preformationist views. In Section 2 we propose to intend epigenesis as a process of phenotypic formation and diversification a) dependent on environmental influences, b) independent of changes in the genomic nucleotide sequence, and c) occurring during the whole life span. Then, Section 3 focuses on phenotypic plasticity and offers an overview of basic properties (like robustness, modularity and degeneracy) that allows biological systems to be evolvable – i.e. to have the potentiality of producing phenotypic variation. Successively (Section 4), the emphasis is put on environmentally-induced modification in the regulation of gene expression giving rise to phenotypic variation and diversification. After some brief considerations on the debated issue of epigenetic inheritance (Section 5), the issue of culture (kept in the background of the preceding sections) is considered. The key point is that, in the case of humans and of the evolutionary history of the genus Homo at least, the environment is also, importantly, the cultural environment. Thus, Section 6 argues that a bio-cultural feedback should be acknowledged in the “epigenic” processes leading to phenotypic diversification and innovation in Homo evolution. Finally, Section 7 introduces the notion of “cultural neural reuse”, which refers to phenotypic/neural modifications induced by specific features of the cultural environment that are effective in human cultural evolution without involving genetic changes. Therefore, cultural neural reuse may be regarded as a key instance of the bio-cultural feedback and ultimately of the extended notion of epigenesis proposed in this work

Culture: The Driving Force of Human Cognition

International audienceIt is often, though sometimes only implicitly, assumed that biological/genetic evolution sets neural substrates, that neural substrates fix cognitive abilities, and that cognitive abilities determine the spectrum of cultural practices exhibited by a biological species. We label this view as the "bottom-up-only" view. In this paper we will show that such a "chain of dependence" is much looser than usually assumed, especially as far as recent periods (the last 800,000 years versus the last seven million or more) are considered. We will provide evidence and arguments supporting the idea that cultural innovation may have direct and ascertainable effects both on the cognitive capabilities of populations of hominins (via what we call "cultural exaptation") and on the neural substrates of the individuals in those populations (via what we call "cultural neural reuse"). Together, cultural exaptation and cultural neural reuse may give raise to a plausible general mechanism for cognitive evolution in which culture is the driving force, thus offering a "top-down-also" view of human evolution. Response to Reviewers: Dear Fiona, Thank you for the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of our manuscript Culture: the driving force of human cognition. We address below, introduced by an asterisk (*), on a point by point basis, how we have addressed the comments raised by you and the reviewers. As you will see, we have made almost all the changes suggested by you and them, including those concerning the figures. We think that, thanks to the comments and issues raised by the reviewers and synthetized by you, the paper is now much stronger. We hope that the revised manuscript will be accepted by TopiCS as we believe that it is a significant contribution and of interest for a large scientific audience