Evolutionary Significance Neotenic Signs of Human: Biological and Sociobiological Approaches

Abstract

The article attempts to analyze the evolutionary significance of neotenic human traits using the example of two alternative research orientations: biological and sociobiological approaches. It is noted that a biological comparison of neotenic characteristics of humans and animals reveals a paradoxical correlation in terms of the adaptive mechanisms of natural selection, due to the changed relationship between the prolongation of the period of adulthood with its “superficial infantilism” and a slowdown in the time of formation of reproductive function. On this basis it is concluded that the biological meaning of neoteny which consists in adaptation to conditions that prevent the full-fledged existence of biologically immature individuals contradicted the species criteria of hominid evolution. The heuristic situation in which morphological signs of neoteny extend to the field of behavioral stereotypes of human looks fundamentally different. In this research context the hypothesis of D. Morris on the consequences of neoteny associated with nudity is critically analyzed. It is shown that in the context of the application of sociobiological research program actions that potentially targeted at members of different demographic groups are of particular interest. Based on the features of the considered paradigm a variant of the simultaneous action of two directions of biological and social evolution is proposed: the preservation of infantile traits that ensure the internal cohesion of the group while simultaneously consolidating other hierarchical differences. The general conclusion of the authors of the article is as follows. Neotenic human traits do not have an independent value as a biological constant independent of the conditions under which the process of individual and group selection took place. Evolutionary value of human neoteny was determined by a complex of acquired and inherited factors allowing us to reason about their primary or secondary, direct or indirect determination, and consequently, about the advantages of biological or sociobiological approaches.