Abstract
As presented in the introductory chapter of this part, cognitive niche construction is strictly connected with the need to lessen the unpredictability characterizing most human endeavors: as posited by niche construction theorists, this gives rise to a new kind of pressure resulting from the modified environment . If living in groups and increased sociality are, for instance, examples of cognitive niche construction aimed at improving fitness and welfare, they produce a new series of drawbacks liked to the unpredictability of human behavior. Hence, a new kind of niche construction must reduce this further unpredictability by making human behavior more predictable and controllable. It is interesting to connect recent studies concerning the coevolution of language and enculturation (Castro et al., Biol Philos 19:712–737 2004) with the emergence of assessors and curators overlooking the maintenance of a give niche, ecological at first, then more and more cognitive. It is in this perspective, I suggest, that it could be interesting to frame, and speculate on, the recent re-evaluation of gossip. Dunbar ’s famous hypothesis (Dunbar, Rev Gen Psychol 8(2):100–110 2004 ) that gossip developed as an evolutionary assorting device (creating bonds but boundaries as well) can be understood as the selection and formation of the fundamental ground for supporting a cognitive niche: language could in fact mediate, in an unprecedented way, the diffusion and elaboration of information about peers involved in the perpetration of the niche. Thus, language can effectively be considered as a super-niche (Clark, Theoria 54:255–268 2005), and as projecting a zero-level cognitive niche which scaffolds all subsequent niches, just because it is able to organize and maintain the human group s necessary for niche construction.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Dunbar ’s hypothesis will be introduced in this chapter, and analyzed in further detail in the next chapter (Sect. 8.3.1).
- 2.
- 3.
I will come back, along my argumentation, to the issue of the negative aspects of gossip when dealing with the weak pragmatic mode of corroboration for gossip-based knowledge in Sect. 7.3.3.
- 4.
Some more words of caution should conclude this introductory matter, stating how my analysis is not intended as totally competitive with other theories concerning gossip, elaborated for instance in evolutionary and psycho/cognitive paradigms (on which anyway I partially rely). For instance Yerkovich (1977), Baumeister et al. (2004), Dunbar (2004), Daniels Jr. (2012)—to mention a few heterogeneous traditions—stress how gossip has a role that transcends the informational one and is often aimed at consolidating the bonds and commitments between gossipers at the indirect expense of those being gossiped about. The point worth noting here, is that gossip (a bit like language), is such a complex and multilayered phenomenon that it can afford (if not plainly need) different levels of explanation that are not necessarily mutually exclusive: ultimately, deciding the priorities between these explanations (i.e., did gossip originate as an informational or a bonding mechanism?) faces the risk of becoming a “chicken and the egg” question which I will not tackle in my analysis.
- 5.
The evaluative dimension of gossip, not concerning gossip in a moral perspective but rather about the moral content of gossip, is the best example of how gossip is eminently group -laden: from the relevance of the shared information (Yerkovich 1977 ) to the accuracy of a report on someone’s behavior (Ayim 1994; Wilson et al. 2002; Beersma and Van Kleef 2011), to the moral judgement of such behavior (Gluckman 1963; Taylor 1994; Dunbar 2004; Magnani 2011), sometimes to the point of triggering a pragmatic reaction concerning the individual on which the gossip focuses. It is worth noticing that one should not understand this reference, and all subsequent ones, to morality and morality evaluation in a sense that makes this chapter an essay of moral philosophy: I am not interested in providing a moral appraisal of gossip, rather in expanding the well-established thesis (for instance by Gluckman 1963, Yerkovich 1977, Taylor 1994, Daniels Jr. 2012) that gossip is concerned with expressing moral judgements. In addition, I mean to stress how the attention to a naturalized dimension of moral ity (Magnani 2011; Boehm 2002) acknowledges the emergence of a proto-moral attitude, which continuously divides the (social) world in what should be approved and what should be disapproved (and eventually sanctioned): this does not require the explicit engagement of complex and explicit moral frameworks.
- 6.
Refer Sect. 7.4.2, where I will elaborate on the epistemic unfeasibility of gossip if it mostly consisted of spreading malicious distortions and fake news.
- 7.
For instance, pragmatic or strategic reasons, that yet are not linked to the object of rumor by a relationship of relevance.
- 8.
A warrior ant will exhibit a given behavior and a given cognition, and thus contribute to the cognitive performance of the hive, in a way that is necessarily different from that of a queen, and of a worker—in fact ants exhibit a high level of “social resilience” in the division of labour: if moved, they will try to come back to the precedent position (Sendova-Franks and Franks 1994).
- 9.
It is the exact opposite of a traditional computational model: a single machine is a hard-assembled system, and most components cannot switch roles, and when they do, as in the case of virtual devices, it requires a heavy software manipulation. Indeed, hard storage cannot behave as CPU, CPU cannot become a Random Access Memory, a Mobile Storage cannot become a Sound Drive, and so on. Conversely, the synerg etic group could be computationally imagined as a network of machines, each capable of working stand-alone, joining their efforts so that one acts principally as a processor unit, another one manages the graphic output, other ones the storage of data, and so on, and where any machine can potentially be assigned to any role.
- 10.
The intuitive idea that those group s should not be in conflict or ecologically compete is a pragmatic, and not an epistemological concern.
- 11.
Once again, it is proper to remember that efficacious epistemic systems do not necessarily provoke positive social outcomes.
- 12.
As we will see, these constraints, as far as gossip is concerned, amount to knowing gossip and how to gossip, and knowing that coincides with being a member of the group . cf. the following section.
- 13.
This aspect will be further developed in Sect. 7.4.2.
- 14.
Section 7.4.1 deals with related issues while outlining the actual inferences enacted by gossipers.
- 15.
To make a trivial example, a free rider must try to find the individuals who have not received any information about his behavior in order to cheat them.
- 16.
Linde (2001) explores the role of occasions and peculiar institutional artifacts as tools regulating storytelling with a social purpose.
- 17.
It is intuitive that, in order to proclaim herself a member of a group , an individual should at least know one of these two types of information, so that she can either name the other members (in a kind of membership by association, “I am in the same group as Paul, Mary and Peter.”) or name the objective/commitments of the group (as in “I am a member of the group of those who believe in Jesus Christ,” or “of those who think overfishing should be stopped,” and so on): it makes little sense to imagine that an individual proclaims herself member of a group and does not know who the other members are or what are the conditions for membership . Of course this has to do with the problem of spontaneous assorting (Wilson and Dugatkin 1997), and not with group s that are imposed upon unwilling or passive individuals by external forces.
- 18.
Such a perspective on gossip is not new, but Linde’s studies corroborate from another angle Baumeister, Zhang and Vohs’ contention that the benefits of gossip reside in its being a tool for cultural learning about the moral and social norms of the group (Baumeister et al. 2004).
- 19.
Things change when such a repository exists, as in the case of gossip mediated by Social Networking websites (Bertolotti 2011).
- 20.
Brackets refer to paragraphs in Peirce (1931–1958).
- 21.
Magnani (2013) explains that abduct ion (also when intended as an inference to the best explanation in the “classical” sense I have indicated above) represents a kind of reasoning that is constitutively provisional, and it is possible to withdraw previous abduct ive results (even if empirically confirmed, that is appropriately considered “best explanations”) in presence of new information. From the logical point of view this means that abduct ion represents a kind of nonmonotonic reasoning, and in this perspective we can even say that abduct ion interprets the “spirit” of modern science, where truth s are never stable and absolute. Peirce also emphasized the “marvelous self-correcting property of reason” in general (Peirce 1931–1958, 5.579). So to say, abduct ion incarnates the human perennial search of new truth s and the human Socratic awareness of a basic ignorance which can only be attenuated/mitigated. In sum, in this perspective abduct ion always preserves ignorance because it reminds us we can reach truth s that can always be withdrawn; ignorance removal is at the same time constitutively related to ignorance regaining.
- 22.
This is not meant to be a critique of Ayim ’s work, which brilliantly revealed the similar orientation towards inquiry. Ayim ’s positive bias might come from the feminist reading that she offers of gossip, as she presents it as the—often—sole available form of inquiry allowed to subjugated human categories (women, immigrants, etc.), and it should not be forgotten that the essay was published in a collection entitled Good Gossip, whose aim was to vindicate gossip from the excessive and unreasoned traditionally attributed negativities.
- 23.
A first objection is trivial, and should therefore be limited to a footnote: considering the nonmonotonic nature of gossiping abduct ions, we can easily imagine that—in the conversation about Petra’s possible affair—if the conversation stopped with Jason’s observation, or with John’s defense, or with Patricia’s rebuttal, the final conclusion would been very different. This often happens in gossip interactions: being idle and unfocused, gossip happens as it can, and those who detain the most valuable information might not be present and might not have shared it yet. In this sense, it can compare to science in a very amateurish way: a scientist could not be excused for joining a discussion on a field she’s an expert within, without having read of the latest groundbreaking advancement because it was published “just” a month earlier.
- 24.
They could not be sure about the truth fulness of Petra’s answer, even if they asked her.
- 25.
This could be reverberated by social dynamics such as “scapegoating,” described by Girard (1986): gossip plays a crucial role in individuating deviants who might bear the responsibility of a crisis just because they display what Girard calls “victimary signs,” signs of differentiation in times of undifferentiation and chaos. Similarly, if gossip plays a substantial role at poetically projecting the group ’s self-appraisal, then there is little wonder in discovering that, after the scapegoating takes place, the removal (or killing) of an innocent victim does indeed create a climate of general distention and wellbeing, as if the crisis had actually been solved. Girard ’s theory could be seen as a fitting example of gossip as a purveyor of military intelligence as described in the previous footnote. I will refer to Girard ’s theory when analyzing the sacrificial mindset at the end of Part III, Chap. 13: in particular, the aforementioned link between scapegoating and the pragmatic construction of truth will be echoed in the description of heroic self-sacrifice in Sect.13.2.3.
- 26.
Much of Part I of this book dealt indeed with this aspects.
- 27.
Linking the pleasurability of gossip to its inferential ground, to the ability of the speaker to connect the dots with respect to the clues she presented, is not radically new. If we could on the one hand trace it back to Keat’s poetical epigraph, according to which “Beauty is truth , truth beauty”—and hence the acquisition of truth should provoke an aesthetic pleasure—on the other hand there is a more recent and provocative hypothesis to contemplate. Harvard anthropol ogist Frank Marlowe suggested an evolutionary, inferential explanation for men’s fascination with ampler female breasts, and connected it with a woman’s “residual reproductive value” (Marlowe 1998). Whereas smaller breasts undergo less changes during a woman’s lifespan, larger breasts tend to sag more conspicuously with advancing age—hence, large breasts, whether sagging or not, could provide a valuable clue as to the woman’s age, and hence to her likelihood of being still fertile and able to carry on a successful pregnancy. I do not mean to overlook, but neither to engage, the questionable sexism of Marlowe’s hypothesis: what I find interesting is the connection he draws between something that is pleasurable, in this case sexually/aesthetically, and the fact that the same thing affords a correct abduct ive appraisal, which is not that distant from our speculation about the enjoyability of gossip.
- 28.
Gossip is often regarded as an exchange where the participants also aim at consolidating their relationship by talking or badmouthing about somebody else (Yerkovich 1977; Gluckman 1963 endorsed this view as well). When that is the case, it could be said that the participants’ aim is still inferential, but the primary objective is to assess each other’s Disposition towards a certain person.
- 29.
Gelfert ’s and Coady’s characterizations of gossip and rumor seem to present two sides of the same coin, as the former places the stress on evidence, while the latter on testimony.
- 30.
Sacrificial cognition will be analyzed in Part III, Chap. 13.
- 31.
The next chapter will deal with these aspects relating to gossip.
References
Anderson ML, Richardson MJ, Chemero A (2012) Eroding the boundaries of cognition: implications of embodiment. Top Cogn Sci 4:717–730
Ayim M (1994) Knowledge through the grapevine: gossip as inquiry. In: Goodman RF, Ben-Ze’ev A (eds) Good gossip. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, pp 85–99
Bardone E, Magnani L (2010) The appeal of gossiping fallacies and its eco-logical roots. Pragmat Cogn 18(2):365–396
Baumeister RF, Zhang L, Vohs KD (2004) Gossip as cultural learning. Rev Gen Psychol 8(2):111–121
Beersma B, Van Kleef GA (2011) How the grapevine keeps you in line: gossip increases contributions to the group. Soc Psychol Pers Sci 2(6):642–649
Bertolotti T (2011) Facebook has it: the irresistible violence of social cognition in the age of social networking. Int J Technoethics 2(4):71–83
Bertolotti T, Magnani L (2013) A philosophical and evolutionary approach to cyber-bullying: social networks and the disruption of sub-moralities. Ethics Inf Technol 15(4):285–299
Boehm C (2002) Variance reduction and the evolution of social control. Paper presented at annual workshop on the co-evolution of behaviors and institutions, Santa Fe
Castro L, Medina A, Toro M (2004) Hominid cultural transmission and the evolution of language. Biol Philos 19:712–737
Clark A (2005) Word, niche and super-niche: how language makes minds matter more. Theoria 54:255–268
Coady D (2012) What to believe now: applying epistemology to contemporary issues. Blackwell, New York
Collins L (1994) Gossip: a feminist defense. In: Goodman RF, Ben-Ze’ev A (eds) Good gossip. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, pp 106–114
Daniels JW Jr (2012) Gossip in the new testament. Biblical Theol Bull: J Bible Cult 42(4):204–2013
Dunbar R (2004) Gossip in an evolutionary perspective. Rev Gen Psychol 8(2):100–110
Flinn MV, Geary DC, Ward CV (2005) Ecological dominance, social competition, and coalitionary arms races: why humans evolved extraordinary intelligence. Evol Hum Behav 26:10–46
Foster EK (2004) Research on gossip: taxonomy, methods and future directions. Rev Gen Psychol 8(2):78–99
Gelfert A (2013) Coverage-reliability, epistemic dependence, and the problem of rumor-based belief. Philosophia 41(3):763–786
Gintis H, Bowles S, Boyd RT, Fehr E (eds) (2005) Moral sentiments and material interests: the foundations of cooperation in economic life. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Girard R (1986) The Scapegoat [1982]. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Gluckman M (1963) Papers in honor of Melville J. Herskovits: gossip and scandal. Am Econ Rev 4(3):307–316
Godrey-Smith P (2002) Environmental complexity and the evolution of cognition. In: Sternberg R, Kaufman K (eds) The evolution of intelligence. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mawhah, pp 233–249
Goldman AI (2010) Introduction. In: Haddock A, Millar A, Pritchard D (eds) Social epistemology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–28
Goodman RF, Ben-Ze’ev A (eds) (1994) Good gossip. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence
Holland J (1997) Emergence: from chaos to order. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Kelso JAS (2009) Synergies: atoms of brain and behavior. In: Sternad D (ed) Progress in motor control. Springer, Berlin, pp 83–91
Laland KN, Brown GR (2006) Niche construction, human behavior, and the adaptive-lag hypothesis. Evol Anthropol 15:95–104
Linde C (2001) Narrative and social tacit knowledge. J Knowl Manag 5(2):160–171
Magnani L (2005) Abduction and cognition in human and logical agents. In: Artemov S, Barringer H, Garcez A, Lamb L, Woods J (eds) We will show them: essays in honour of Dov Gabbay, vol II. College Publications, London, pp 225–258
Magnani L (2009) Abductive cognition: the epistemological and eco-cognitive dimensions of hypothetical reasoning. Springer, Berlin
Magnani L (2011) Understanding violence. Morality, religion, and violence intertwined: a philosophical stance. Springer, Berlin
Magnani L (2013) Is abduction ignorance-preserving? Conventions, models, and fictions in science. Log J IGPL 21(6):882–914
Marlowe F (1998) The nubility hypothesis. Hum Nat 9(3):263–271
Odling-Smee F, Laland K, Feldman M (2003) Niche construction. A neglected process in evolution. Princeton University Press, New York
Peirce CS (1931–1958) In: Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, vols 1–6 Hartshorne C, Weiss P (eds) vols 7–8, Burks AW (ed)
Putnam H (2002) The collapse of the fact/value dichotomy and other essays. Harvard University Press, Boston
Rohwer Y (2007) Hierarchy maintenance, coalition formation, and the origin of altruistic punishment. Philos Sci 74:802–812
Sendova-Franks AB, Franks NR (1994) Social resilience in individual worker ants and its role in division of labour. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B: Biol Sci 256(1347):305–309
Taylor G (1994) Gossip as moral talk. In: Goodman RF, Ben-Ze’ev A (eds) Good gossip. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, pp 34–46
Wilson D, Wilczynski C, Wells A, Weiser L (2002) Gossip and other aspects of language as group-level adaptations. In: Hayes C, Huber L (eds) The evolution of cognition. The MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 347–365
Wilson DS, Dugatkin LA (1997) Group selection and assortative interactions. Am Nat 149:336–351
Woods J (2005) Epistemic bubbles. In: Artemov S, Barringer H, Garcez A, Lamb L, Woods J (eds) We will show them: essays in honour of Dov Gabbay vol II. College Publications, London, pp 731–774
Woods J (2013) Errors of reasoning. Naturalizing the logic of inference. College Publications, London (forthcoming)
Yerkovich S (1977) Gossiping as a way of speaking. J Commun 27:192–196
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bertolotti, T. (2015). Gossip as Multi-level Abduction: The Inferential Ground of Linguistic Niche Construction. In: Patterns of Rationality. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, vol 19. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17786-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17786-1_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17785-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17786-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)