4 ms·

A problem that this hypothesis has to contend with is that there are populations of humans (Khoi san and African pygmies) who split off from the rest of humanit

A problem that this hypothesis has to contend with is that there are populations of humans (Khoi san and African pygmies) who split off from the rest of humanity > 70k years ago, yet who seem pretty modern.

trevyn 7y ago
The mutation allowed certain individuals to invent recursive language, which could then be taught to individuals without the mutation during a critical period in childhood.
foldr 7y ago
What could be more "modern" in this case than existing at the present moment?
- erikpukinskis 7y ago
  From Wikipedia: As an analytical concept and normative ideal, modernity is closely linked to the ethos of philosophical and aesthetic modernism; political and intellectual currents that intersect with the Enlightenment; and subsequent developments such as existentialism, modern art, the formal establishment of social science, and contemporaneous antithetical developments such as Marxism. It also encompasses the social relations associated with the rise of capitalism, and shifts in attitudes associated with secularisation and post-industrial life (Berman 2010, 15–36).
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    I meant modern in the sense that the person you're responding to was using it. I'm not sure what their point was; as far as I can tell they were agreeing with me. The Khoi San diverged from the rest of humanity roughly 200k years ago. Yet they are basically compatibly with modern humans. As far as I am aware, they have recursive language and normal imaginations. My point was that this theory would have to deal with the fact that human populations who split much, much longer ago than 70k years ago appear to have the same basic brain functionality as the rest of humanity. I guess, based on what someone else said, the theory is positing that people with the mutation could bootstrap the process in people who don't have it. I dunno, in light of the Khoi San, things start to diverge pretty far from what I would describe as a parsimonious explanation. Plus we're talking hypothetically about what was going on in the minds of people who lived 70k years ago. There are a lot of theories that could be correct, since we have literally no direct evidence of the presence of recursive language (or the lack thereof).
    - foldr 7y ago
      The Khoi San are human and just as "modern" as us, given that we all exist right now.
      - toasterlovin 7y ago
        Side note: you're being pedantic. When discussing deep human history, 'modern human' has a meaning beyond just the dictionary meaning of the word 'modern' (being of a recent vintage). It is used to contrast modern humans with our quite complex behavior vs. archaic humans with their (apparently) much less complex behavior. But anyway, my point doesn't depend on how you define 'modern human', since not only do the Khoi San co-exist with the rest of humanity in the current moment, but they are not really significantly different from the rest of humanity in a behavioral sense. So by both definitions they are 'modern humans'. Which gets to my actual point: a theory which posits that behaviorally modern humans have their genesis only 70k years ago has some explaining to do in light of the fact that the Khoi San split from the rest of humanity about 200k years ago, yet are more or less the same as the rest of humanity.
        foldr 7y ago
        >It is used to contrast modern humans with our quite complex behavior vs. archaic humans with their (apparently) much less complex behavior. Yes, I know - that was my point. You seem to be assuming that we in the West are at the apex of development while the Khoi San are to be evaluated by the degree to which their society resembles Western societies. Who knows - perhaps the Khoi San think that they are more modern than us and are waiting for us to catch up. We all have ancestors going back to the first humans. No present human society is more "archaic" than any other, unless you think that human societies are somehow predestined to develop along a certain course. So I do object to calling the Khoi San "pretty modern", as if they are somehow being stick-in-the-muds by not developing along exactly the same path as the West.
        toasterlovin 7y ago
        > You seem to be assuming that we in the West are at the apex of development while the Khoi San are to be evaluated by the degree to which their society resembles Western societies. No, I am not. I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. On the contrary, my whole argument depends on the Khoi San not being significantly different, behaviorally, from the rest of humanity. Here are quotes of what I said. The only reason I didn't use even stronger language is that there are, in fact, significant genetic differences between the Khoi San and the rest of humanity (that's how we know they diverged so long ago). But anyway, the quotes: > (Khoi san and African pygmies) [...] who seem pretty modern. Edit in reply to your edit: "pretty" in a colloquial sense means "very". As in, "it's pretty hot out today" = "it's very hot out today". Even the dictionary definition is "to a moderately high degree". > Yet they are basically compatibly with modern humans. As far as I am aware, they have recursive language and normal imaginations. > Appear to have the same basic brain functionality as the rest of humanity. > they are not really significantly different from the rest of humanity in a behavioral sense > are more or less the same as the rest of humanity

trevyn 7y ago

The mutation allowed certain individuals to invent recursive language, which could then be taught to individuals without the mutation during a critical period in childhood.

foldr 7y ago

What could be more "modern" in this case than existing at the present moment?

erikpukinskis 7y ago
From Wikipedia: As an analytical concept and normative ideal, modernity is closely linked to the ethos of philosophical and aesthetic modernism; political and intellectual currents that intersect with the Enlightenment; and subsequent developments such as existentialism, modern art, the formal establishment of social science, and contemporaneous antithetical developments such as Marxism. It also encompasses the social relations associated with the rise of capitalism, and shifts in attitudes associated with secularisation and post-industrial life (Berman 2010, 15–36).
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  I meant modern in the sense that the person you're responding to was using it. I'm not sure what their point was; as far as I can tell they were agreeing with me. The Khoi San diverged from the rest of humanity roughly 200k years ago. Yet they are basically compatibly with modern humans. As far as I am aware, they have recursive language and normal imaginations. My point was that this theory would have to deal with the fact that human populations who split much, much longer ago than 70k years ago appear to have the same basic brain functionality as the rest of humanity. I guess, based on what someone else said, the theory is positing that people with the mutation could bootstrap the process in people who don't have it. I dunno, in light of the Khoi San, things start to diverge pretty far from what I would describe as a parsimonious explanation. Plus we're talking hypothetically about what was going on in the minds of people who lived 70k years ago. There are a lot of theories that could be correct, since we have literally no direct evidence of the presence of recursive language (or the lack thereof).
  - foldr 7y ago
    The Khoi San are human and just as "modern" as us, given that we all exist right now.
    - toasterlovin 7y ago
      Side note: you're being pedantic. When discussing deep human history, 'modern human' has a meaning beyond just the dictionary meaning of the word 'modern' (being of a recent vintage). It is used to contrast modern humans with our quite complex behavior vs. archaic humans with their (apparently) much less complex behavior. But anyway, my point doesn't depend on how you define 'modern human', since not only do the Khoi San co-exist with the rest of humanity in the current moment, but they are not really significantly different from the rest of humanity in a behavioral sense. So by both definitions they are 'modern humans'. Which gets to my actual point: a theory which posits that behaviorally modern humans have their genesis only 70k years ago has some explaining to do in light of the fact that the Khoi San split from the rest of humanity about 200k years ago, yet are more or less the same as the rest of humanity.
      - foldr 7y ago
        >It is used to contrast modern humans with our quite complex behavior vs. archaic humans with their (apparently) much less complex behavior. Yes, I know - that was my point. You seem to be assuming that we in the West are at the apex of development while the Khoi San are to be evaluated by the degree to which their society resembles Western societies. Who knows - perhaps the Khoi San think that they are more modern than us and are waiting for us to catch up. We all have ancestors going back to the first humans. No present human society is more "archaic" than any other, unless you think that human societies are somehow predestined to develop along a certain course. So I do object to calling the Khoi San "pretty modern", as if they are somehow being stick-in-the-muds by not developing along exactly the same path as the West.
        toasterlovin 7y ago
        > You seem to be assuming that we in the West are at the apex of development while the Khoi San are to be evaluated by the degree to which their society resembles Western societies. No, I am not. I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. On the contrary, my whole argument depends on the Khoi San not being significantly different, behaviorally, from the rest of humanity. Here are quotes of what I said. The only reason I didn't use even stronger language is that there are, in fact, significant genetic differences between the Khoi San and the rest of humanity (that's how we know they diverged so long ago). But anyway, the quotes: > (Khoi san and African pygmies) [...] who seem pretty modern. Edit in reply to your edit: "pretty" in a colloquial sense means "very". As in, "it's pretty hot out today" = "it's very hot out today". Even the dictionary definition is "to a moderately high degree". > Yet they are basically compatibly with modern humans. As far as I am aware, they have recursive language and normal imaginations. > Appear to have the same basic brain functionality as the rest of humanity. > they are not really significantly different from the rest of humanity in a behavioral sense > are more or less the same as the rest of humanity