In our capacity for language and joint intention, we have the capacity to form culture. Obviously, these capacities are cognitive in nature, and appear to be evident in humans universally (Heine, 2016). However, not all cultures are the same. Culture, while the same at its core, appears to be a heterogenous phenomena in regards to how it manifests. Different cultures have different practices, values and means by which its members relate to others. For example, cultures in which men must hunt and fish for survival tend to value masculinity, whereas other cultures in which men assist mothers in child rearing and do not need to engage in as much physical labour have less regard for masculinity (Heine, 2016).
What intrigues me about this concept is the idea that culture can evolve and further influence the cognition of those within said cultural climate. Various environmental factors require different adaptations in knowledge and tradition, as previously mentioned. This evolution appears to correlate with biological evolution, in that its factors cannot be create from nothingness. Rather, each aspect of a culture must emerge from a pre-existing cultural practice. These practices in turn are internalized by members of a culture and allow further influence on the culture at large. This seems to me to create a "chicken-and-egg" dichotomy, in which one ponders which of these aspects came first. It is clear that cultural learning mainly comes from imitation of others (what is referred to as "imitative learning"), but these pre-existing cognitive aspects must have emerge from somewhere. Presumably, the cognitive capabilities of humans emerged from environmental changes, which further lead to changes in cognition. The short answer is we do not fully understand how or why this capacity emerged. However, we must keep our minds open to new evidence and allow the research to continue.
References
Heine, S. J. (2016). Cultural Psychology (3rd ed.). United States: W.W. Norton & Company Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment