This essay discusses Cecilia Heyes’ groundbreaking new book Cognitive Gadgets: The Cultural Evolution of Thinking. Heyes’ point of departure is the claim that current theories of cultural evolution fail adequately to make a place for the mind. Heyes articulates a cognitive psychology of cultural evolution by explaining how eponymous “cognitive gadgets,” such as imitation, mindreading and language, mental technologies, are “tuned” and “assembled” through social interaction and cultural learning. After recapitulating her explanations for the cultural and psychological origins of these gadgets, we turn to criticisms. Among those, we find Heyes’ use of evolutionary theory confusing on several points of importance; alternative theories of cultural evolution, especially those of the Tomasello group and of Boyd, Richerson and Henrich, are misrepresented; the book neglects joint attention and other forms of intersubjectivity in its explanation of the origins of cognitive gadgets; and, whereas Heyes accuses other theories of being “mindblind,” we find her theory ironically other-blind and autistic in character.

本文讨论了塞西莉亚·海耶斯（Cecilia Heyes）开创性的新书《认知小工具：思维的文化演进》。Heyes的出发点是声称当前的文化进化理论未能充分地为思想奠定基础。Heyes通过解释如何通过社交互动和文化学习来“调整”和“组装”同名的“认知小工具”，例如模仿，思维理解和语言，心理技术，从而阐明了文化进化的认知心理学。在概括了她对这些小工具的文化和心理渊源的解释之后，我们转向批评。其中，我们发现海耶斯（Heyes）对进化论的使用在几个重要方面都令人困惑。文化进化的替代理论，尤其是托马塞洛集团的理论以及博伊德，里奇森和亨里奇的理论，都被曲解了；在解释认知小工具的起源时，该书忽略了共同关注和其他形式的主体间性。而且，虽然海耶斯（Heyes）指责其他理论是“头脑愚蠢”，但我们发现她的理论具有讽刺意味，是“盲目”和“自闭症”。