Why Al Gore is not a nutcase

Not very long ago Al Gore challenged the United States ‘to commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years.’ Gore’s attempts to convince the American people that change can and must occur have been aggressively mocked by political opponents, and his ambitious challenge is generally dismissed as inconceivable even by those who are sympathetic to the cause. But there is a lot more substance to his sometimes emotional or patronizing pleas for humanity to deal with the existential crisis of climate change than many prominent figures realize or would like to acknowledge publicly.

There is no denying that Gore’s expectations are high. The breadth and depth of institutional and individual change required to avert ecological disaster is staggering; he is suggesting that the notoriously distractible, apathetic and oftentimes uninformed (one could also argue misinformed) citizens of the US come together in some sort of unprecedented, concerted effort to ensure the livelihood of not only people they may never know in their lifetimes, but also members of completely separate species. Admittedly, he is asking a lot.

One reason to heed Gore’s (sometimes tedious) calls for action stems from the nature of the crisis itself. It would be wrong to judge the necessity for change based on the feasibility of it occurring. Just because to downplay the potential devastation of climate change – and our ability to counteract it – would make us all feel less guilty for failing to adjust our way of life does not, unfortunately, change the fact that the straits are bona fide DIRE. More and more prominent scientists are now publicly expressing concern and stressing the need for immediate and dramatic action. James McCarthy, President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, recently stated that the opportunity to prevent irrevocable damage to the environment is only within the next four years. At this point it seems safe to conclude there is no question as to the severity and urgency of the problem; unless radical measures are taken to combat current trends, there will be grave consequences for ourselves and the rest of the biological world.

This brings us to the issue of feasibility. Gore optimistically envisions a nation of socially, economically, geographically and politically disparate inhabitants working together towards a goal that will involve considerable lifestyle modification and potentially a fair amount of self-sacrifice. Even to those less inclined to cynicism this scenario would appear unlikely, if not outright preposterous. However, the intuitive and seemingly obvious negative evaluation stems from a common misunderstanding of human behavior and culture, along with a shortsighted view of history.

People have a tendency to think of human existence as fixed and chronologically homogeneous. This conception gives rise to statements like, ‘Things have always been this way, so there’s no changing them’, or the slightly more insightful, ‘Things are better than they’ve ever been, so we should just stick with what we’ve got’. For many organisms on planet earth, the first statement holds, for the most part (obviously, all organisms and environments change through evolution, but at a speed sufficiently slow to not be at issue here). The hallmark of humans, however, is an additional level of evolution, that of culture. Because humans can so adeptly master, manipulate and alter their own environments, what constitutes ‘human experience’ has been forever shifting. If we look at the last 10,000 years alone – a mere fraction of the history of our species – social organization, technology, scientific understanding, belief systems, moral and ethical codes, and virtually all other aspects of human culture have undergone immense change and elaboration.

The important lesson to take from the science of culture and cultural evolution is that our behaviors and capacities are not immutable features of our biology, but instead flexible and open to innovation. Although cultural evolution has, for the most part, remained undirected, it does not necessarily follow that exercising some control over its course is an impossibility (rebutting the second statement above). Paul Ehrlich, an award winning biologist, has for some time commented on the potential for harnessing the power of cultural change as a means to address problems facing society, most recently in regards to climate change . The task of adapting our behavior and infrastructure to avert environmental disaster is daunting, to be sure. But the forces responsible for massive ecological destruction are the same ones that provide a solution. Through deliberate cultural adaptation, it is possible to implement the policies and practices essential to the survival of our civilizations, as well as our fellows in the biological tree of life.

Al Gore’s vision of radical institutional change should not be derided as pure fantasy. An awareness of the mechanisms of cultural evolution provides an opportunity to consciously shape our world and how we interact with it. Once the potential for successful societal transformation is recognized, developing appropriate and effective solutions becomes much more realistic.

What can a videogame-playing chimpanzee tell us about ourselves? Quite a lot.

The 20th century has seen many attempts by scientists (and pseudoscientists) to teach primates of various sorts human language. Although a number of intriguing examples warrant attention, I will focus on the most remarkable of them, that of the bonobo Kanzi (bonobos (Pan paniscus) are a subspecies of chimpanzee differing morphologically and behaviorally from common chimpanzees (Pan troglodyte)).

Kanzi is famous (infamous is not totally inappropriate) within the fields of linguistics, psychology, and primatology, among others, and his celebrity has even extended into the realm of pop culture (a keyboard duet with Peter Gabriel is not to be missed). Through a fluke of scientific experimentation, Kanzi learned to communicate with visual symbols (so called ‘lexigrams’, or arbitrary images representing words or concepts) and understand spoken English. It isn't necessary to go into the details, except to note that Kanzi was not taught language explicitly; instead, his communicative skills were acquired simply from interacting with humans in a social context. Caregivers talked to Kanzi and made available visual symbols to represent functional aspects of his environment, and in doing so, induced in him the ability to comprehend linguistic material, as well as produce signals – either through lexigrams or gesture -- to communicate meanings back to his caregivers.

The question of whether Kanzi has acquired ‘human language’ is hotly debated, and I will not attempt to address that question here. The crucial point is, even if we judge that Kanzi is not exhibiting a specifically linguistic capacity, his exceptional behaviors differ radically from those that occur in wild bonobo populations. Kanzi is able to interpret speech, communicate about things apart from the here-and-now, and engage in activities as modern as playing Pac-Man. His behavioral repertoire is highly sophisticated, exhibiting many abilities that would otherwise be considered in the domain of humans alone. It is quite evident that this unique developmental environment has significantly augmented his cognitive capacities.

Kanzi’s experience illustrates the hallmark of primate intelligence—the ability for highly social and inquisitive creatures to not only adjust to their environment, but exploit and internalize the structure and tools that are made available to them. Kanzi’s early and continual immersion in a rich, culturally-constructed human setting enhanced his cognitive abilities beyond what anyone would have expected. We can contrast his experience with that of, say, a domestic cat. Cats are raised in the same sort of setting with care and attention. Many owners even talk to their cats. But no cat has ever mastered even the simplest aspects of human communication, let alone seemed interested in doing so. Kanzi shows that there is something special about the primate lineage, and humans are a more striking case than bonobos.

Human behavioral plasticity is one of our most defining characteristics. To understand the extent to which we can enhance our own abilities, we need only look to the historical record. Think about how much the functioning of society relies on written language – a cultural innovation that arose quite recently in human history. Orthography has allowed us both to increase the cognitive capacities of individuals, but also to increase the collective store of cultural knowledge, from which we have continued to develop new tools, that in turn have enhanced individual and societal achievement. The cycle is a self-sustaining and self-enhancing feedback loop. Use of orthography is not a trait bestowed on us from our genes or any other organism-internal mechanism. Yet all normal children, given exposure, manage to acquire these skills, often becoming as second nature.

A lesson we can take from all this is that human potential is crucially dependent on experience; the nature of what humans are capable of attaining is determined in large part by what is available in the developmental environment to be acquired, adjusted and co-opted. One implication that follows from these insights is the debunking of the so-called ‘American Dream’, which holds that anyone can ‘make it’ because equal opportunity is available for all. But opportunity is bound by potential, and as is evident, human potential is heavily influenced by experience—not determined by some kind of inherent, resilient ‘scrappiness’. Children raised in perceptually and intellectually rich and stimulating environments with attentive and informed caregivers are, from the beginning, poised to fulfill the range of possibilities available to them. In turn, however, children in less fortunate circumstances are equally affected by external forces. Severe deprivation, abuse or neglect, as well as seemingly more innocuous factors like limited parental interaction, will irrevocably impact development and ultimately affect behavior in adulthood. Moreover, the relationship between developmental environment and adult behavior is not limited to potential intelligence. Humans are psychologically and emotionally complex beings, and these same factors will also influence beliefs, desires, values, judgments and other variables that determine how we operate in the world. The difference between a positive and enriched upbringing and a depressed or even tragic one often directly corresponds to varying socio-economic conditions. Thus, is it a grave error to assume that overcoming disadvantage is a likely or even trivial affair. Not only is escape from poverty impeded by multiple economic and social barriers, but the desires and motivations to do so are themselves potentially stymied, further decreasing the likelihood that a person will manage to improve his or her situation.

From a global perspective, these concerns become especially pressing. Unfavorable conditions in the United States pale in comparison to the unthinkable suffering caused by violence, war, famine, disease and political unrest experienced by millions of people around the world. It is sobering to consider the developmental consequences for children born into such situations, which will ultimately direct the course of these societies and perpetuate the destitution that created them.

Just as the cycle of cultural accumulation and elaboration can yield extraordinary advancements, its powerful self-enhancing properties can equally foster, sustain and amplify the more iniquitous aspects of the human condition. The machinery of this cycle is distributed across individuals, societies and historical timescales, which renders its operation abstruse and elusive, leaving it free to insidiously influence the course of human culture. When we pair this cycle with the embedded and interacting one of individual development, it becomes clear that events of the past will have nonlinear and often unexpected effects on current conditions. The legacies of persecution, oppression and marginalization are not a passive, historical backdrop, but instead are manifested anew each generation through the mechanisms of cultural transmission and learning. We cannot, therefore, assume that damages will vanish with those who suffered and perpetrated them directly, and we must devise methods to actively counteract the effects that persist to this day.

The sciences of culture and human behavior are urgently germane to solving the injustices that plague so much of humanity. We cannot fashion solutions until we fully understand the problems at hand. Recognizing that human development and cultural evolution are intricately intertwined and inter-dependent processes requires a change in how we view the causes of societal woes like inequality, poverty, crime and many others. Taking this knowledge into account can elucidate the true roots of social and individual disparity and guide us to effective approaches to combating their origination and spread.