This paper is a critical review of cultural evolutionary science written by eleven researchers and philosophers from within the field. The review was prompted by a survey of members of the Cultural Evolution Society, who reported that the field lacks a unified theoretical framework and often uses key concepts in ways that are difficult to define clearly or measure consistently.

Discussion Questions

1. What is the difference between defining “culture” and defining where one culture ends and another begins?
   Can cultures be identified and separated in a clear, non-arbitrary way? If not, what problems does this create when researchers compare different cultures?
2. The authors argue that the field’s focus on producing widely applicable theories encourages simplified theories that ignore history and treat cognition mainly as information processing.
   Is this simply how the field currently operates, or is it an unavoidable consequence of studying human behaviour at the population level?
3. Population-level models often pay little attention to individual agency and choice.
   Is this a useful simplification that helps explain broad patterns, or does it give an inaccurate picture of how people actually think and act?