Skip to main content

The Relationship between Sexual Selection, Intelligence and Art

Look at the human: a comparatively dull-looking, weak being. No colour, no tusks, no nothing. But look again, and you will see the tanks, works of art, fashion, music, superior communication, and the artificial environments.

Nature might have taken a gamble when physical strength was selected second to a growing brain and intelligence. The gamble certainly paid off, humans don't need strength, we have guns and walls, humans don't need colours, we have dyes and clothes (that inadvertently rhymes!). So we experience, and have experienced, much fewer natural selection pressures and responses, and more artificial responses. For example, although the natural selection pressure of cold weather resulted in a thick fur in polar bears, and therefore turned into a sexual selection pressure due to furry polar bears surviving for longer, the same natural selection pressure resulted in a completely different adaptation for Eskimos - building igloos and shooting bears.

In fact, human intelligence seems to be at the root of almost all alternative adaptations. Why so successful? Because intelligence acts fast. It takes long for natural selection to get rid of ill-adapted life, and it's a fairly rudimentary, basic process. The development of a thick fur over generations in the case of humans is a ridiculous solution, when all it takes is shooting a bear to wear its fur. The same applied in the distant past, when using an arrow to kill prey proved a lot more successful than chasing it endlessly and risking death. Natural selection in this case is closely connected to sexual selection. Of course everyone wanted to promote the quality of intelligence, as it resulted in better prospects for future generations. The intelligent humans came on top, they were picked for mating, so passed on their genes and behaviours. It can be said that the quality of intelligence promotes itself, because those who choose not to promote it are left behind, so in fact, we don't decide that intelligence is worth keeping, but intelligence decides whether we ourselves are worth keeping.

The development of language and communication in humans can be seen as the most crucial result of intelligence, and the beginning of our artificial universe: letters, words, drawings, music. They are codes between humans, that all humans in a population understand; however, that was not always the case, and naturally only those who took part in the communication process were selected for. Nowadays, the same is still true - there are many languages that most people do not understand, music genres that divide populations and households, and forms of art so many that cannot be remembered. They are artificial expressions central to sexual selection. Which one will come on top?

Humans' sexual selection has shifted very much from the natural, self-propagation mode which is limited to reproduction, to the artificial self-propagation mode which is virtually unlimited. What is artificial self-propagation? Laughing at someone's joke. It may make you want to have babies with them, but in all honesty you won't. Buying something. You don't want to mate with the producer, you might not even care whether the product will stop selling. It could be a handbag or a new phone. The basic instinct drives you towards them, because you feel buying them, making them yours, promotes them. Good for the present, good for the future. Makes you better.

Intelligence is such a core property of ours, that we don't even realise it. The intelligence to manipulate someone, to be a good actor, to do maths. The intelligence to tap into someone's instincts, to make them want you. Wanting to have sex with someone you fancy. Why is that instinct so strong, despite the definite self-assurance that you don't want a child, or you cannot have a child?

How has our intelligence influenced our sex drive? Find out in the next post about Intelligence and our Sex Drive.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

By-products of Evolution - why not everything has a purpose

Last time we looked at how certain major adaptations such as hair loss have enabled humans to survive over the millennia in different conditions, and when faced with competition from other species. Not everything about the human body has a specific purpose, though, in the sense that we expect it to. One example of such thing is the philtrum - that little channel leading from the base of your nose to the upper lip. Recent research suggests that this development dates back millions of years, and has been inherited from fish. Apparently, when human embryos develop their face in the womb, all parts of the forehead, mouth, etc come together and fuse where the philtrum is located.


Some adaptations, on the other hand, are no longer relevant not because of their nature, but because the environmental selection pressure for which they evolved has disappeared. For example, an East Asian's typical eyelid shape evolved as a result of higher light intensities in that area of the world, yet the …

The evolution of the human body

In order to be able to look at ourselves in the mirror and be able to answer the question "Why do I look like this?", we must look back to our ancestry and their lifestyle, over a very long period of time. For the purpose of this analysis, let's look at the human versus the neanderthal. Recently there have been found neanderthal genes within the human gene pool, but the two species are different enough to compare, yet not too different (human versus fly would be too different).

As you can see, the construction of the human pelvis and toes is different, and the human has less hair. This results in humans being able to run easily for long distances, in the detriment of short-distance running which we are worse at. We sweat better, so we can do more long-term effort. This feat is essential to better settlements, as we can discover a larger area with potentially better resources. It might seem counterproductive to not be able to run quickly for a short period, when it comes …

4 Reasons Google's Calico Won't "Solve Death"

The on-line world has been taken ablaze by Calico's bid to end ageing, and thus death itself, but is this what they will actually focus on, and will they achieve it?



The fact is ageing will be reversed, and death by "natural causes" will go with it. The questions are "When?" and "By whom?".

Until recently, not a lot was known about the approach Calico would take in this venture dubbed "moonshot thinking" - a term touted by Google as the source of all considerable human progress throughout history. This we don't doubt, but is this what Calico is all about?


CNN's Dan Primack has revealed details about Calico's plan, which hint at a less-than-moonshot thinking approach, and cast a serious question mark on its ability to deliver the punchy TIME headline. Here is why:

1. The man with the idea, Bill Maris, arrived at the conclusion that the root of all death-causing disease is simply ageing itself. Not only is this widely known in the ant…