ASEBL Journal – Volume 11 Issue 2, Spring 2015
More strongly, theory of mind in psychology explains why human presence is often desired in artworks. Theory of mind is the adapted sense of understanding
about the desires and operations of the minds of others, and its development in a
growing child is seen at around four years old, sometimes even as young as three,
which two-year-olds lack, and is an ability humans have perfected to a unique degree (e.g. Wellman 1991) (the phrase was coined by Premack & Woodruff 1978).
For a good introduction, see Baron-Cohen (1999). The ability to place oneself into
someone else’s position allows for the social complexity humans have developed,
because it allows humans to reason with each other, to deceive and counter deception, and to form deep relationships with others that would be impossible otherwise. Theory of mind suggests story-telling has developed because dealing with
characters and situations, helps practice and develop individuals’ theories of
minds, and consequently develops their ability for social interaction. Lisa Zunshine
claims specifically that literature helps improve theory of mind because it allows
people to read characters’ inner thoughts and motives even when characters might
try to disguise their mental feelings from others, occurrences that do not happen
frequently in the real world (Zunshine 2006, 2012). If the inclusion of human presence does often increase the appeal and draw of artworks, it is likely because human presence stimulates adaptations for navigation in the world as a social being.
It is also likely that artworks in general stimulate theory of mind adaptations
whenever people look at art, because viewing artworks suggests human proximity
and also an ability to understand another human, as all artworks show expression
by their maker (e.g. Keskin (2009)).
The evidence against sexual selection as the origin of the arts looks pretty damaging. For example, despite the hypothesis that singing in humans evolved from initial courtship songs to woo mates, gibbons are the only primates that “sing”, which
sing together as a monogamous pair to communicate their shared territory to others
(Dissanayake 2014c). However, there is good evidence to suggest that Homo neanderthalensis might have sung (Mithen 2005) (for Dissanayake’s review of Mithen’s book, see Dissanayake (2005)). The main criticisms against the sexual selection hypothesis are that the evidence Miller supported is fragile, and although
many activities and traits are subject to sexual selection, this is not always their
main purpose (e.g. Ball 2010, Dunbar 2005). Miller and Dutton argue the main
sexual selection in e \