Bornean orangutans learn to exploit fig trees by watching others crack them open and feed. That social transmission of feeding strategy is genuine survival advantage.
But the learned dependency created a catastrophic vulnerability. When logging fragmented the forests through the 1980s and 1990s, those populations had no fallback.
A solitary forager in a comparable species might shift to alternative foods and adapt through individual trial and error. The orangutan raised in a tradition of fig-cracking had a narrower band of survival because the knowledge that saved them made them brittle.
Social learning absolutely does function as a survival mechanism. It also absolutely does create ecological fragility when the learned resource becomes unreliable. Over generations in stable forest, cultural transmission produces efficiency. Over a decade when that forest vanishes, the same efficiency becomes a liability. The orangutan optimized for one world encounters a different one.
Mastery in one context buys efficiency at the cost of flexibility in another.
The same pattern appears in how humans spend attention. A jazz musician trained classically can improvise across harmonic changes in real time. That training creates dependency on certain structures—a novel environment without the harmonic language they learned does not free them into exploration but narrows what they can do. Mastery in one context buys efficiency at the cost of flexibility in another. What you learn to do well, you learn to need. The question is not whether to pursue social learning or cultural knowledge. Whether you are building for a stable world or learning how to learn when your world changes.