Thread by @garwboy

OK, seen this Tweet shared a lot lately. I get why; it implies some scary, but cool, stuff. But it's misleading by omission, and a good example of why Evolutionary psychology is regularly co-opted by those with ideological agendas.

Here's why

Yes, it's more #BrainStuff

/1

I'll say up front; as far as I'm aware, nobody knows with 100% certainty why the Uncanny valley effect exists.

BUT, it doesn't automatically follow that there were shapeshifting human-resembling predators in our deep past. There are far more logical, and likely, explanations

/2

For instance, the uncanny valley effect may be the result of corpses.

A dead human looks just like a live one, but without all the subtle cues and animations that living humans give off constantly. Much like 'realistic' androids, animations etc.

/3

Why would we evolve to fear corpses?

Well, in ancient times, a dead human, despite maybe being the remains of a loved one, was a vessel for a great deal of rot, bacteria, mould, pathogens, etc.

In the days before germ theory and the concept of hygiene, that's bad

/4

Humans are very social, very strongly motivated to maintain relationships and connections. When someone we care about dies, we struggle to accept it, and always have.

But in the days before hygiene and germ theory, that's not a good survival trait.

/5

So, in this scenario, ancient ultrasocial humans who feel compelled to tend to their deceased friends and loved ones, they'd be more likely to pick up the sorts of diseases and bacteria that dead flesh is invariably host to.

/6

But then, our ultra-social and cooperative tendencies are what made humans so successful in the first place. You can't just ditch those, and it would take millennia of evolution to reverse that in any case. So, what to do?

/7

In this situation, you'd have humans who responded very favourably to anyone who gave off all the usual human cues, for social/relationship/cooperation reasons, but very *negatively* to anything that was human-but-not-quite, like corpses are.

/8

Put simply, it became an evolutionary advantage for our species to respond positively to living humans, but negatively to dead ones. Before we discovered germs, evolution gave us the instinctive aversion to things which likely housed them in abundance.

/9

For a long time, this wasn't especially confusing. 99.999% of us are instinctively reluctant and wary to interact with corpses, no matter how much we may rationalise it. Because that's how we've evolved. The #UncannyValley may just be an expression of the same thing.

/10

There are other theories, of course. Maybe it's due to an evolved aversion to other humans experiencing diseases, so are swollen, bleeding, ravaged, or anything else that makes them human-looking-but-not-quite.

Not very nice, I know. But then evolution rarely is.

/11

Or maybe the aversion to seeing a human-but-not-quite corpse stems from the fact that whatever killed it is likely to still be nearby. So, wanting to get away from there asap is a good survival trait.

/12

Point is, there are a lot of possible explanations for the #UncannyValley, and some are more logical and likely than others. "Human mimicking super predator" is waaaay down the feasibility list, let alone the 'only possible explanation'.

/13

And that's why it helps to do your research before commenting on #BrainStuff. Not sure that 'shapeshifting super predators' is less reassuring than 'our brains were shaped by corpses', but there you go.

Happy #Halloween, I guess?

/14

If you liked this #BrainStuff thread, please consider buying some/any of my books. That's where I put all this stuff usually.

amazon.co.uk/Books-Dean-Bur…

hive.co.uk/Search/Search?…

/end