Singh introduces the concept of cultural super-attracters, which are complex and robust cultural institutions whose stability is borne from collective subjective appeal and not necessarily objective benefits or evolutionary history. This system supposedly leads to the existence of non-adaptive cultural institutions such as dance, lullabies, and shamanism. Singh overlooks notable genetic links to both primary aesthetic emotions and complex behaviors (Plomin et al., Reference Plomin, DeFries, Knopik and Neiderhiser2016; Vukasovic & Bratko, Reference Vukasović and Bratko2015). The concept of “subjective selection” appears rooted in basic emotional drives, and such instincts are mostly dictated by a long phylogenetic history.
Cultural activities will often have a viable path to our evolutionary past even though such behaviors may sometimes seem disconnected from survival. One idea, so often ignored in evolutionary studies, is that an adaptive trait need not be adaptive in every situation. Not every expression of anger is evolutionarily adaptive; however, the sum total of all expressions of anger throughout history must have ultimately been adaptive for mammalian organisms. In a similar vein, not every sexual impulse enhances survival (e.g., masturbation and pornography). These apparent contradictions do not nullify our general belief that aggression or sexual desire are evolutionarily adaptive. Such vestigial or byproduct behaviors are “tolerated” by evolutionary processes.
Let’s examine lullabies (and music), one of the flagship examples of a non-adaptive super-attractor. Whether it be songbirds or alarm calls, vocalizations in the animal kingdom are typically considered evolutionarily adaptive. Music appears to be the outcome of a dedicated neurocognitive system (Szyfter & Witt, Reference Szyfter and Witt2020) that triggers a variety of pleasurable emotional states that can be simultaneously communicated to every conspecific in the group. Many traditional societies produce music during important tribal rituals, including war dances, but not every musical institution needs to be evolutionarily adaptive. Rock bands and orchestras may be no more adaptive than lullabies in traditional societies. I would argue that music is a vestigial phenomenon (no longer particularly helpful for survival), while rock bands and lullabies are byproducts akin to masturbation and pornography. These byproduct behaviors each have their own idiosyncratic history and do not necessarily follow a universal theme like super-attractants.
In a similar vein, Singh suggests shamanism is a conscious strategy to control uncertain outcomes; however, shamanism appears to occur at a much more unconscious level. Although the idea has received little traction among psychiatrists, shamanism and schizophrenia appear to share a similar phylogenetic history. A detailed explanation of the shamanistic theory of schizophrenia is beyond the scope of a brief commentary (Polimeni, Reference Polimeni2012; Polimeni, Reference Polimeni2022); but put simply, where schizophrenia is common, shamanism is not, and where shamanism is practiced, hallucinations and delusions are interpreted as magico-religious communication. Shamanism is not precisely schizophrenia because schizophrenia represents the biological experience of magico-religious thoughts (i.e., hallucinations and delusions), while shamanism is a social role, well-suited for those on the schizotypal spectrum – similar to how tall people are well-suited to be basketball players.
Every religion whose beginnings are known has originated from the mind of one individual (Labarre, Reference Barre1972). This shaman or prophet almost always experiences some form of magico-religious communication with the gods in the form of hallucinations and delusions. Shamans are the creators of traditional religious folklore, and the rest of us have the capacity to receive the signal. Spirituality may be evolutionarily advantageous because it facilitates a number of prosocial activities, such as bolstering morality, enhancing fighting morale, and prompting divination. Incidentally, there is little evidence that distrustful environments beget paranoid psychosis, as Singh suggests. The prevalence of paranoid psychosis is fairly uniform throughout the world, and accordingly, paranoid thinking (e.g., schizophrenia) is rooted in genetics and biology.
One key point about the schizophrenia-shaman connection is that so many behaviors occur at an unconscious level. While most people readily identify emotions that cause physiological changes, such as anger and sexual attraction, many other supposed emotions are not so easily felt. Investigating these amorphous emotions is often the basis of psychodynamic interpretations around such complex emotions as narcissism, obsessiveness, or latent hostility, to name a few. Therefore, emotions appear to be complex instinctual responses that have the capacity to be evolutionarily advantageous in key situations. In the case of shamanism, I have proposed that religiosity is not rational but based on very subtle spiritual emotions (i.e., the feeling that something greater out there could conceivably influence the tangible world). This emotion appears to be present in almost all humans to varying degrees.
That the invisible hand of evolution can produce a distinct phenotype within a species (i.e., shamans) can be theoretically (and jointly) supported by such evolutionary mechanisms as group selection, frequency-dependent selection, heterozygote advantage, and perhaps antagonistic pleiotropy (Hunt & Jaeggi, Reference Hunt and Jaeggi2022).
Under Singh’s hypothesis, it would seem that sports should be considered a super-attracter. Almost every traditional society and contemporary culture engages in some form of sanctioned games (Lombardo, Reference Lombardo2012); and such games are usually imbued with the necessary emotions to war with others. Sports (and war) seem to universally trigger three pleasurable emotions: glory, excitement, and camaraderie – perhaps to counterbalance fear. Sports may be an evolutionarily adaptive behavior when used directly as practice for war, but it may be a vestigial or byproduct behavior in other circumstances, such as online video games or a football match.
In summary, Singh’s idea of super attractants is thoughtful and interesting but does not seem to replace plainer concepts that simply invoke the constructs of evolutionary adaptiveness versus vestigial/byproduct behaviors.
You have
Access
Singh introduces the concept of cultural super-attracters, which are complex and robust cultural institutions whose stability is borne from collective subjective appeal and not necessarily objective benefits or evolutionary history. This system supposedly leads to the existence of non-adaptive cultural institutions such as dance, lullabies, and shamanism. Singh overlooks notable genetic links to both primary aesthetic emotions and complex behaviors (Plomin et al., Reference Plomin, DeFries, Knopik and Neiderhiser2016; Vukasovic & Bratko, Reference Vukasović and Bratko2015). The concept of “subjective selection” appears rooted in basic emotional drives, and such instincts are mostly dictated by a long phylogenetic history.
Cultural activities will often have a viable path to our evolutionary past even though such behaviors may sometimes seem disconnected from survival. One idea, so often ignored in evolutionary studies, is that an adaptive trait need not be adaptive in every situation. Not every expression of anger is evolutionarily adaptive; however, the sum total of all expressions of anger throughout history must have ultimately been adaptive for mammalian organisms. In a similar vein, not every sexual impulse enhances survival (e.g., masturbation and pornography). These apparent contradictions do not nullify our general belief that aggression or sexual desire are evolutionarily adaptive. Such vestigial or byproduct behaviors are “tolerated” by evolutionary processes.
Let’s examine lullabies (and music), one of the flagship examples of a non-adaptive super-attractor. Whether it be songbirds or alarm calls, vocalizations in the animal kingdom are typically considered evolutionarily adaptive. Music appears to be the outcome of a dedicated neurocognitive system (Szyfter & Witt, Reference Szyfter and Witt2020) that triggers a variety of pleasurable emotional states that can be simultaneously communicated to every conspecific in the group. Many traditional societies produce music during important tribal rituals, including war dances, but not every musical institution needs to be evolutionarily adaptive. Rock bands and orchestras may be no more adaptive than lullabies in traditional societies. I would argue that music is a vestigial phenomenon (no longer particularly helpful for survival), while rock bands and lullabies are byproducts akin to masturbation and pornography. These byproduct behaviors each have their own idiosyncratic history and do not necessarily follow a universal theme like super-attractants.
In a similar vein, Singh suggests shamanism is a conscious strategy to control uncertain outcomes; however, shamanism appears to occur at a much more unconscious level. Although the idea has received little traction among psychiatrists, shamanism and schizophrenia appear to share a similar phylogenetic history. A detailed explanation of the shamanistic theory of schizophrenia is beyond the scope of a brief commentary (Polimeni, Reference Polimeni2012; Polimeni, Reference Polimeni2022); but put simply, where schizophrenia is common, shamanism is not, and where shamanism is practiced, hallucinations and delusions are interpreted as magico-religious communication. Shamanism is not precisely schizophrenia because schizophrenia represents the biological experience of magico-religious thoughts (i.e., hallucinations and delusions), while shamanism is a social role, well-suited for those on the schizotypal spectrum – similar to how tall people are well-suited to be basketball players.
Every religion whose beginnings are known has originated from the mind of one individual (Labarre, Reference Barre1972). This shaman or prophet almost always experiences some form of magico-religious communication with the gods in the form of hallucinations and delusions. Shamans are the creators of traditional religious folklore, and the rest of us have the capacity to receive the signal. Spirituality may be evolutionarily advantageous because it facilitates a number of prosocial activities, such as bolstering morality, enhancing fighting morale, and prompting divination. Incidentally, there is little evidence that distrustful environments beget paranoid psychosis, as Singh suggests. The prevalence of paranoid psychosis is fairly uniform throughout the world, and accordingly, paranoid thinking (e.g., schizophrenia) is rooted in genetics and biology.
One key point about the schizophrenia-shaman connection is that so many behaviors occur at an unconscious level. While most people readily identify emotions that cause physiological changes, such as anger and sexual attraction, many other supposed emotions are not so easily felt. Investigating these amorphous emotions is often the basis of psychodynamic interpretations around such complex emotions as narcissism, obsessiveness, or latent hostility, to name a few. Therefore, emotions appear to be complex instinctual responses that have the capacity to be evolutionarily advantageous in key situations. In the case of shamanism, I have proposed that religiosity is not rational but based on very subtle spiritual emotions (i.e., the feeling that something greater out there could conceivably influence the tangible world). This emotion appears to be present in almost all humans to varying degrees.
That the invisible hand of evolution can produce a distinct phenotype within a species (i.e., shamans) can be theoretically (and jointly) supported by such evolutionary mechanisms as group selection, frequency-dependent selection, heterozygote advantage, and perhaps antagonistic pleiotropy (Hunt & Jaeggi, Reference Hunt and Jaeggi2022).
Under Singh’s hypothesis, it would seem that sports should be considered a super-attracter. Almost every traditional society and contemporary culture engages in some form of sanctioned games (Lombardo, Reference Lombardo2012); and such games are usually imbued with the necessary emotions to war with others. Sports (and war) seem to universally trigger three pleasurable emotions: glory, excitement, and camaraderie – perhaps to counterbalance fear. Sports may be an evolutionarily adaptive behavior when used directly as practice for war, but it may be a vestigial or byproduct behavior in other circumstances, such as online video games or a football match.
In summary, Singh’s idea of super attractants is thoughtful and interesting but does not seem to replace plainer concepts that simply invoke the constructs of evolutionary adaptiveness versus vestigial/byproduct behaviors.
Financial support
None.
Competing interests
None.