PNB T [  4 [ V C B S U  t  B O HV BH F  P G  &NP U J P O T  U I F  1F B D P D L T  5B J M  P S  "V E J U P S Z  $ I F F T F D B L F  Language of Emotions, Peacock's!Tail or Auditory Cheesecake? Musical Meaning: Philosophy vs. Evolutionary Psychology Tomasz Szubart C O G N I T I V E R E T H I N K I N G O F B E A U T Y : U N I T I N G T H E P H I L O S O P H Y . . .84 855PNB T [  4 [ V C B S U  t  B O HV BH F  P G  &NP U J P O T  U I F  1F B D P D L T  5B J M  P S  "V E J U P S Z  $ I F F T F D B L F  Traditional views concerning musical meaning, in the field of philosophy, quite often oscillate around the discussion of whether music can transfer meaning (and if so if it happens by a means similar to language). Philosophers have provided a wide range of views – according to some, music has no meaning whatsoever, or if there is any meaning involved, it is only of a formal/structural significance. According to the opposing views, music can contain meaning in a similar way to language and what is more, sometimes it can be even richer than language, as in music we are – arguably – able to encode "emotional meanings". In recent years, several approaches – also speculative – to the old philosophical question have been proposed by evolutionary psychologists, one of the most controversial views being that of Stephen Pinker's famous metaphor for music as "auditory cheesecake". This anti-adaptationist view has CFFODIBMMFOHFEGFYCZ(FPGGSFZ.JMMFSPS*BO$SPTT In this chapter, I enlist some of the main philosophical views on the titular problem and investigate some evolutionary-paradigm-based propoTJUJPOTGPS JUTTPMVUJPO  UPFYBNJOFXIFUIFSoCPUIGSPNFYQMBOBUPSZBOE methodological standpoints – the philosophy of music could gain something from recent developments in evolutionary psychology. The Problem of Musical Meaning in Philosophy Let's start with philosophy. Around two and half thousand years ago, according to some accounts, Pythagoras said that when "he encountered some drunken youths trying to break into the home of a virtuous woman, he sang a solemn tune with long spondees and the youths' 'raging wilfulness' abated" (Riedweg 2008, 30). This could be seen as one of the earliFTUBOFDEPUFT	BU MFBTU JO8FTUFSOUIJOLJOH TUSFTTJOHUIFQPXFSPGNVTJcal meaning. Speaking more seriously, Pythagorean views on music were NVDINPSFNFUBQIZTJDBM IPXFWFS  TUSFUDIJOH UP UIFFYUFOUPGBOVOEFSstanding of music as an abstract, mathematical form of the universe. As it was claimed that Pythagoras discovered the mathematical relationships in musical intervals, such claims, however strange we find them today, might TFFNKVTUJmFEGPSPOFUSZJOHUPVOEFSTUBOEBOEFYQMBJOUIFNBUIFNBUJDBM DIBSBDUFSPG$PTNPT"OZIPX JOUIF8FTUFSOUSBEJUJPO UIFQIJMPTPQIZPG music (and its meaning) started with the Pythagoreans who were the first to emphasize the importance of music, both its therapeutic power and its C O G N I T I V E R E T H I N K I N G O F B E A U T Y : U N I T I N G T H E P H I L O S O P H Y . . .86 power to signify something and the debate has lasted until modern times. In the following centuries, several, quite different and often contradictory, answers were provided to the question of why we listen to music and what might the musical meaning be. Starting from the Sophists, who claimed that we listen to music simply for physical pleasure, in the same way as we eat for the pleasure of eating, and ending with the Formalists, according to whom there is no meaning in music, or, if there is anything we listen to music for, it is its form, i.e. its formal (syntactical) dependencies. Between (or beyond, depending on the type of classification) those two radical views lies a wide spectrum of theories according to which music has or, at least, can have some kind of meaning. How is that meaning defined and – maybe more importantly – how does it function, remains the subject of the main controversy. Therefore, generally, we can speak of two main and basic questions within the musical meaning problem:  $BOBQJFDFPGNVTJDIBWFBNFBOJOH *GZFT  8IBUJTNVTJDBMNFBOJOH In other words, as Levinson puts it, we have two main views: the autonomist and the heteronomist: "The autonomist position is that music has no meaning, or else that it means only itself (thus yielding what is sometimes called 'intra-musical' meaning). The heteronomist position is that music has some sort of meanJOHUIBUJTPUIFSUIBOUIFNVTJDJUTFMG	TPNFUJNFTEFOPNJOBUFEAFYUSBNVTJcal' meaning)" (Levinson 1998). The modern debate is often considered to have started with the famous TUVEZCZ&EVBSE)BOTMJDL 0OUIF.VTJDBM#FBVUJGVM	 JOXIJDIIFFYpressed a formalistic approach to music, as opposed to the popular, rootFEJOSPNBOUJDJTN UIFTJTUIBUNVTJDDBOFYQSFTTFNPUJPOT"DDPSEJOHUP )BOTMJDL NVTJDEPFTOPUFYQSFTT	PSFWFOXPSTFoDPOUBJO FNPUJPOT8F can speak of music as symbolizing emotional qualities, as tension, surprise or calmness, but it is only an analogy, based on the dynamic elements contained in the music. Music does not have any content, and what is substantial of music is its form only. As Hanslick put it, referring to Gluck's famous air from Orfeo ed Euridice, where Orpheus sings: "I have lost my Euridice, nothing equals my misery!" the line could be substituted equally well by "I have found my Eurydice, nothing equals my happiness!" and the music XPVMETVJUKVTUBTXFMM)FODF DPODMVEFT)BOTMJDL NVTJDJUTFMGDBOOPUFYQSFTTFNPUJPOT UIBUXPVMEMFBEUPBDPOUSBEJDUJPO8IBUJTJNQPSUBOUJO 875PNB T [  4 [ V C B S U  t  B O HV BH F  P G  &NP U J P O T  U I F  1F B D P D L T  5B J M  P S  "V E J U P S Z  $ I F F T F D B L F  music is the structure and not the "emotional content", as we cannot even identify the latter. This and similar views on musical meaning, or rather lack of musical meaning is called formalism and is still a popular point of WJFX BUMFBTUBNPOHQIJMPTPQIFST	FH4DSVUPO;BOHXJMM "UUIF other end of the spectrum, we have the so-called, linguistic paradigm, acDPSEJOHUPXIJDI SPVHIMZTQFBLJOH NVTJDJTUPTPNFFYUFOUMJLFMBOHVBHF  and music possesses meaning as (or similarly too) a language. This concept is rooted in romanticism and a view of music as the "language of emotions". It was quite popular among composers, but also philosophers. For FYBNQMF 4DIPQFOIBVFSGBNPVTMZDMBJNFEi<NVTJD>EPFTOPUFYQSFTTUIJT or that individual or particular joy, this or that sorrow or pain or horror or FYBMUBUJPOPSDIFFSGVMOFTTPSQFBDFPGNJOE CVUSBUIFSKPZ TPSSPX QBJO  IPSSPS FYBMUBUJPO DIFFSGVMOFTTBOEQFBDFPGNJOEBTTVDIJOUIFNTFMWFT  abstractly" (Schopenhauer 2011, 289). One of the most interesting philosophical views on musical meaning can be found in Susanne Langer's work Philosophy in the New Key (1979). In the chapter primarily devoted to music and its meaning, Langer develPQFEB8JUUHFOTUFJOJBO	JFCBTFEPO5SBDUBUBSJBOUIFPSZPGNFBOJOH OPU 8JUUHFOTUFJOTWJFXTPONVTJD DPODFQUPGNVTJDBMNFBOJOH *OIFSWJFX music is capable of being symbolic, in the same way that language can be symbolic. The difference is that while linguistic symbols are representational, musical symbols are presentational, not descriptive or discursive. In this way, musical meanings are symbolic in a more imaginary than representative way. Even though the concept of presentational symbols seems to be controversial, Langer's arguments for the connection of music with language are still disputed up to now and are often mentioned in discussions concerning musical meaning, and not only in philosophy (Koelsch 2012). If one accepts that music and language are somehow connected, then, CZUIJT POFVTVBMMZNFBOTUIBUNVTJDFYQSFTTFTTPNFUIJOH JOBXBZTPNFIPXTJNJMBSUPUIFXBZMBOHVBHFFYQSFTTFTTPNFUIJOH0CWJPVTMZ UIFDPOUFOUTPGNVTJDBMFYQSFTTJPOXPVMEOPUCFBTFBTJMZVOEFSTUPPEBTUIFDPOUFOUPGB MJOHVJTUJDFYQSFTTJPO8JUI UIFTUBUFNFOU iUIF-BQUPQ JTPO UIF UBCMFw*DBORVJUFFBTJMZFYQSFTTNZWJFXPOUIFBDUVBMTUBUFPGCFJOH CVU JUXPVMECFIBSEUPFYQSFTTUIFTBNFUISPVHINVTJD.VTJDBMFYQSFTTJPOT are often – not only, however – about emotions. Here we meet another dimension of the problem of musical meaning. Having agreed that music has something to do with emotions, we need to know how this connection works. There are several answers to this problem, the main two being: (a) cognitivism and (b) emotivism. According to cognitivism, we mainly recognize and understand musical emotions, and according to emotivism, we C O G N I T I V E R E T H I N K I N G O F B E A U T Y : U N I T I N G T H E P H I L O S O P H Y . . .88 mainly feel the emotions in music. I use the word "mainly" to indicate the point at which the theories are often in opposition; however, it might be that we both feel and understand musical emotional meanings. Let's think of the 2nd movement of Bach's Double Violin Concerto in D-minor. Some people would agree that we can hear some form of sadness UIFSF)PXJTUIJTQPTTJCMF 5IFQPTTJCMFBOTXFSTBSFBTGPMMPXT  4BEness can be found in music, in other words, the music possesses sadness as an emotional quality. This seems to be quite implausible though (at least according to a somewhat naturalistic perspective), given that sadness is a kind of emotion, which is, in turn, a kind of a mental state. Other – noncontradictory – possibilities: (2) The music makes us feel sad and (3) we imagine sadness or understand music as sad. This problem is another of the major controversies in the contemporary philosophy of music. Summing up this short and selective overview, we can see that philosophers have provided almost all of the possible answers to previously stated questions. Starting from an understanding of music as not having any meaning, through formalism, symbolism, emotivism and ending with cognitivism. The discussion is still lively; however, it seems that little further progress has been made over the last few years on the philosophy of music alone. Musical research is developing very quickly in what is broadly understood as the cognitive sciences and research into the roots of music, and language in evolutionary psychology seems to provide some particularly interesting points of view, which may be worth looking at (after dealing with some meta-theoretical obstacles), also by philosophers. The Functions of Music as Seen by Evolutionary Psychology "As far as biological cause and effect are concerned, music is useless. It shows no sign of design for attaining a goal such as long life, grandchildren, or accurate perception and prediction of the world. Compared with language, vision, social reasoning, and physical know-how, music could vanish from our species and the rest of our lifestyle would be virtually unchanged. Music appears to be a pure pleasure technology, a cocktail of recreational drugs that we ingest through the ear to stimulate a mass of pleasure circuits as once" (Pinker 1997, 528). i* TVTQFDU UIBUNVTJD JT BVEJUPSZ DIFFTFDBLF  BO FYRVJTJUF DPOGFDUJPO 895PNB T [  4 [ V C B S U  t  B O HV BH F  P G  &NP U J P O T  U I F  1F B D P D L T  5B J M  P S  "V E J U P S Z  $ I F F T F D B L F  DSBGUFEUPUJDLMFUIFTFOTJUJWFTQPUTPGBUMFBTUTJYPGPVSNFOUBMGBDVMUJFT A standard piece tickles them all at once, but we can see the ingredients in various kinds of not-quite-music that leave one or more of them out" (Pinker 1997, 534). 5IFTFDPOUSPWFSTJBMWJFXTPG4UFQIFO1JOLFS POFPGUIFNPTUJOnVFOUJBM cognitive psychologists of the end of XX century caused lively debate – not only in the various fields of psychology (cognitive or evolutionary) but generally among academics concerned with the broad issue of the function of music (be it social, cognitive, para-linguistic or emotional)1. Naturally, the meaning of music, from an evolutionary perspective on psychology, will be SFEVDFE	JGOPUFMJNJOBUFE UPTPNFTPSUPGBGVODUJPOBMFYQMBOBUJPOPGUIF role that music played in the evolution of the human mind which in turn produced musical behaviour. Still, the question remains linked to the previous philosophical considerations – if music is capable of being meaningful, UIFOUIFSFNVTUCFTPNFiFWPMVUJPOBSZSFBTPOwCFIJOEUIBU8IBUUZQFPG reason that might be is a different question. As seen above, it is quite obvious that in the view of Pinker, music is not an adaptation. Such a view stands in opposition to some of the classical positions, the most famous being that of Darwin, according to who musical BCJMJUJFTBSF UIFPVUDPNFTPGTFYVBMTFMFDUJPO UIBUTJHOJmFT UIFmUOFTTPG males (analogously to the song of some species of birds), which also helped the development of what later became human languages: "... it appears probable that the progenitors of man, either the males PSGFNBMFTPSCPUITFYFT CFGPSFBDRVJSJOHUIFQPXFSPGFYQSFTTJOHUIFJS mutual love in articulate language, endeavored to charm each other with musical notes and rhythm" (Darwin 1871, 880). The modern version of such a position is offered by Geoffrey Miller in The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped Human Nature (2000a), where the author states that music is an adaptation, an important adapUBUJPOUIBUEFWFMPQFEUISPVHITFYVBMTFMFDUJPO*O.JMMFSTWJFX NVTJD	BT well as art, sports, religion, self-consciousness, and moral virtue) evolved SBUIFSUISPVHITFYVBMTFMFDUJPOUIBOUIFDMBTTJDBMOBUVSBMTFMFDUJPO.JMMFS  while accepting that music is an adaptation, fully rejects the survivalist view according to which the main role in the evolution of all human mental abilities was played by the "survival of the fittest". 1 As such, the problem of musical meaning might be treated as multior interdisciplinary, GPSFYBNQMF  JODPHOJUJWFOFVSPTDJFODFT UIF GVODUJPOBMQSPDFTTJOHPGNVTJD JTPGUFODPNpared with the function of other cognitive abilities, in order to search for possible links or underlying mechanisms (Koelsh 2012). C O G N I T I V E R E T H I N K I N G O F B E A U T Y : U N I T I N G T H E P H I L O S O P H Y . . .90 In The Mating Mind we read that: "Even if the survivalist theory could take us from the world of natural history to our capacities for invention, commerce, and knowledge, it cannot account for the more ornamental and enjoyable aspects of human culture: art, music, sports, drama, comedy, and political ideals" (Miller 2000a, 2). 5IFTVSWJWBMJTUWJFXDPVMECFEFGFOEFECZJOUSPEVDJOHBOFYQMBOBUJPO involving side effects – while the human brain evolved in order to develop human fitness, an accidental outcome of that, together with growth of the CSBJO TPNFFYUSB VOJOUFOUJPOBM PSOBNFOUBMRVBMJUJFTFWPMWFE MJLFNVTJD According to Miller, however, such a defence is unsatisfactory: "Biologically, it predicts that other big-brained species such as elephants and dolphins should have invented their own versions of human BSU1TZDIPMPHJDBMMZ  JU GBJMT UPFYQMBJOXIZ JU JTTPNVDIIBSEFSGPSVT UP learn mathematics than music, surgery than sports, and rational science than religious myth" (Miller, 2000a, 2). Music doesn't (directly) help to get more food, omit sickness or avoid predators. Instead, Miller proposes a view according to which music evolved to function as a courtship display (in a way like Peacock's tail). )FSFTBOFYBNQMFIPXJUDBOXPSLJODPOUFNQPSBSZIVNBO i$POTJEFS +JNJ )FOESJY  GPS FYBNQMF 5IJT SPDL HVJUBSJTU FYUSBPSEJnaire died at the age of 27 in 1970, overdosing on the drugs he used to fire his musical imagination. His music output, three studio albums and hunESFETPGMJWFDPODFSUT EJEIJNOPTVSWJWBMGBWPVST#VUIFEJEIBWFTFYVBM liaisons with hundreds of groupies, maintained parallel long-term relationships with at least two women, and fathered at least three children in the U.S., Germany, and Sweden. Under ancestral conditions before birth DPOUSPM IFXPVMEIBWFGBUIFSFENBOZNPSF)FOESJYTHFOFTGPSNVTJDBM talent probably doubled their frequency in a single generation, through UIFQPXFSPGBUUSBDUJOHPQQPTJUFTFYBENJSFST"T%BSXJOSFBMJ[FE NVsic's aesthetic and emotional power, far from indicating a transcendental PSJHJO QPJOUUPBTFYVBMTFMFDUJPOPSJHJO XIFSFUPPNVDIJTOFWFSFOPVHI 0VSBODFTUSBMIPNJOJE)FOESJYFTDPVMEOFWFSTBZ A0, PVSNVTJDTHPPE enough, we can stop now', because they were competing with all the hominid-Eric-Claptons, hominid-Jerry-Garcias, and hominid-John-Lennons. 5IF BFTUIFUJD BOE FNPUJPOBM QPXFS PGNVTJD JT FYBDUMZXIBUXFXPVME FYQFDU GSPN TFYVBM TFMFDUJPOT BSNT SBDF UP JNQSFTTNJOET MJLF PVSTw (Miller 2000b, 331). *O UIF.JMMFSJBO TFOTF NVTJD JT B TFU PG TFYVBMMZ TFMFDUFE JOEJDBUPST Those indicators might include: "Dancing reveals aerobic fitness, coordination, strength, and health. Because nervousness interferes with fine motor 915PNB T [  4 [ V C B S U  t  B O HV BH F  P G  &NP U J P O T  U I F  1F B D P D L T  5B J M  P S  "V E J U P S Z  $ I F F T F D B L F  control, including voice control, singing in key may reveal selfconfidence, TUBUVT BOEFYUSPWFSTJPO3IZUINNBZSFWFBM UIFCSBJOTDBQBDJUZ GPSTFRVFODJOHDPNQMFYNPWFNFOUTSFMJBCMZ BOEUIFFGmDJFODZBOEnFYJCJMJUZPG the brain's 'central pattern generators'. Likewise, virtuosic performance of instrumental music may reveal motor coordination, capacity for autoNBUJOHDPNQMFYMFBSOFECFIBWJPST BOEIBWJOHUIFUJNFUPQSBDUJDF	XIJDI in turn indicates not having heavy parental responsibilities already, and IFODFTFYVBMBWBJMBCJMJUZ .FMPEJDDSFBUJWJUZNBZSFWFBMMFBSOJOHBCJMJUZUP NBTUFSFYJTUJOHNVTJDBMTUZMFTBOETPDJBMJOUFMMJHFODFUPHPCFZPOEUIFNJO QSPEVDJOHPQUJNBMMZFYDJUJOHOPWFMUZw	.JMMFSC   This idea is apparently highly speculative. Even though the concept of NVTJDBTBTFUPGJOEJDBUPSTDBOFYQMBJOUIFFWPMVUJPOPGNVTJDBMJUZ XFBSFo seemingly – still quite far from the traditional area of musical meaning. By TBZJOHUIBUNVTJDJTBOBEBQUBUJPO XFTUJMMMBDLBOFYQMBOBUJPOGPSXIFSF the differences in musical (which is described not only by rhythm and comQMFYJUZ FWBMVBUJPOTDPNFGSPN8FNJHIUCF JOUFSFTUFE JOXIZBOEIPX a given piece of music is "emotional" or how we sometimes "understand" it. Miller provides an idea to answer such doubts, introducing the concept PGNVTJDBTBTFUPGTFYVBMMZTFMFDUFEBFTUIFUJDEJTQMBZT XIJDIJTCBTFEPO the effect of the Fisherian runaway. In the original formulation by Fisher: i8IFOFWFS BQQSFDJBCMF EJGGFSFODFT FYJTU JO B TQFDJFT XIJDI BSF JO GBDU correlated with selective advantage, there will be a tendency to select also UIPTFJOEJWJEVBMTPGUIFPQQPTJUFTFYXIJDINPTUDMFBSMZEJTDSJNJOBUFUIF difference to be observed, and which most decidedly prefer the more adWBOUBHFPVTUZQF4FYVBMQSFGFSFODFPSJHJOBUFEJOUIJTXBZNBZPSNBZOPU confer any direct advantage upon the individuals selected, and so hasten the effect of the Natural Selection in progress. It may therefore be far more XJEFTQSFBEUIBOUIFPDDVSSFODFPGTUSJLJOHTFDPOEBSZTFYVBMDIBSBDUFSTw (Fisher 1930). In other words: if there is a trait T among the males of a given species and some preference towards a perceptual quality Q of T in females along XJUIBOJOJUJBMCJBTUPXBSETUIFQSFGFSFODF1GPS2PG5 UIFOoCZTFYVBMTFlection – Q and P will evolve, develop and become prevalent in both males BOEGFNBMFT5IFSFBSFTFWFSBMFYBNQMFTPGTVDIBOFGGFDUJOOBUVSF NPTU famously, the peacock's tail, or generally the clear difference between peaDPDLTBOEQFBIFOT.JMMFSFYUSBQPMBUFT UIF'JTIFSJBOFYQMBOBUJPO UP UIF human mind and behaviour and also relates it to the function of music, as below: "Any psychological mechanism used in mate choice is vulnerable to this SVOBXBZFGGFDU XIJDINBLFTOPUPOMZUIFEJTQMBZTUIBUJUGBWPSTNPSFFYC O G N I T I V E R E T H I N K I N G O F B E A U T Y : U N I T I N G T H E P H I L O S O P H Y . . .92 treme, but makes the emotions and cognitions themselves more compelMJOH"HBJOTU UIFDMBJNUIBUFWPMVUJPODPVMEOFWFSFYQMBJONVTJDTQPXFS to emotionally move and spiritually inspire, the runaway theory says: any FNPUJPOBMPSTQJSJUVBMQSFGFSFODFTUIBUJOnVFODFNBUFDIPJDF OPNBUUFS IPXFYUSFNFPSTVCKFDUJWFMZPWFSXIFMNJOH BSFQPTTJCMFPVUDPNFTPGTFYVal selection. If music that emotionally moves or spiritually inspires tended UPTFYVBMMZBUUSBDUBTXFMM PWFSBODFTUSBMUJNF UIFOTFYVBMTFMFDUJPODBO FYQMBJONVTJDTBQQFBMBUFWFSZMFWFMw	.JMMFS   If Miller is right (which with current methods and types of evidence is hard to establish scientifically) music and music's capability to communiDBUFNJHIUmOEBOFYQMBOBUJPOXJUIJO UIFFWPMVUJPOBSZQBSBEJHN XIJDI seems to be an enticing solution, especially for naturalistically minded philosophers of music (and mind). On the other hand, there are several alUFSOBUJWFTUPUIF'JTIFSJBOSVOBXBZBTFYQMBOBUJPOT UIFNBJOBMUFSOBUJWF CFJOHUIF)BOEJDBQ1SJODJQMFQSPQPTFECZ"NPU[;BIBWJ8IJMFUSZJOHUP answer the question of why some traits, which apparently do not help the fitness of the male, are preferred by females (deer's antlers, peacock's tail), ;BIBWJXSJUFTiTFYVBMTFMFDUJPOJTFGGFDUJWFCFDBVTFJUJNQSPWFTUIFBCJMJUZ PGUIFTFMFDUJOHTFYUPEFUFDURVBMJUZJOUIFTFMFDUFETFY5IFTFMFDUJOHTFY benefits because it can be assured of the quality of its mate, while the seMFDUFETFYCFOFmUTCFDBVTFJUDBOCFUUFSBEWFSUJTFJUTRVBMJUZBOEUIVTQSPCBCMZBDRVJSFTNPSFPSBCFUUFSNBUF#VUCPUITFYFTBMTPMPTF.BMFTMPTFCZ investing (time, energy, risks, etc.) in advertising. Females may receive less help from their mates and bear sons which are less fit to stand the pressure of natural selection (since they are also of the genotype which invests NPSFJOBUUSBDUJOHGFNBMFT w	;BIBWJ   0OFPG UIFXBZT UPQSFTFOURVBMJUZ o UIFPSJHJOBM JEFBPG;BIBWJ o JT through a handicap system. A male by developing a trait that handicaps in comparison to others shows that it can survive even though it is weaker, or more endangered in the environment. By this, the quality of the genes is presented, and as an outcome, a handicapped male may be found to be attractive by female and preferred over non-handicapped specimens. In FGGFDU UIFUSBJUCFDPNFTNPSFQPQVMBSBOEQSFWBMFOUJOUIFTQFDJFT8IJMF this category was first applied to animal (bird) behaviour, as a general rule DPVMECFIZQPUIFUJDBMMZFYUFOEFEPOPUIFSTQFDJFT  JODMVEJOHIVNBOT *O UIJTTFOTF JGTFBSDIJOHGPSBOFWPMVUJPOBSZFYQMBOBUJPOGPSUIFGVODUJPOPG music, we could also consider the handicap principle. Applied to human music, it could be assumed that musicality (or, going further, maybe even particular abilities to control musical characteristics, as rhythm, melody or harmonizing) is a handicap. The problem arises, however, that – contro935PNB T [  4 [ V C B S U  t  B O HV BH F  P G  &NP U J P O T  U I F  1F B D P D L T  5B J M  P S  "V E J U P S Z  $ I F F T F D B L F  WFSTJBMMZoTFYVBMEJNPSQIJTNJTOPUBTOPUJDFBCMFJOUIFDBTFPGNVTJDBCJMJUJFTBTJUJTJOUIFBQQFBSBODFPGBQFBDPDL0SNBZCFJUJT "MTP JUXPVME CFOFDFTTBSZUPPGGFSBOFYQMBOBUJPOPGIPXNVTJDBMUSBJUTDPVMECFSFMBUFE to the ecological problems of the species. Depending on the answers to these questions, which is beyond the scope of this article, one could decide XIFUIFSJUJTWBMJEUPJODMVEFTFYVBMTFMFDUJPOUIFPSZBTBOFYQMBOBUJPOGPS the function of music. Quite a different approach is taken by Ian Cross in his work concerned with music as a social tool compared to language. In the article "The Evolutionary Nature of Musical Meaning" Cross claims that both music and language constitute complementary components of human communication systems. Musical meaning, being different from language, can be categorized according to its two main functions: culturally-enactive and NPUJWBUJPOBMTUSVDUVSBM8IJMFDVMUVSBMMZFOBDUJWFNFBOJOHBSJTFTGSPNDVMUVSBMDPOUFYUT	BOENBZWBSZBNPOHQPQVMBUJPOT

UIFNPUJWBUJPOBMTUSVDtural aspect is rooted in survival-related development and has strong links UPFWPMVUJPO *O UIJTXBZ IJTQPJOUTVQQPSUTBOBEBQUBUJPOJTUWJFX8IJMF we are not interested in the culturally-enactive meaning here, let's have a closer look at motivational-structural meaning. In this sense, it seems that Cross' idea is quite simple. Music as a communicative tool uses natuSBMTJHOBMT8IZIBTNVTJDFWPMWFE #FDBVTFJUCFDBNFBTUBCMFTUSBUFHZUP NBLFTQFDJmDTPVOET)FSFJTBOFYBNQMF "Lower frequency sound signals denote larger animals: perceivers (assessors) will be selected to attend focally to the frequencies of sounds in making judgments about threat level; simultaneously, managers (sound producers) will be selected so as to be capable of producing the lowest frequency sounds possible so as to seem to constitute the greatest possible threat" (Cross 2004, 185). Low-frequency sounds suggest a large animal and thus danger from a predator; high frequency, rapid and intense sounds indicate "intense, terminal, fear and aggression". As making such sounds has been shown to be useful in survival, it became a popular strategy for humans. Such an approach directly aligns with classical natural selection without much referFODFUPTFYVBMTFMFDUJPO BTXBT GPSFYBNQMF NFOUJPOFEJO.JMMFSTUIFPSZ Music directly helped with survival because it was communicative. At this level, however, still only as a sign, not as a symbol. In another article on music and evolution (Cross 2003), Cross suggests UIBUNVTJDNJHIUCFBOFYBQUBUJPO	XIJDIDPVMECFTFFOBTDPOUSBEJDUPSZ to the idea of music as an adaptation). It is claimed that music may have arisen in the course of evolution in part as a result of processes of progresC O G N I T I V E R E T H I N K I N G O F B E A U T Y : U N I T I N G T H E P H I L O S O P H Y . . .94 sive altricialisation2. To put it simply music evolved as a side-effect of the prolonged period of infancy in humans. The argument for such a claim goes as follows: "It can be hypothesised that this absolutely longer maturational period sustained the persistence of childhood patterns of thought and behaviour into and through adulthood, at least in part because of the increased likelihood that a higher proportion of a population than had previously been the case would have had access to, and would have had to deal with those with access to, such patterns of thought and behaviour. Populations that accommodated their collective behaviours to childhood modes of thought, action and interaction are likely to have had members who were possessed PGnFYJCMFNPEFTPGDPHOJUJWFPQFSBUJPOBOEXFSFTLJMMFEJOTPDJBMJOUFSBDtion, hence affording them an advantage in survival (and reproduction) over populations that had not engaged in such an accommodation." (Cross 2003, 86–87). One of those "patterns of thought and behaviour", claims Cross, is music. In other words, music evolved as we had contact with infants' "protomusical behaviour" for a long time (longer than any other primates) and music becomes incorporated into the adult's cognitive framework, and that was useful. /PEPVCU UIFSFDPVMECFEJGGFSFOUJOUFSQSFUBUJPOTPGNVTJDBTBOFYBQtation, but Cross' speculations show a broad range of the possible ways in XIJDIUIFGVODUJPO	T PGNVTJDDPVMECFFYQMBJOFEBOEJODPSQPSBUFEXJUIJO an evolutionary framework. Summary and Conclusions As in philosophy the problem of musical meaning seems to have reached an impasse, with the assumption of methodological naturalism and the acceptance of some level of interdisciplinarity, one might try to reach towards the natural sciences to see if there are any developments that would help to provide ideas to be included within the philosophical discourse. Such a project could be seen as methodologically suspicious; hence, it's worth providing some meta-framework of operation. Seeing the 2 Altricialisation defined as: "a lengthening of the pre-reproductive juvenile period" (Cross 2003, 79). 955PNB T [  4 [ V C B S U  t  B O HV BH F  P G  &NP U J P O T  U I F  1F B D P D L T  5B J M  P S  "V E J U P S Z  $ I F F T F D B L F  IVNBONJOE BOE JUT FYQMBOBUJPOT  BT BNVMUJMFWFMNFDIBOJTN #FDIUFM  Abrahamsen 2005) might be one of the most promising approaches. The main controversy about musical meaning in philosophy is whether music is capable of being meaningful and if so if it is by means similar to that of language. Together with the development of the cognitive sciences (particularly cognitive neuroscience), this ancient problem finds some empirical formulations (Szubart 2019). Another prevalent contemporary approach UPNPEFMBOEFYQMBJONVTJDBMNFBOJOHJTFWPMVUJPOBSZQTZDIPMPHZ*UEPFT not seem to be controversial that Pinker's anti-adaptationist view on music is widely rejected.3 Instead, several evolutionary models of musical meanJOHIBWFCFFOQSPQPTFE JODMVEJOHNVTJDBTBOFGGFDUPGTFYVBMTFMFDUJPO  by means of Fisherian runaway, or the handicap principle and music as BEJSFDUBEBQUBUJPOPSNVTJDBTFYBQUBUJPO5PEFDJEFXIJDIPOFPGUIFTF ideas suits the evolutionary story best is not a task for the philosopher. It seems important to note, however, that musical meaning problem has its continuation, often based on long-term philosophical considerations, and the concept of music as somehow connected with language has not been lost; on the contrary, it is being developed further. References #FDIUFM 8 "CSBIBNTFO"	 &YQMBOBUJPO".FDIBOJTU"MUFSOBUJWFStudies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36, 421–441. Cross, I. (2003): Music and Evolution: Consequences and Causes. Contemporary Music Review, 22, 79–89. Cross, I. (2004): The Evolutionary Nature of Musical Meaning. Musicae Scientiae, 113, 179– 200. Darwin, C. (1871): The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray. Fisher, R. A. (1930): The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection 0YGPSE$MBSFOEPO1SFTT Hanslick, E. (1986): On the Musically Beautiful: A Contribution towards the Revision of the Aesthetics of Music (Transl: Payzant, G.), Indianapolis: Hackett. Koelsch, S. (2012): Brain and Music 0YGPSE8JMFZ#MBDLXFMM Langer, S. (1979): Philosophy in a New Key: A Study in the Symbolism of Reason, Rite, and Art, Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 3 And shared the fate with its precursor – Sophists' idea of music as a purely physical pleasure. C O G N I T I V E R E T H I N K I N G O F B E A U T Y : U N I T I N G T H E P H I L O S O P H Y . . .96 Levinson, J. (1998): Musical Meaning: General. In: Craig, E. (ed.): Routledge Encyclopaedia of Philosophy 0YGPSE5BZMPS'SBODJT Miller, G. F. (2000a): The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped Human Nature /FX:PSL Anchor Books. .JMMFS ('	C &WPMVUJPOPG)VNBO.VTJDUISPVHI4FYVBM4FMFDUJPO*O8BMMJO /-  Merker, B., Brown S. (eds.): The Origins of Music, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Pinker, S. (1997): How the Mind Works /FX:PSL88/PSUPO Riedweg, C. (2008): Pythagoras: His Life, Teaching, and Influence, Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Schopenhaurer, A. (2011): The World as Will and Representation. Volume 1. (Norman, J., 8FMDINBO, A., Janaway, C. eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Scruton, R. (1999): The Aesthetics of Music 0YGPSE0YGPSE6OJWFSTJUZ1SFTT 4[VCBSU 5	 &YQMBOBUJPOBOE3FEVDUJPOJOUIF$PHOJUJWF/FVSPTDJFODF"QQSPBDIUP the Musical Meaning Problem. In: Démuth, A. (ed.): The Cognitive Aspects of Aesthetic Experience II – Selected Problems. Bratislava: Peter Lang GmbH, Veda. ;BIBWJ "	 .BUF4FMFDUJPOB4FMFDUJPOGPSB)BOEJDBQJournal of Theoretical Biology, 53, (1), 205–214. ;BOHXJMM /  "HBJOTU&NPUJPO)BOTMJDL8BT3JHIUBCPVU.VTJDBritish Journal of Aesthetics, 44, (1), 29–