4 ms·

It's been known for awhile that modern humans aren't the only tool users. Neanderthals and other archaic humans are straightforward examples, but western chimpa

It's been known for awhile that modern humans aren't the only tool users. Neanderthals and other archaic humans are straightforward examples, but western chimpanzees also do it pretty frequently. Even outside the apes, macaques are known to use stone tools for foraging and sexual gratification.

ceejayoz 4y ago
Lots outside primates, too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool_use_by_animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool_use_by_animals Birds, dolphin, octopuses, otters...
mc32 4y ago
Sure and I guess Neanderthal tools would have produced similar tool shapes to those produced by historical humans. What this paper is saying is that S.Am. primates may be responsible for primitive tools previously associated/attributed with/to humans (due to how they look/characteristics) in some South American sites but this aspect casts some doubt on the origin of those sites and thus affects chronological occupation of the continent by people.
wolverine876 4y ago
Modern humans (homo sapiens) are ~200,000 years old. Tool use goes back ~2.5 million years.
- BlueTemplar 4y ago
  These days, homo sapiens is more like 300-350 ky old, and (Lomekwian) tool industry is 3.4 My old : https://tauromachy.wordpress.com/2018/07/05/the-lomekwi-tools-and-how-we-maybe-almost-were-not/ https://tauromachy.wordpress.com/2018/07/05/the-lomekwi-tool... Which puts into question the naming of homo habilis (="handy man", that 2.5 My old Oldowan tool industry you seem to mention comes from) and australopithecus (responsible for Lomekwian) as "not-homo". Tool use is of course much older (other primates) and other animals also do it : dolphins, crows... Can this capuchin-monkey example be called "tool industry" ?
  - wolverine876 4y ago
    Who wrote that? They seem clear that they have no expertise. https://tauromachy.wordpress.com/2018/06/06/a-kind-of-introduction/ https://tauromachy.wordpress.com/2018/06/06/a-kind-of-introd...
    - BlueTemplar 4y ago
      Lou Keep. Also known for : https://loukeep.substack.com/p/vagaries https://loukeep.substack.com/p/vagaries But especially : https://samzdat.com/ https://samzdat.com/ They might not have expertise, but they know how to write. And (from my own, admittedly layman's searches) I haven't seen anything contradicting the main claims.
      - wolverine876 4y ago
        > They might not have expertise, but they know how to write. That describes the sophists (by the modern meaning), those who can communicate persuasively but are liars. I'd much rather have the opposite.
        BlueTemplar 4y ago
        No, it doesn't : to be able to lie you need to have expertise. You can bullshit though. Or, and so far this is my impression here, you can also take the expertise of others and present it better (that's what the best science journalists do !)
cudgy 4y ago
Question for any archaeologists or zoologists. Do seagulls using the coastal rocks to break open oysters and clams by dropping them from the air qualify as using tools? If not, what is this type of activity considered?
- _0ffh 4y ago
  IIRC that should count as using tools, but that's still a step away from making tools.
  - OJFord 4y ago
    Are nests tools for child-rearing? Or is that making furniture without the use of tools?
    - mc32 4y ago
      Beavers make dams and build lodges. Bees build hives and have division of labor… at dome point we have to declare a cutoff.
      - OJFord 4y ago
        Sure, I just think it's interesting, and that surely you do need to think about why you're interested in whether an animal 'makes' or uses 'tools' to know where that cut-off should be, otherwise it's a bit arbitrary and self-fulfilling ('only humans and some apes use tools' ... 'where tool is defined as a manufactured object held in the hand'!) isn't it?
      - macinjosh 4y ago
        IIRC, Bees build their hives with their own secretions. I see this as categorically different than animals that make nests out of various items laying around. In the case of a beaver I think it is more advanced than a birds nest because they actually harvest specific trees instead of using what’s on the ground already.
- OJFord 4y ago

ceejayoz 4y ago

Lots outside primates, too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool_use_by_animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool_use_by_animals Birds, dolphin, octopuses, otters...

mc32 4y ago

Sure and I guess Neanderthal tools would have produced similar tool shapes to those produced by historical humans. What this paper is saying is that S.Am. primates may be responsible for primitive tools previously associated/attributed with/to humans (due to how they look/characteristics) in some South American sites but this aspect casts some doubt on the origin of those sites and thus affects chronological occupation of the continent by people.

wolverine876 4y ago

Modern humans (homo sapiens) are ~200,000 years old. Tool use goes back ~2.5 million years.

BlueTemplar 4y ago
These days, homo sapiens is more like 300-350 ky old, and (Lomekwian) tool industry is 3.4 My old : https://tauromachy.wordpress.com/2018/07/05/the-lomekwi-tools-and-how-we-maybe-almost-were-not/ https://tauromachy.wordpress.com/2018/07/05/the-lomekwi-tool... Which puts into question the naming of homo habilis (="handy man", that 2.5 My old Oldowan tool industry you seem to mention comes from) and australopithecus (responsible for Lomekwian) as "not-homo". Tool use is of course much older (other primates) and other animals also do it : dolphins, crows... Can this capuchin-monkey example be called "tool industry" ?
- wolverine876 4y ago
  Who wrote that? They seem clear that they have no expertise. https://tauromachy.wordpress.com/2018/06/06/a-kind-of-introduction/ https://tauromachy.wordpress.com/2018/06/06/a-kind-of-introd...
  - BlueTemplar 4y ago
    Lou Keep. Also known for : https://loukeep.substack.com/p/vagaries https://loukeep.substack.com/p/vagaries But especially : https://samzdat.com/ https://samzdat.com/ They might not have expertise, but they know how to write. And (from my own, admittedly layman's searches) I haven't seen anything contradicting the main claims.
    - wolverine876 4y ago
      > They might not have expertise, but they know how to write. That describes the sophists (by the modern meaning), those who can communicate persuasively but are liars. I'd much rather have the opposite.
      - BlueTemplar 4y ago
        No, it doesn't : to be able to lie you need to have expertise. You can bullshit though. Or, and so far this is my impression here, you can also take the expertise of others and present it better (that's what the best science journalists do !)

cudgy 4y ago

Question for any archaeologists or zoologists. Do seagulls using the coastal rocks to break open oysters and clams by dropping them from the air qualify as using tools? If not, what is this type of activity considered?

_0ffh 4y ago
IIRC that should count as using tools, but that's still a step away from making tools.
- OJFord 4y ago
  Are nests tools for child-rearing? Or is that making furniture without the use of tools?
  - mc32 4y ago
    Beavers make dams and build lodges. Bees build hives and have division of labor… at dome point we have to declare a cutoff.
    - OJFord 4y ago
      Sure, I just think it's interesting, and that surely you do need to think about why you're interested in whether an animal 'makes' or uses 'tools' to know where that cut-off should be, otherwise it's a bit arbitrary and self-fulfilling ('only humans and some apes use tools' ... 'where tool is defined as a manufactured object held in the hand'!) isn't it?
    - macinjosh 4y ago
      IIRC, Bees build their hives with their own secretions. I see this as categorically different than animals that make nests out of various items laying around. In the case of a beaver I think it is more advanced than a birds nest because they actually harvest specific trees instead of using what’s on the ground already.
OJFord 4y ago