Precisely. We know that the common ancestor of Homo sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis and Homo hedelbergensis (~500,000 years ago) A) buried their dead, B) expressed themselves symbolically, and C) probably had advanced language (even if it wasn't as advanced as modern human language). The main results of this evidence is that behavioural modernity gradually emerged over hundreds of thousands of years. Your questions. I think that adapting to extreme environmental pressures is the only way real change occurs in nature. This is essentially what causes punctuated equilibrium. This is certainly the case with modern humans. So within the context of our modern system, we wouldn't be attempting to switch from fossil fuels if A) they weren't destroying planet and B) they weren't finite... but those two problems will cause a punctuated equilibrium-like change in our energy production (I think to solar). Well, I say that some type of proto-language has been around for 2 million years. I do touch on this in my Pathway to the Global Brain lecture at GBI. Work from Dunbar's team on language has really pushed the field into a new frontier. Here is a recent paper going over their hypothesis. And here is a good excerpt from The Social Brain by Robin Dunbar on the emergence of language: As for the evidence - it is derived from the A) relationship between neocortex size and group size within primate groups, B) the amount of time we spend talking to other humans (it's the same as other primates spend grooming), C) the symbolic communication medium that would have been required to stabilize ratcheting (increasingly complex) culture and technology. These lines of evidence converge on a time for some type of advanced language emerging between 1 million and 500,000 years ago - but again this is gradual - and when I say 2 million years ago - I mean that early Homo habilis would have been communicating with symbols - they would have been primitive but they would have been representing things symbolically. The difference is qualitative and quantitative and its a gradient... there is not necessarily a threshold where you can say "this is advanced" - and we have the problem of not actually being able to study extinct hominids. I think my overview of language and the difference between chimp and human communication expresses my opinion on the gradient between primitive and advanced symbolic communication. All humans have equally complex or "advanced" language. That is definitive evidence that modern language existed at least 200,000 years ago with the emergence of modern humans. Some anthropologists think that it emerged with modern humans (so this would be McWhorter's stance). I don't necessarily disagree with this - but it is definitely the case that all humans that existed 500,000 years ago had some type of language (although it wouldn't have been as complex. -- The final quote you cited seems like a fair statement to me. -- Sorry for the late reply - I wanted to answer thoroughly as I could.So you're points of contention with the author are mainly that some of his examples for behavioral modernity do not spontaneously arise at 50,000 years ago but that, in fact, some of the author's examples have been around for hundreds of thousands of years (the ceremony of burying the dead, clothes, language) and furthermore, behavioral modernity has been established in some observations of Homo erectus and Homo habilis.
Namely, [have we] demonstrated a propensity for behavioral plasticity that could, and would be the only way possible, of saving the biosphere?
where is your evidence that language has been around for 2 million years?
Language evolved to bridge this gap in bonding time requirement because it allows time to be used more efficiently.
1. Several individuals can be “groomed” at once.
2. Possible to time share with speech in a way that is not possible with grooming (talk/walk/feed)
3. Allows us to exchange information about events within our social network that happened during our absence.
-Suggests that language, at least in some form, would have had to have evolved by around 0.5 mya.
-We should probably not expect language to have arisen as a single phenotypic or genotypic event but rather as a series of stages.
-Language pathway: (i) conventional primate grooming (ii) increasing use of vocal chorusing to bond groups in the way that gelada and other living primates already do (iii) appearance of socially focused language designed to expand the range and quality of interactions needed to support larger groupings (iv) language as we now have it
what's the difference between a language and an "advanced" language?
I'm reading a book now, The Power of Babel, by John McWhorter, that asserts that "uncivilized" or fringe societies (like those in the Amazon, for example) have languages that are just as complex as the English language, albeit with less of a vocabulary, so the idea of there being advanced and unadvanced languages is too simplistic.
McWhorter claims that language is about 160,000 years old, not 500,000.
Woah, that took me on a wikipedia trip. Huh. Never heard of punctuated equilibrium, good to know. Thanks apesI think that adapting to extreme environmental pressures is the only way real change occurs in nature. This is essentially what causes punctuated equilibrium.