Posted on 06/21/2011 6:34:59 AM PDT by decimon
Advanced crafting of stone spearheads contributed to the development of new ways of human thinking and behaving. This is what new findings by archaeologists at Lund University have shown. The technology took a long time to acquire, required step by step planning and increased social interaction across the generations. This led to the human brain developing new abilities.
200 000 years ago, small groups of people wandered across Africa, looking like us anatomically but not thinking the way we do today. Studies of fossils and the rate of mutations in DNA show that the human species to which we all belong – Homo sapiens sapiens – has existed for 200 000 years.
But the archaeological research of recent years has shown that, even though the most ancient traces of modern humans are 200 000 years old, the development of modern cognitive behaviour is probably much younger. For about 100 000 years, there were people who looked like us, but who acted on the basis of cognitive structures in which we would only partially recognise ourselves and which we do not define today as modern behaviour.
It is precisely that period of transformation that the researchers at Lund University in Sweden have studied. In the next issue of the well renowned Journal of Human Evolution, they present their new findings on the early modern humans that existed in what is now South Africa, approximately 80 000 years ago.
The findings show that people at that time used advanced technology for the production of spearheads and that the complicated crafting process developed the working memory and social life of humans.
“When the technology was passed from one generation to the next, from adults to children, it became part of a cultural learning process which created a socially more advanced society than before. This affected the development of the human brain and cognitive ability”, says Anders Högberg, PhD.
The technology led to increased social interaction within and across the generations. This happened because the crafting of stone spearheads took a long time to learn and required a lot of knowledge, both theoretical and practical. Producing a stone spearhead also required the ability to plan in several stages. This social learning contributed to the subsequent development of early modern humans’ cognitive ability to express symbolism and abstract thoughts through their material culture, for example in the form of decorated objects.
“The excavations have been carried out in a small cave; the location we have studied is called Hollow Rock Shelter and lies 250 km north of Cape Town. We are cooperating with the University of Cape Town and the research we have just published is part of a larger research project on this location”, says Professor Lars Larsson.
The article is entitled Lithic technology and behavioural modernity: New results from the Still Bay site, Hollow Rock Shelter, Western Cape Province, South Africa. For more information, please contact:
Anders Högberg, mobile 0709-124315 email: anders.hogberg@sydsvenskarkeologi.se
Lars Larsson, mobile 0708-345430 email lars.larsson@ark.lu.se
Making the cut ping.
They assume “training” made the brains and not that the brains provided the ability for the skills.
Why is it that educated guesses are presented as authoritative knowledge?
About the time the last glacial maximum started.
The only problem is the earth is only around 12,000 years old. Maybe less.
Well, technically speakin’ and all, a lot of this so-called the “cutting edge” training happened when hunter-warrior tribe 1 figgered out that hunter-gatherer tribe 2 was a good target for being on the receiving edge of cutting wedge technology version 1.5 .... And that communicatin’ the need to accurately get the “HELP” back to tribe 1 helped get help from tribe 1 to protect himself as he attacked tribe 2; thus language, writing, speech, etc.
Warfare IS evolutionary: Survival of the fitness requires that the fittest be mentally sharper as well. And, if you are not protecting those already born and those back at the house protecting and feeding your own youth, “you” won’t survive either. Thus, “civilized” behavior of charity, love, and forgiveness are required.
Let's toss out everything we know from Darwin to Mendel to modern DNA analysis and bring back some Lamarckian inheritance where giraffes that stretch their necks out further have longer necked offspring.
I think they’re giving spear-tip making courses at Sylvan now.
The question is do we have any degree of conscious control of the super computers inside our DNA strands ~ so, let's say, I'm a frog and I start thinking "Hey, I could use a longer tongue" ~ visualizing it of course ~ and creeky machinery starts moving and a gene is identified for a duplication ~ and the next frogs down the line will have longer tongues.
At the moment no one has the slightest idea if the "outside world" has influence over the "inside world" other than through reproduction through sex and the relative death rates pertaining to the resultant ofspring.
On the other hand there may well be tremendous linkage of which we are simply not aware.
The sharper tools win the spoils, making many sharper tool, Jr.'s.
I think that mental evolution like this continued even through recent centuries, when the ability to plan and make things like water mills, wagons, guns, etc. gave someone an edge over peasants. The process is reversed when socialism rewards the indolent and stupid.
Should be easy to test. Take some animals and do a genetic analysis on them. Then feed the control group normally and make the experimental group work a little harder for their food (making the giraffes stretch their necks). Then compare each groups' sperm and eggs with each animal's original DNA. If there are specific changes, then that would point to Lamarckian effects on DNA.
At some point I think we need to find the mechanism that controls epigenetics.
Check out the history for the domestication of foxes. In 40 generations, wild foxes were transformed into tame, dog-like, creatures.
The article is poorly written. Training did not change their brain or their DNA; it was selective breeding over a long period of time.
They assume “training” made the brains and not that the brains provided the ability for the skills.
///
agreed.
...i only agree with them, there was a “leap” in that time frame, after relative stagnation for 120,000 years.
so the event is clear, but the cause is debatable.
and i seem to recall that there was a near extinction event (for humans) around 74,000 years ago...
They assume “training” made the brains and not that the brains provided the ability for the skills.
///
yep. just like they assume boys become boys, only because they play with trucks, not dolls...
(btw, my compliments to your tag line!!!)
Why do you assume that's the case? If a report includes qualifiers then it is panned for that.
Typical response to the qualifiers: "As soon as you see 'maybe,' 'could have,' etc., you know these so-called "scientists" don't know shite!"
More accurately, having the ability to construct tools gave the toolmaker a big survival advantage over non-toolmakers, resulting in selection for toolmaking ability. The humans who couldn't master the skills died out and were replaced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.