Dear qpet-ga;
Thank you for allowing me an opportunity to answer your interesting
question.
As you might imagine, it is quite difficult to date a human trait such
as cognition or to trace its earliest origins because of the lack of
tangible evidence. In addition, one must first define the meaning of
cognition and be able to determine what the qualifying characteristics
are. It is generally assumed that mere “awareness” in itself or the
fundamental ability to reason do not meet the criteria for what is
commonly accepted as early cognition. What we must search for is the
earliest evidence of man’s use of abstract thought, his use of
imagination, and his ability to recall the past, perceive the present
and or to speculate with regard to future probabilities. Other
evidence suggesting much more than man’s basic observation skills such
as the development of an inquisitive mind, his enthusiasm, his ability
to make judgments, form opinions or to subscribe to certain abstract
beliefs would also be indicative of cognitive thinking.
One of the earliest known pieces of evidence of man’s evolving
cognitive abilities that fits this criteria comes to us in the form of
cave drawings found in South Africa about 180 miles east of Cape Town,
called Blombos Cave which Archaeologist Christopher Henshilwood of the
State University of New York, Stony Brook, dated to about 77,000 years
ago. Prior to this discovery it was widely believed that man’s
cognitive ability first evolved around 40,000 years ago. At the other
end of the spectrum, scientists had established that early man used an
iron ore called “ochre” as a means of protecting his skin, and
decorating the body for symbolic purposes, suggesting that reasoning
and discovery of his surroundings may well have been present as long
as 100,000 years ago. This type of awareness and adaptation to his
surrounding predates actual human cognition by some 30 thousand years.
Henshilwood said. "These finds demonstrate that ochre use in the
Middle Stone Age was not exclusively utilitarian and, arguably, the
transmission and sharing of the meaning of the engravings relied on
fully syntactical language." Clearly, this appears to be a new
discovery that raises many questions about what has been generally
accepted as the earliest time frame for the presence of cognitive
ability in humans and places the date somewhere between 100,000 and
77,000 years ago.
Now, what is known and being taught in universities around the world
is that the earliest patterns of cognitive thinking date to a period
some 50,000 and 45,000 years ago in what is now Africa, about 45,000
years ago in the middle eastern regions, about 43,000 years ago in
southeastern Europe and roughly 38,000 years ago in Western Europe.
Stanford University archaeologist Richard Klein theorized that a major
cognitive revolution, possibly a genetic change in brain structure,
took place about 50,000 years ago and quickly spread across the face
of the earth in early man’s more highly evolved descendants. He
reminds us that the two or three thousand years difference seen in the
regional timelines is merely “a geologic eyeblink" in terms of
evolution.
The problem with the timeline is two-fold. First we cannot assume that
the earliest known examples of cognitive thinking are in fact the
earliest examples yet to be found or the earliest examples ever. As we
discover more about our past, more opportunities to discover that
which is beyond our current knowledge base is afforded to us.
Secondly, there is no real method of establishing the exact time when
the evolutionary “haves” existed in tandem with the “have-nots”. With
regard to cave art examples and their relation to the dawn of
cognitive thinking, Paul Bouissac, author of the essay “Probing
Prehistoric Cultures”, makes this observation:
“They naively project unto the evolutionary axis data borrowed from
developmental and pathological psychology, oblivious of the fact that
while such data may indeed also apply to the mental development of
prehistoric children, they certainly cannot be applied to the parents
or, more generally, adult groups that brought them up.”
While scholars are unable to pin-point the moment in time when man’s
offspring first became intellectually superior to his parents, we are
quite comfortable, for the moment at least, in our most recent
scientific research which places a timeline for the birth of cognitive
thinking in humans at about approximately 45,000 to 50,000 years ago.
However, being the highly evolved creatures that we are, we will never
be fully satisfied with this as a final answer as long as other
uninvestigated evidence exists, such as the one in Blombos Cave, that
may very well dispute it some day.
I hope you find that that my research exceeds your expectations. If
you have any questions about my research please post a clarification
request prior to rating the answer. I welcome your rating and your
final comments and I look forward to working with you again in the
near future. Thank you for bringing your question to us.
Best regards;
Tutuzdad-ga
INFORMATION SOURCES
EVOLUTION OF THOUGHT: WERE STONE AGE ARTISTS DELIBERATE OR DOODLING?
http://sci.newsfactor.com/perl/story/15861.html
COGNITIVE ANTHROPOLOGY
http://cognet.mit.edu/MITECS/Entry/audouze
AN ESSAY CONCERNING HUMAN UNDERSTANDING
http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/publications/locke_understanding.html
ARCHAEOLOGY AND COGNITIVE SCIENCE
http://cas-courses.buffalo.edu/classes/psy/segal/ARCHCHAP.htm
PREHISTORIC ART – VIRTUAL MUSEUM
http://vm.kemsu.ru/en/preart-diff.html
COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT OF HOMONIDS
http://216.239.57.100/search?q=cache:g_4B4XvfIi8C:mc2.vicnet.net.au/user_files/c/cognit/myfiles/newsletters/hominidcognition.pdf+cognitive+development+prehistoric&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
PROBING PREHISTORIC CULTURES
http://www.semioticon.com/frontline/probing_prehistoric_cultures.htm
SEARCH STRATEGY
SEARCH ENGINE USED:
Google ://www.google.com
SEARCH TERMS USED:
COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
COGNITION EVOLUTION
COGNITION “EARLY MAN”
COGNITIVE “EARLY MAN”
COGNITIVE ARCHAEOLOGY
COGNITIVE ANTHROPOLOGY
COGNITION "PRIMITIVE MAN"
COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT PREHISTORIC |
Clarification of Answer by
tutuzdad-ga
on
20 Mar 2003 09:42 PST
Dear qpet-ga,;
Thank you for your patience and giving me an opportunity to work on
this question a bit more. Again I apologize for the misunderstanding.
As for “HOW” cognitive thinking began, Edward H. Hagen, formerly of
the Center for Evolutionary Psychology, University of California,
Santa Barbara, and now at the Institute for Theoretical Biology in
Berlin, said, “Very little has changed physiologically in the last
10,000 years (Australian aborigines were more or less isolated from
other populations for perhaps 40,000 years, yet are essentially
identical physiologically to other human populations), so very little
has probably changed psychologically. 10,000 years (500 generations)
is just not enough time to evolve complex adaptations. If we had as
thorough an understanding of our psychological adaptations as we do
our physiological adaptations, then perhaps we might be able to
identify some simple psychological adaptations that evolved in the
last 10,000 years. However, we understand almost nothing about our
evolved cognitive abilities. Imagine studying skin color without
knowing what skin is. That would be a complete waste of time!”
THE EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY FAQ
http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/projects/human/epfaq/holocene.html
The implication here is that we simply do not know what we do not
know; that it is implausible to believe that a full understanding of
the mind is possible even in principle. How can a man define his own
extent and grasp the totality of himself without first being able to
do either? It is generally believed that cognitive thinking in humans
evolves in much the same was as it does in animals – through the
process of natural selection. For this evolution to occur
successfully, the people must have varying levels of ability, or
underlying processes that enable the ability, and these differences
must be adaptive. This suggests a trial and error type moment of
evolution occurs where one mind learns from the mistakes or the
successes of another, usually through example.
It appears that cognitive thinking, at least in most primitive form,
first came about as a direct result of our need to survive; both
literally and figuratively. Humans have interacted with predators for
centuries and primitive man, through trial and error, coupled with
instinct, adapted to being hunted and successfully developed evasive
measures. These problems presented new challenges as man migrated and
encountered new predators, new and unknown environments and as man
himself physically evolved from a lower species to a stronger, smarter
and more adaptive bipedal creature. In time, it is likely that man
applied his evasion skills to subduing his own quarry and became a
much better hunter/gatherer from having been hunted himself. He
learned to project outcomes, plan actions, control his confusion and
emotions or intentionally behave in ways that were previously foreign
to him in order to recreate certain circumstances. By emulating
himself as a hunted food source, he projected the actions of his
enemy. Man most likely learned that a number of activities, behaviors
or circumstances tended to repeat themselves under ideal conditions
and this only served to enhance his ability to reason. Man eventually
adapted and survived by subduing his predator – beating him at his own
game, if you will. He predicted the animal’s behavior and formulated a
successful plan for his own survival. In doing so he became the
predator himself, nourished his body and eliminated the immediate
threat.
As we evolved, the development of linguistic skills brought with it a
number of cognitive thinking abilities as a necessity. A popular
hypothesis is that there are "cognitive cycles" in speech marked by
high pause rate (Hesitant or H phases) and periods with low pause rate
(Fluent or F phases) that reflects semantic planning units. The
ability to verbally communicate is useful only when one contemplates
what it is he needs to say. In doing so immediate decisions must be
made that range from word selection to conveyance of meaning. Man must
be cognizant of his ability to alter events, fulfill his needs or
express his thoughts in order for language to be of use to him.
In time, obviously, man developed critical thinking skills that
allowed him to consider causes, entertain theories and explore the
hypothetical. As mentioned earlier, because varying degrees of
processes were present and communication became more universally
utilized, we discussed our thoughts and played out scenarios on our
minds and with others. Our theories were debunked where necessary and
adopted where feasible. We learned that through discussion our
conceptual abilities could broaden and we could consider things that
might never have otherwise entered our minds. Men learned from the
cognitive thinking of others and expanded their own though processes
through these experiences.
In more modern times, curiosity plays a large part in our cognitive
thinking abilities. As we find ourselves without frontiers or concepts
to consider we begin to intelligently consider the unknown. This
abstract idea is relatively new, where in our past we might only have
considered only tangible or known concepts as potential information.
Space, time, future, life-after-death all become topics for
consideration. Socially, we study one another, in part to learn more
about ourselves in an effort to be more effective, more productive or
more powerful, but largely because of our seemingly natural need to
gather information and to master our surroundings and circumstances.
Psychologically we struggle to become masters of ourselves. Our
attention span, consciousness, language, memory, motor skills, visual
perception, are all topics that we are constantly examining, either
intentionally or subconsciously.
In summary, then, cognition came about as a necessity. From primitive
man, who needed it to survive to modern man who needs it to fulfill
his thirst for knowledge, advanced cognitive thinking is one of the
remarkable traits that separate us from lower forms of life and drives
the intellect that makes us, as humans, what we are.
Below you will find that I have carefully defined my search strategy
for you in the event that you need to search for more information. By
following the same type of searches that I did you may be able to
enhance the research I have provided even further. I hope you find
that that my research exceeds your expectations. If you have any
questions about my research please post a clarification request prior
to rating the answer. Otherwise, I welcome your rating and your final
comments and I look forward to working with you again in the near
future. Thank you for bringing your question to us.
Best regards;
Tutuzdad-ga
INFORMATION SOURCES
GENETICS, PLASTICITY AND THE EVOLUTION OF COGNITIVE PROCESSES
http://grimpeur.tamu.edu/~colin/TheCognitiveAnimal/P1/burghardtp1.pdf
COGNITIVE ADAPTATIONS
http://cogweb.ucla.edu/EP/Adaptations.html
PREDATOR-PREY COGNITION PROJECT
http://www-abc.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/users/barrett/
THE CASE FOR COGNITIVE CYCLES IN SPONTANEOUS SPEECH
http://cogslib.cogs.susx.ac.uk/csr_abs.php?type=wpip&num=2&id=7287
SOCIAL COGNITION
http://www.psych.purdue.edu/~esmith/scarch.html
FEELING AND THINKING: THE ROLE OF AFFECT IN SOCIAL COGNITION
http://www.psy.unsw.edu.au/~joef/Symposium.htm
SEARCH STRATEGY
SEARCH ENGINE USED:
Google ://www.google.com
SEARCH TERMS USED:
COGNITIVE ADAPTATIONS
COGNITIVE PROCESSES
PRIMITIVE CONGNITION
COGNITIVE EVOLUTION
COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
|
