Missionloops · research seat (open) · cultural evolution & anthropology
Whether a network's methods ratchet upward, or decay.
A research seat on whether field-tested method builds up across a live trust network, and on what governs that, the number of predecessors or the structure of the ties between them. On this network the tree of transmission can be watched as it forms, a live complement to the trees reconstructed from what survived.
The mechanism this seat studies
In the field's standard account, cumulative cultural evolution is a ratchet: above a threshold of diverse predecessors, learners sample what came before, filter out what fails, and build upward, so a group's methods get better across generations rather than starting over each time. Below the threshold, skills decay.
Does that ratchet engage in a live trust network? And is it the number of predecessors that governs it, or the structure of the ties? That is the question this seat is open to study.
What the literature already shows
- Cumulative culture ratchets, or it decays. Above a threshold of diverse predecessors a population accumulates and improves its methods; below it, technique is lost. The mechanism is known; whether a given network crosses the threshold is not.
- No single factor drives cultural complexity. Population size predicts toolkit richness in some societies and risk of resource failure in others, and which one operates is contingent on the kind of society, not universal. The tidy single-cause story does not survive a fair test.
- Structure governs whether a technique stays coherent, not culture itself. Where a craft travels through a closed network it descends like a clean family tree even when people copy widely; the outward-facing layer fragments first while the in-group core is transmitted faithfully. Structure beats headcount.
- Complexity grows by reusing a versatile core, with diminishing returns. The count of tools grows more slowly than the count of parts: societies diversify mostly by recombining the parts they already have, and there is no free lunch for diversity.
- The strongest results are negative ones. The field's most durable findings are the cases where a fashionable single-cause explanation was given a fair test and failed. This is a discipline of killing tidy stories, including one's own.
Phylogenetic method reconstructs the tree of transmission from the surviving record, inferring how technique descended and branched. Here the network is live and fully logged, so that same tree can be watched as it forms. You see technique pass from operator to guide to the next operator, branch across communities, and either ratchet upward or decay, a live counterpart to the trees drawn from the deep-time record. Whether the ratchet engages at all is not assumed. It is the study.
The open questions
The sharpest question this seat owns is whether field-tested method actually accumulates across the network, and what governs it. Cumulative cultural evolution predicts a threshold in the number of diverse predecessors; the structure-over-size finding predicts that the closure and shape of the ties matter more than the count. The network is the place to tell them apart, because both the number of predecessors and the structure of the ties are observable directly rather than inferred.
- Recombination across community boundaries. When an operator and a guide come from different communities with different tacit knowledge, do their methods collide and recombine into something neither community would reach alone, or does the boundary keep them separate the way a closed network keeps a craft within its own line?
- Durability under attack. Does adversarial pressure work-harden the network that carries the doctrine, or fracture the trust the transmission runs on?
- Where it meets the rest. The accumulating, cross-community network is the civil-resilience door, where cohesion across fault lines counters divide-and-conquer; the recombination thread meets the innovation seat, where novelty-from-recombination is the question.
Why the platform is the instrument
Cultural evolution is mostly studied at the speed of generations, reconstructed from the surviving record. Transmission is inferred after it has happened, and the structure of the ties is reconstructed from the pattern it leaves. Here the network is live and growing, and every interaction is logged. Transmission and branching can be measured as they occur, the structure of the ties is observed directly, and AI compresses the ratchet from generations onto infrastructure time. Cumulative cultural evolution becomes observable within a study rather than across centuries.
The studies this seat can run
A menu, not a programme. Recast any toward your own published line, or bring a question we did not anticipate.
- Cross-Community Bridges and Recombination Whether techniques blend across community boundaries or stay within them.
- The Self-Spreading Cure Under Attack Whether the network carrying the doctrine strengthens or fractures under adversarial pressure.
The broader cluster is the rest of the menu: whether a trained minority protects the wider population, whether the network hardens against intrusion, and whether resilience and innovation turn out to be one property.
The seat, and the terms
The seat is open, and the ask is a conversation, not a commitment. The terms are a free option: tell us the question you would bring, and commit only if it is funded.
We are looking for the researcher whose line is cultural evolution and the transmission of technique, the phylogenetics of material culture, and the question of whether structure or size governs how a method accumulates. If that is your line, the instrument here lets you watch the tree of transmission form, a live complement to the trees you reconstruct from what survived.
scott (at) missionloops (dot) ca
See also: All research seats · Defence · Member · Investor