Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-tq7bh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-20T04:11:45.702Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The design space of human communication and the nonevolution of ideography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2023

Walter Veit Open the ORCID record for Walter Veit [Opens in a new window]  and
Heather Browning Open the ORCID record for Heather Browning [Opens in a new window]
Walter Veit
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK wrwveit@gmail.com; https://walterveit.com/
Heather Browning
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK DrHeatherBrowning@gmail.com; https://www.heatherbrowning.net/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Despite the once-common idea that a universal ideography would have numerous advantages, attempts to develop such ideographies have failed. Here, we make use of the biological idea of fitness landscapes to help us understand the nonevolution of such a universal ideographic code as well as how we might reach this potential global fitness peak in the design space.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e255
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Acerbi, A., Tennie, C., & Mesoudi, A. (2016). Social learning solves the problem of narrow-peaked search landscapes: Experimental evidence in humans. Royal Society Open Science, 3(9), 160215. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160215CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review, 75(2), 332–337.Google Scholar
David, P., & Rothwell, G. (1996). Standardization, diversity and learning: Strategies for the coevolution of technology and industrial capacity. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 14(2), 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, D. C. (1995). Darwin's dangerous idea: Evolution and the meaning of life. Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Kaplan, J. (2008). The end of the adaptive landscape metaphor? Biology & Philosophy, 23(5), 625–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mesoudi, A., & Thornton, A. (2018). What is cumulative cultural evolution? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1880), 20180712. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.0712CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, S. (1932). The roles of mutation, inbreeding, crossbreeding, and selection in evolution. Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on Genetics, 1(8), 355–366.Google Scholar