Do you believe in behavioural modernity?

[dazzn]

Most of paleoanthrpology makes sense, other than "behavioural modernity".

How come we at 50,000 years "all of a sudden" became truly sapient and could abstract, ponder and reason?

The theory has some flaws as I see it:

- What caused this supposed DNA mutation?

- In essence then, were homo sapiens prior to this mutation not of the same species, or more accurately were a subspecies? Clearly their brains were not the same morphologically or physiologically as our own.

- Who is to say homo heidelbergensis or homo erectus/ergaster did not make primitive art forms? There is no evidence they did, but the contrary is also true, is it not? Moreover, whilst we did not descend from Neanderthals, our understanding of their relative intelligence is moot. They did have on average larger brains, however they could have been as smart as we are. We just don't know for certain. Neanderthals could have readily made art, which is yet to be discovered.

[The Grand Nudger]

Behavioral modernity is an observation. What you;re referring to is not the observation, but one of the hypothesis associated with the observation.

One faction of a current divide contends that it was a sudden event but they have some nagging bits of evidence suggesting that it wasn't to contend with- and those are the bits that the other side of the camp rely on when they form their hypothesis.

The flaw in the idea of a sudden change to behavioral modernity is simple. We find examples of pieces of what we would call behavioral modernity that predate the proposed timeframe of any sudden change. It looks cumulative, though once the "total package" is there, it is - granted -impressive.

It's pointless to invoke what we "might one day discover" when attempting t explain something using this method. We explain the unknown by reference to the known. There's no need for you to imagine a neanderthal picasso to point out problems for the hypothesis you're skeptical about.

[Minimalist]

How come we at 50,000 years "all of a sudden" became truly sapient and could abstract, ponder and reason?

Now, you are moving into my field, lad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6ningen_Spears

The Schöningen Spears are 8 wooden throwing spears from the Palaeolithic Age, that were found under the management of Dr. Hartmut Thieme from the Lower Saxony State Service for Cultural Heritage (NLD) between 1994 and 1998 in the open-cast lignite mine, Schöningen, county Helmstedt, Germany, together with approx. 16,000 animal bones. More than 300,000 years old,[1][2][3][4] they are the oldest completely preserved hunting weapons in the world and they are regarded as the first evidence of the active hunt by Homo heidelbergensis. These discoveries have permanently changed the picture of the cultural and social development of early man.

They have been worked very thoroughly and are evidence of highly developed technological skills and of workmanlike tradition. Like in today’s tournament javelins, the greatest diameter and therefore its centre of gravity is in the front third of the shaft. The tips are worked symmetrically from the base of the stems, the end of the tips were worked beside the medullary ray, the weakest part of the stem, on purpose.

In their throwing qualities, the wooden Schoeningen spears are equal to today’s tournament javelins. During tests, athletes could throw true to original replicas up to 70 metres.

Contrast if you would the bolded portion of your post with the bolded portions of the web site. These javelins were not fashioned by some grunting ape. There is an obvious understanding of aerodynamics - even if they did not understand it as such.

[The Grand Nudger]

Not only was the ape not grunting, he wasn't consumed all day every day with scrounging for food in the dirt and on the trees like a racoon. Workmanship takes time and focus (not to mention lots of otherwise useless and wasteful practice). When I started making wooden darts I had a workbench full of modern tools, but I can guarantee you that my shit was something that said grunting ape would have expected from one of his children, not a competent craftsman.

[dazzn]

Behavioral modernity is an observation. What you;re referring to is not the observation, but one of the hypothesis associated with the observation.

One faction of a current divide contends that it was a sudden event but they have some nagging bits of evidence suggesting that it wasn't to contend with- and those are the bits that the other side of the camp rely on when they form their hypothesis.

The flaw in the idea of a sudden change to behavioral modernity is simple. We find examples of pieces of what we would call behavioral modernity that predate the proposed timeframe of any sudden change. It looks cumulative, though once the "total package" is there, it is - granted -impressive.

It's pointless to invoke what we "might one day discover" when attempting t explain something using this method. We explain the unknown by reference to the known. There's no need for you to imagine a neanderthal picasso to point out problems for the hypothesis you're skeptical about.

I get that it's an observation, however it seems fanciful that all of a sudden we acted as fully sapient beings 50,000 years ago.

[Angrboda]

Contrast if you would the bolded portion of your post with the bolded portions of the web site. These javelins were not fashioned by some grunting ape. There is an obvious understanding of aerodynamics - even if they did not understand it as such.

I think your inference is a bit broad. It is possible for technology to evolve to a point of refinement through a process of cultural evolution, wherein with each generation, those with the best spears have the greatest influence on the succeeding generation. So while it's plausible that they possessed considerable knowledge and intelligence, it isn't necessarily the case when dealing with a simple technology. This is not my field, but if I'm not mistaken, many times the procedures for creating technological items become highly ritualized, even including superstitious elements which do not affect the utility of the item. So cultural evolution of such items without any understanding of the principles of their operation is also plausible.

(There are many examples of this in even the modern era, where technological items evolved through a series of stepwise refinement and competition, without any actual grasp of the underlying reasons for the change in the utility of the item. For example, the fluid dynamics associated with boats and sailing vessels.)

[Jackalope]

Behavioral modernity is an observation. What you;re referring to is not the observation, but one of the hypothesis associated with the observation.

One faction of a current divide contends that it was a sudden event but they have some nagging bits of evidence suggesting that it wasn't to contend with- and those are the bits that the other side of the camp rely on when they form their hypothesis.

The flaw in the idea of a sudden change to behavioral modernity is simple. We find examples of pieces of what we would call behavioral modernity that predate the proposed timeframe of any sudden change. It looks cumulative, though once the "total package" is there, it is - granted -impressive.

It's pointless to invoke what we "might one day discover" when attempting t explain something using this method. We explain the unknown by reference to the known. There's no need for you to imagine a neanderthal picasso to point out problems for the hypothesis you're skeptical about.

I get that it's an observation, however it seems fanciful that all of a sudden we acted as fully sapient beings 50,000 years ago.

You might want to investigate the continuity hypothesis.

[The Grand Nudger]

I get that it's an observation, however it seems fanciful that all of a sudden we acted as fully sapient beings 50,000 years ago.

The crux of my response was that there were other explanations. It isn't fanciful that "all of a sudden" we have evidence of the total package. Again, that's just an observation. Whether or not we got there "all of a sudden" is an area of contention. Behavioral modernity occurred, it's not an issue of belief, how it occurred is an active field of study.

[Anomalocaris]

Most of paleoanthrpology makes sense, other than "behavioural modernity".

How come we at 50,000 years "all of a sudden" became truly sapient and could abstract, ponder and reason?

The theory has some flaws as I see it:

- What caused this supposed DNA mutation?

- In essence then, were homo sapiens prior to this mutation not of the same species, or more accurately were a subspecies? Clearly their brains were not the same morphologically or physiologically as our own.

If it is clear to you, then you are dilusional. There is no direct evidence that morphologically brains of earlier anatomically modern homo sapiens were different from ours in meaningful ways.

We might infer they differ in some way not readily detected in fossils, but that it is. It is certainly not obvious from available evidence.

Also, some modern humans are obviously more stupid than others. In fact, given the range of intelligence present amongst human populations, it would not be a bad inference to say some percentage of the brighter individuals from amongest the anatomically modern homo sapiens before 50,000 years ago would pack higher brain wattage than many of the fully modern humans packing christian revival meetings today.

Does this mean some of the howling dervishes of pentacostalism really belong to a different species or at least a sub species?

[Minimalist]

I don't agree, Apo. That kind of advanced design implies cognitive powers as well as the cultural ability to pass them on to other members of the group.

We had some character show up here once claiming that the ability to write a sonnet was the defining characteristic of human intelligence. That's bullshit. Writing a sonnet is a side growth of an intelligence which allowed a small group of underpowered apes to overcome their physically superior but less organized competitors. Only when their bellies were full and their immediate enemies driven off could they sit on their butts and write a sonnet.