Great book by a human evolutionary biologist which helps me understand why humans are the way we are: non-rational but still able to cooperate in large groups. I’d liken it to Sapiens in its attempts but the material is more advanced and it is better cited. Before reading, I didn’t know much about cultural evolution and culture-gene coevolution. After the author’s claims and presentation of evidence I am more convinced that (1) these exist and (2) they contribute drastically to our behaviors and structures today (as well as in the past.) Cooperation is a part of it, but there is so much more! Ie: How do we seem so intelligent when we are irrational, what are mechanisms for establishing cooperation, and what does (did) this mean for our species? In sum: social norm formation, random tool invention/improvement, and language development all culturally developed/evolved in small groups of humans (and pre-humans) and self-amplified through various mechanisms (genetic and non-genetic.) How children absorb rules and norms was particularly eye opening to me. The subject is obviously not one where you can perfectly apply the scientific method but I think he does a magnificent job with his studies and presentation. Admittedly though, I am not smart/knowledgeable enough (or haven't been exposed to the appropriate amount of cultural learning) to know if items have been cherry picked or excluded to fit his thesis. The end (why terrestrial apes vs other animals) is certainly more speculative but gives science many frontiers to take a look at.

As an added bonus, there may be insights into human happiness in this book by analyzing social norms/rituals/behaviors and their relation to human cultural evolution.

This book gave me an appreciation for culture and cultural transmission, as well as why a lot of cultural practices exist. I particularly liked the notion that for the longest time in humanity's history, being curious about things was a reliable way to get killed, due to which our cultural systems are resistant to change.

Solid book overall, with lots of great examples. Why do tribes use oracle bones for forecasting where they should hunt? It's more rational than it seems at first glance.

Great ideas. Slight bit on the dry side.

The nature-nurture debate: in the years 1990-2010 this was one of the fiercest polemics in the scientific world and around. What was most decisive in the evolution of humans, both as a species and as an individual, the biological-genetic background or the cultural/educational background? The storm has somewhat subsided, but the battle is far from over. Joseph Henrich (° 1968, professor of human evolutionary biology at Harvard University) is now offering his contribution, and the subtitle makes abundantly clear which side he has chosen: “The secret of our species' success resides not in the power of our individual minds, but in the collective brains of our communities. Our collective brains arise from the synthesis of our cultural and social natures—from the fact that we readily learn from others (are cultural) and can, with the right norms, live in large and widely interconnected groups (are social).”

Henrich is not completely original with this, Peter Richerson and Robert Boyd earlier published [b:Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution|104527|Not by Genes Alone How Culture Transformed Human Evolution|Peter J. Richerson|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1328872595l/104527._SX50_.jpg|100781], also a title that says it all. Henrich admits that he is largely indebted to both, although his approach is different. He overwhelms the reader with numerous examples and references, especially from the social sciences: social and cognitive psychology, linguistics, anthropology, ethnography, and so on. He does this so profusely that it sometimes becomes dizzying. And there is also quite a bit of reasoned speculation involved, especially when Henrich ventures into a reconstruction of human evolution from 4 million years BP to the present. According to him, an important leap must have been made around 1.8 million years ago: “By 1.8 million years ago, the threshold had probably been crossed, and cumulative cultural evolutionary products were driving the genetic evolution of our genus, shaping our feet, legs , guts, teeth, and brains. Albeit slow by later standards, toolkits improved and techniques were added gradually, though of course, cultural losses and technological setbacks continued, and would continue into the modern world. By 750,000 years ago at Gesher Benot Ya'aqov, there's little doubt that we are dealing with a cultural species who hunts large game, catches big fish, maintains hearts, cooks, manufactures complex tools, cooperates in moving giant slabs, and gathers and processes various plants.”

The greatest value of this book is perhaps the enormous amount of insights and hypotheses that Henrich provides, which can help explain certain developments in evolutionary history and which can be tested against archaeological and archaeogenetic findings. In that sense, in my view, this is a more valuable work than Clive Gamble's [b:Thinking Big: How the Evolution of Social Life Shaped the Human Mind|22331913|Thinking Big How the Evolution of Social Life Shaped the Human Mind|Clive Gamble|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1534095904l/22331913._SX50_.jpg|41730074] (2015), which focused too rigidly on the human brain and cognitive capacities, in interaction with the social environment. I have the impression that Henrich has captured somewhat better the extremely complex dynamics that have set in motion and continue to drive the social and cultural processes.

A rather tricky aspect of Henrich's thesis is that he places quite an emphasis on how the socio-cultural process also has an influence on our genetic evolution (see the previous quote): the ubiquitous impact of social-cultural learning more and more drives genetic selection, making our biological constitution even more focused on the learning process, in an endless feedback loop. He calls this “culture-gene coevolution”. That sounds very attractive and plausible, but I assume that it will make quite a few biologists' hairs stand on end. No, the nature-nurture debate is certainly not over yet, but this book sure makes a very important contribution! Rating 3.5 stars