Tải bản đầy đủ - 0 (trang)
5 The Sociocultural Cultivation of Positive Attitudes Toward Learning: The Differentiating Factor in Learning Ability Betwe...

5 The Sociocultural Cultivation of Positive Attitudes Toward Learning: The Differentiating Factor in Learning Ability Betwe...

Tải bản đầy đủ - 0trang

23



Sociocultural Cultivation of Positive Attitudes Toward Learning: Considering. . .



constitutes the first stage of cultural evolution. Although, as I

demonstrated elsewhere (Omura 2013b), children already

acquire this ability through both the development of selfconsciousness and projection of self onto others during

babyhood, this ability is further strengthened and cultivated

by teasing.

Moreover, teasing leads children to learn not to follow

their emotional desires naively, but to observe and evaluate

situations in order to discern a meta-frame and reach a proper

solution independently. This is nothing but the ability to

objectify, which is essential to creation, the second stage of

cultural evolution. In this sense, adults’ teasing of children in

Inuit society is equivalent to a koan (paradox) in Zen, which

Bateson (1972) uses to exemplify the ability to objectify, but

is even more emotionally laden so that children have difficulty

distancing themselves from and evade it as a joke. Children

learn this ability while grappling with an emotionally laden,

paradoxical dilemma, like Zen candidates, but more patiently.

Thus, through the ordeal of being teased, children cultivate

the art of patience, learn to objectify situations calmly, and to

observe closely—all abilities essential to a positive attitude

toward learning; this is the basis for cultural learning and

creation, although during childhood, they do not learn any

specific techniques or knowledge. Moreover, while learning

this attitude, children also learn as a naturalized truth that the

world is full of unexpected difficulties; nevertheless, they

would be able to find a way out of difficulties by their own

efforts. In other words, in Inuit society, two abilities indispensable to cultural evolution are inculcated into children not

separately, but through the cultivation of a positive attitude

toward learning during childhood. Thereafter, guided by this

attitude, the Inuit spontaneously learn established techniques

and knowledge and how to develop creative modifications

and inventions when necessary.

It is also important here that, as previously noted, this

attitude is socioculturally cultivated only within the life

cycle’s recursive system for no less than 10 years. Of course,

this attitude is also based on biological mechanisms. However, the attitude would not develop without a sociocultural

process, like the teasing in Inuit society, even if it is based on

a biologically evolutional process. Likely, then, both

abilities indispensable to cultural evolution should be

socioculturally acquired within some institution on the

basis of a biological mechanism. Thus, Inuit adults’ teasing

of children tells us that the modern humans’ species-unique

mechanism of cumulative cultural evolution becomes possible only when humans developed sociocultural institutions,

even if institutions are based on abilities acquired through a

biologically evolutional process.

Therefore, we can conclude that the most important factor

distinguishing the learning abilities of Neanderthals and

modern humans is not biological ability, but rather a difference in their respective collective methods of generating and



283



maintaining sociocultural institutions. This does not mean,

of course, that this difference is based on biological

differences. However, it is impossible to close in on the

truth of the difference in learning ability without considering

the difference in sociality. This conclusion should eventually

lead us to the following view: While Neanderthals might not

have been able to fully experience cultural evolution through

the development of institutions, modern humans developed

sociocultural institutions advantageous to developing objectification, as in the Inuit life cycle, and thus fully realized

cultural evolution.

Acknowledgments I would like to thank Professor Hideaki

Terashima and Professor Barry S. Hewlett for precious comments on

early drafts of this article. I would also like to thank Enago (www.

enago.jp) for the English language review.



References

Bateson G (1972) Steps to an ecology of mind. The University of

Chicago Press, Chicago

Boas F (1927) Primitive art. Aschehoug, Oslo

Briggs JL (1968) Utkuhikhalingmiut Eskimo emotional expression.

Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Northern

Science Research Group, Ottawa

Briggs JL (1970) Never in anger: portrait of an Eskimo family. Harvard

University Press, Cambridge

Briggs JL (1975) The origins of nonviolence: aggression in two Canadian Eskimo groups. In: Muensterberger W (ed) The psychoanalytic

study of society, vol 6. International Universities Press, New York

Briggs JL (1978) The origins of nonviolence: Inuit management of

aggression. In: Montagu A (ed) Learning non-aggression: the experience of non-literate societies. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Briggs JL (1979a) Aspects of Inuit value socialization. National

Museum of Canada, Ottawa

Briggs JL (1979b) The creation of value in Canadian Inuit society. Int

Soc Sci J 31(3):393–403

Briggs JL (1982) Living dangerously: the contradictory foundations of

value in Canadian Inuit society. In: Leacock E, Lee R (eds) Politics

and history in band societies. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, pp 109–131

Briggs JL (1991) Expecting the unexpected: Canadian Inuit training for

an experimental lifestyle. Ethos 19(3):259–287

Briggs JL (1994) “Why Don’t You Kill Your Baby Brother?”: the

dynamics of peace in Canadian Inuit camps. In: Sponsel L, Gregor

T (eds) The anthropology of peace and nonviolence. Lynne

Reinner, Boulder, pp 155–181

Briggs JL (1998) Inuit morality play: the emotional education of a

three-year-old. Yale University Press, New Haven

Brody H (1975) The people’s land: Whites and the eastern Arctic.

Penguin, Harmondsworth

Condon R (1988) Inuit youth: growth and change in the Canadian

Arctic. Rutgers University Press, New York

Downey G (2010) ‘Practice without Theory’: a neuroanthropological

perspective on embodied learning. J R Anthropol Inst 16(s1):

S22–S40

Marchand THJ (2010) Making knowledge: explorations of the

indissoluble relation between minds, bodies, and environment. J R

Anthropol Inst 16(s1):S1–S21

Mithen S (1996) The prehistory of the mind: a search for the origins of

art, religion and science. Thames and Hudson Ltd., London



284

Omura K (2013a) Kanada inuito no minzokushi: nichijo¯teki jissen no

dainamikusu. (The Ethnography of Canadian Inuit: The Dynamics

of Everyday Practices). Osaka University Press, Osaka

Omura K (2013b) Kanjo¯ no ontologie: Inuitto no kakudaikazoku

syudan ni miru no sinkasiteki kiban. (The ontology

of feeling: The evolutionary basis of ‘natural institutions’ in Inuit

extended-family groups). In: Kawai K (ed) Seido: Jinrui syakai no

shinka. (Institutions: the evolution of human societies). Kyoto

University Press, Kyoto, pp 329–348

Omura K (2014a) The ability to objectify conventional styles of

problem-solving: a hypothesis on the difference in learning ability

between modern humans and Neanderthals. In: Akazawa T,

Ogihara N, Tanabe HC, Terashima H (eds) Dynamics of learning

in Neanderthals and modern humans, Vol 2, Cognitive and physical

perspectives, RNMH series. Springer, Tokyo, pp 25–32

Omura K (2014b) Mechanism of meta-learning: evolutionary basis

of the modern human creativities. In: Terashima H (ed) Progress



K. Omura

report no. 4 of research team A02, RNMH project. Kobe Gakuin

University, Kobe, pp 31–40 (in Japanese)

Omura K (2015) The potentiality of ability to freely realize extensions

of the mind: from Neanderthals to future humans in outer space.

In: Terashima H (ed) Progress report no. 5 of research team

A02, RNMH project. Kobe Gakuin University, Kobe, pp 19–36

(in Japanese)

Paradise R, Rogoff B (2009) Side by side: learning by observing and

pitching in. Ethos 37(1):102–138

Sterelny K (2012) The evolved apprentice: how evolution made

humans unique. MIT Press, Cambridge/London

Tomasello M (1999) The cultural origins of human cognition. Harvard

University Press, Cambridge/London

Wallace AFC (1970) Culture and personality. Random House,

New York

Wallace AFC (2003) Revitalizations and mazeways: essays on culture

change. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln



24



Body Growth and Life History of Modern

Humans and Neanderthals from the

Perspective of Human Evolution

Taro Yamauchi



Abstract



Human life history is comprised of five stages of development: infancy, early and middle

childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. Each stage is associated with particular rates of

physical growth (e.g., height [cm/year]), characteristics of dentition, changes related to

methods of feeding, physical and mental competencies, and maturation of the reproductive

system and sexual behavior. An extended period from juvenility through adolescence that

separates infancy from adulthood is unique to humans; the life histories of other mammals,

including other primates, have a comparatively brief transition into physical and cognitive

maturity. Extended adolescence in humans is argued to have evolved to accommodate our

greater brain growth, which together affords the ability to acquire the accumulated cultural

knowledge and social skills necessary for success as a mature adult. In this article, I

propose that there may have been key differences in the life history characteristics of

Neanderthals and H. sapiens, with Neanderthals experiencing comparatively short juvenile and adolescent stages of development. Neanderthals would consequently have been at

a disadvantage in terms of their learning capacity, contributing to their eventual replacement by H. sapiens.

Keywords



Body growth

evolution



24.1







Life history



Introduction



In this chapter, I review body growth in modern humans

from the perspective of human evolution. Among the five

life stages defined by the growth rate curve (e.g., height), I

focus on the prolonged childhood–juvenile and adolescent

stages, which are unique to humans and during which rapid

physical growth takes place. Furthermore, I make a bold

attempt to propose some possible scenarios regarding the

life history of Neanderthals on the basis of previous studies



T. Yamauchi (*)

Laboratory of Human Ecology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Hokkaido

University, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan

e-mail: taroy@med.hokudai.ac.jp







Modern humans







Neanderthals







Adolescence







Human



and simulations regarding the nutritional physiology and

nutritional adaptation of Neanderthals.



24.2



Body Growth of Modern Humans



24.2.1 A Brief Comparison with Other Primates

In comparison to humans, primates (and virtually all other

mammals) have a relatively simple life history. Judging

from differences in the growth rate curves among primates

and modern humans, life history is likely to have become

gradually more complex moving from earlier primates to

later points in the hominid line leading to modern humans

(Bogin 1999). Most nonhuman mammals have a two-stage



# Springer Japan 2016

H. Terashima, B.S. Hewlett (eds.), Social Learning and Innovation in Contemporary Hunter-Gatherers,

Replacement of Neanderthals by Modern Humans Series, DOI 10.1007/978-4-431-55997-9_24



285



286



life history, undergoing sexual maturation directly after

weaning and initiating reproduction soon after. Primates

have an intervening juvenile stage between infancy and

adulthood, during which the rate of growth remains low.

The course of human development, in contrast, may be

divided into five distinct stages: infancy (I), childhood (C),

juvenile (J), adolescence (A), and mature adult (Bogin

1999). The period of infancy begins at birth and lasts as

long as offspring are breastfed (2–3 years). Childhood

continues until brain growth is complete, around the age of

7. The juvenile stage follows and extends for roughly the

duration of elementary school in industrial societies. In this

chapter, I combine the childhood and juvenile stages and

refer to the period between 3 and 12 years old as the

childhood–juvenile stage. This period is particularly important in the development of learning abilities. During the

subsequent adolescence (A) stage, when social and sexual

maturation occurs, rapid physical growth, called the adolescent growth spurt, occurs. This period begins at approximately

10 years of age in girls—reflecting their earlier development

of secondary sexual characteristics—and at approximately

12 years of age in boys. Adulthood begins at age 20. In

addition to the aspects of development described above,

each stage corresponds to biological events, such as the eruption of teeth, development of secondary sexual characteristics,

and cognitive development, as well as to changes in behavioral patterns and psychological development.

Figure 24.1 shows both average increase in height and

average rate of growth over the course of human development. The monotonically rising curve, in blue, represents the

growth curve, and the vacillating curve, in red, represents

changes in growth rate (cm/year). Each directional change in

the growth rate curve reflects the onset of new stage of

development.

Fig. 24.1 Cumulative growth

and growth rate curves for height

in humans. I infancy,

C childhood, J juvenile,

A adolescence, M mature adult.

(Modified from Bogin 1999,

pp. 69, Fig. 2.5B)



T. Yamauchi



24.2.2 Prolonged Childhood–Juvenile Stage

Compared with other primates, modern humans have a

unique growth pattern characterized by prolonged

childhood–juvenile and adolescence stages, during which

rapid physical growth occurs. As shown in Fig. 24.1, growth

rate remains low during the childhood–juvenile stage and is

believed to accommodate brain growth (Leonard and

Robertson 1994). Because of the high metabolic cost of

maintaining the brain, nutrition is secured for brain growth

at the expense of body growth. Another proposed explanation is that growth rate is reduced to avoid food competition

within a group (Janson et al. 1993). Keeping a child’s body

size small secures its position to be fed by mature adults and

avoids food competition among older children and mature

adults in the group. This allows brain growth to occur safely

during this stage. In addition, the longer childhood–juvenile

stage affords a longer period in which to learn. These

hypotheses are not mutually exclusive; rather, it is likely

that both brain growth and within-group competition over

resources were both factors underlying the prolonged

childhood–juvenile stage in modern humans.



24.2.3 Adolescent Growth Spurt

We now focus on another characteristic of the human growth

pattern, the adolescent growth spurt. The growth rate curve

(red) in Fig. 24.1 indicates rapid acceleration in growth in

boys beginning at approximately 12 years of age. Growth

rate peaks at approximately 14 years of age, followed by

rapid deceleration to zero growth at approximately 18 years

of age. Although the definition of adolescence varies



24



Body Growth and Life History of Modern Humans and Neanderthals from the. . .



academically and legally, we define adolescence by this

window of rapid growth.

Adolescence is also a stage when individuals begin to

venture further from their homes and engage in more diverse

activities. Figure 24.2 shows GPS data collected from Baka

hunter-gatherer children (Hagino and Yamauchi 2014) and

reveals differences in the distances boys and girls travel per

day (exclusively on foot). There was greater variability in

the distances boys traveled than among girls especially after

around 12 years of age when adolescent stage begins. A

more detailed analysis on the locations of their activities

showed that boys spent more time in a nearby forest away

from their village when they reached the adolescent stage

(Hagino and Yamauchi 2014).

Studies of adolescents in the West have shown they tend

to be excitable and to seek novelty, risk, social approval, and

the company of peers (Dobbs 2011). It is widely agreed

among Western experts who study adolescent health and

development in Western societies that as the growth spurt

invokes rapid physical growth and behavioral changes,

the balance between mental and physical development is

lost in adolescent children. Creativity develops, and some

adolescence-specific issues emerge during this stage, such as

establishing an identity and mental conflict (Rothenberg

1990). However, adolescence does not exhibit these

characteristics universally. The emotional turbulence often

associated with adolescence is rare or absent among most or

all modern hunter-gatherers (Condon 1987). Hewlett and

Hewlett (2012) have pointed out that forager adolescents



Fig. 24.2 Daily travel distance of Baka hunter-gatherers by age

(Source: Hagino and Yamauchi 2014, p 94, Fig. 10.5)



287



often take the lead in energizing the community, often

demonstrating their interest and abilities in creativity and

innovation. We suggest that the imbalance between mental

and physical development, behavioral change during the

adolescent growth spurt, is related to the development of

creativity.



24.3



Growth Patterns in Neanderthals



24.3.1 Simulation of Nutritional Physiology

and Nutritional Adaptation

in Neanderthals

The daily energy expenditure of modern humans consists of

three components: basal metabolic rate (BMR); diet-induced

thermogenesis (DIT), which is the caloric value related to

food digestion and absorption; and physical activity-related

energy expenditure (PAEE). Modern human populations

living in cold environments, such as the Siberians and

Inuit, have a BMR elevated 15 % above average (Steegman

et al. 2002). Neanderthals, who inhabited cold regions, are

assumed to have had a high BMR as an adaptation to the cold

(Sorensen and Leonard 2001). Steegman et al. (2002) also

proposed that compared with modern humans, Neanderthals

had a larger amount of brown adipose tissue (BAT), which

increases heat-producing capacity. Moreover, it is widely

accepted that Neanderthals had more robust skeletons and

more muscular bodies than modern humans (Wood and

Collard 1999). As BMR is proportional to muscle mass and

increases due to cold adaptation, Neanderthals are assumed

to have required a considerably higher BMR than modern

humans of the same body weight. A higher BMR means

higher total daily energy expenditure (TEE), which must

necessarily be balanced by a high total daily energy intake

(TEI). Therefore, the nutritional requirements of

Neanderthals were likely significantly greater than those of

modern humans.

It is estimated that adult male Neanderthals required

4000–6000 kcal/day and that adult females required

3000–5000 kcal/day (Dusseldorp 2009). We simulated the

energy expenditure levels in modern humans and

Neanderthals using 63-kg males as examples (Figs. 24.3a

and 24.3b). The BMR of an adult modern human is

estimated to be 1500 kcal/day (FAO/WHO/UNU 1985).

Assuming that DIT is 10 % of TEE and physical activity

level (PAL) is 2.0 (vigorously active 2.0–2.4, FAO 2004),

the TEE of a modern human is approximately 3000 kcal/day.

PAEE is calculated to be 1200 kcal/day by subtracting DIT

(300 kcal/day) and BMR (1500 kcal/day) from TEE. Assuming that BMR is 20 % higher in Neanderthals than that in

modern humans due to cold adaptation and greater muscle

mass, BMR was 1,800 kcal/day for male Neanderthals.



288



Assuming that TEI is 4000 kcal/day and is in balance with

TEE, PAEE of male Neanderthals was 1800 kcal/day

(Fig. 24.3a). If TEI (¼ TEE) is 5000 kcal/day, PAEE is

calculated to be 2,775 kcal/day or 2.3 times that of modern

humans (Fig. 24.3b). Assuming that males mostly engaged

in foraging activities, the energy expenditure required for

foraging activities would have been 1.5–2.3 times greater in

Neanderthals than that in modern humans.

Although foraging efficiency (amount of meat acquired

per hour) in Neanderthals and modern humans is controversial, we assumed that foraging efficiency in Neanderthals

was comparable to that in modern humans (Sorensen and

Leonard 2001). In this case, Neanderthals had to spend

Fig. 24.3a Simulation 1 of

modern human versus

Neanderthal energy requirements

and expenditure



Fig. 24.3b Simulation 2 of

modern human versus

Neanderthal energy requirements

and expenditure



T. Yamauchi



1.5–2.3 times more time on foraging activities to acquire

sufficient energy according to the above calculations.

In addition, the simulation assumed a body weight of

63 kg for modern humans and Neanderthals; however, a

previous study demonstrated that the mean body weight

among nine current hunter-gatherer populations is 53.3 kg

in males and 45.4 kg in females and estimated that the

mean body weight of Neanderthals was 65 kg in males and

55 kg in females using data from 12 selected middle Pleistocene hominids (Sorensen and Leonard 2001). Another

study estimated that the male Neanderthal body weight

was 80.8 kg according to data gathered from the remains

of seven glacial period European Neanderthals (Ruff



24



Body Growth and Life History of Modern Humans and Neanderthals from the. . .



et al. 1997). Again, the actual mean body weight and

required energy of Neanderthals are thus likely to have

been greater than those of modern humans.

These simulations require further examination because

they do not consider various factors involved in nutritional

adaptation and were generated by simple calculations using

ambiguously defined factors. Nevertheless, it is highly likely

that Neanderthals required a substantially greater amount of

energy compared with that required by modern humans and

maintained their energy balance with high expenditure and

high intake, suggesting that they spent a long time on foraging activities.



24.3.2 Body Growth and Maturation

in Neanderthal Children

The maturation rate of Neanderthals has been reported to be

faster than (Rozzi and de Castro 2004), comparable to

(Guatelli-Steinberg et al. 2005), or slower than (Ponce de

Leo´n et al. 2008) that of modern humans; thus, a consensus

remains to be established. Compared with modern humans,

earlier eruption of molars (Smith et al. 2007) and more rapid

brain growth have been suggested as characteristic of

Neanderthals (Ponce de Leo´n et al. 2008).

We will now discuss environmental adaptations with

regard to the population rather than the individual. Children

consume many calories but produce little food compared to

adults. Thus, young children represent net costs calorie-wise

to their groups. According to the comparative research of

four current hunter-gatherer societies, the Ache, Hadza,

Hiwi, and Kung, children begin to contribute to foraging at

approximately 15 years of age, at which point they have



Fig. 24.4a Evolution of hominid

life history (Modified from Bogin

1999, pp. 185, Fig. 4.9). P/A Pan

and Australopithecus afarensis,

Aa Australopithecus africanus,

Hh Homo habilis, He1 early

Homo erectus, He2 late Homo

erectus, Ne Neanderthals, Hs

Homo sapiens



289



produced <5 % of their total life energy, but have already

consumed 25 % of their total life energy (Kaplan

et al. 2000). Neanderthals may have, in contrast, had evolved

a strategy of faster maturation into adulthood, limiting the

time during which an individual constitutes a net cost to their

family or group. To this end, Neanderthal life history may

have additionally been characterized by earlier weening (i.e.,

a shorter infancy stage) and earlier initiation of foraging

activities (i.e., a shorter childhood–juvenile stage).



24.4



Neanderthal Life History



How does the life history of Neanderthals place in the

evolutionary line between nonhuman primates and modern

humans? Did they have the adolescent growth spurt characteristic of modern humans? Figure 24.4a depicts a working

hypothesis, developed by Bogin (1999), of the evolution of

life history in the human lineage. Note that the figure has

been derived from assumptions about fossil hominids other

than chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes, “P”) and modern

humans (Homo sapiens, “Hs”) based on previous studies.

Two possible patterns are conceivable for the life history of

Neanderthals on the basis of this figure; it may perhaps be

closer either to that of the late Homo erectus (He2, devoid of

the adolescent growth spurt) (Fig. 24.4b) or to modern

humans (Hs) with an adolescent growth spurt (Fig. 24.4c).

Although we cannot determine which of these is true, we

may presume that even if Neanderthals did undergo an

adolescent growth spurt, the rate of growth during the spurt

may have been lower and the duration shorter based on the

assumption that Neanderthals underwent maturation earlier

than modern humans.



290



T. Yamauchi



Fig. 24.4b Neanderthal life

history 1 (Modified from Bogin

1999, pp. 185, Fig. 4.9). P/A Pan

and Australopithecus afarensis,

Aa Australopithecus africanus,

Hh Homo habilis, He1 early

Homo erectus, He2 late Homo

erectus, Ne Neanderthals, Hs

Homo sapiens



Fig. 24.4c Neanderthal life

history 2. P/A Pan and

Australopithecus afarensis, Aa

Australopithecus africanus, Hh

Homo habilis, He1 early Homo

erectus, He2 late Homo erectus,

Ne Neanderthals, Hs Homo

sapiens



Based on previous discussions, our opinion regarding the

life history of Neanderthals may be summarized as follows.

Compared with the life history of modern humans, the

infancy and childhood–juvenile stages of Neanderthals

were short. The adolescent growth spurt was absent or

small (of short duration). Assuming this life history,

Neanderthals would have had a shorter learning period

than modern humans, as well as a shorter adolescence

stage, in which creativity develops. These life history

differences may have led to differences in learning capacity

and behavior and eventually to Neanderthals being replaced

by modern humans.



References

Bogin B (1999) Pattern of human growth, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

Condon R (1987) Inuit youth. Rutgers University Press, New

Brunswick

Dobbs D (2011) Beautiful teenage brains. Nat Geosci 220

(4):36–59

Dusseldorp GL (2009) A view to a kill: investigating middle

Palaeolithic subsistence using an optimal foraging perspective.

Sidestone Press, online

FAO/WHO/UNU (1985) Energy and protein requirements: report of a

joint FAO/WHO/UNU expert consultation, Tech Rep Series 724.

World Health Organization, Rome



24



Body Growth and Life History of Modern Humans and Neanderthals from the. . .



Food and Agricultural Organization (2004) Human energy

requirements: report of a joint FAO/WHO/UNU expert consultation, FAO Food Nutr Tech Rep Series 1. Food and Agriculture

Organization, Rome

Guatelli-Steinberg D, Reid DJ, Bishop TA, Larsen CS (2005) Anterior

tooth growth periods in Neandertals were comparable to those

of modern humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102(40):14197–14202

Hagino I, Yamauchi T (2014) Daily physical activity and time-space

using of Pygmy hunter-gatherers’ children in southeast Cameroon.

In: Akazawa T, Ogihara N, Tanabe HC, Terashima H (eds) Dynamics of learning in Neanderthals and modern humans, vol 2, cognitive

and physical perspectives. Springer, Tokyo, pp 91–98

Hewlett BL, Hewlett BS (2012) Hunter-gatherer adolescence. In:

Hewlett BL (ed) Adolescent identity: evolutionary, cultural and

developmental perspectives. Routledge, New York, pp 73–101

Janson CH, van Schaik CP, Pereira ME, Fairbanks LA (1993) Ecological risk aversion in juvenile primates: slow and steady wins the race.

In: Pereira ME, Fairbanks LA (eds) Juvenile primates: life history,

development, and behavior. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp

57–74

Kaplan H, Hill K, Lancaster J, Hurtado AM (2000) A theory of human

life history evolution: diet, intelligence, and longevity. Evol

Anthropol Issue News Rev 9(4):156–185



291



Leonard WR, Robertson ML (1994) Evolutionary perspectives on

human nutrition: the influence of brain and body size on diet and

metabolism. Am J Hum Biol 6(1):77–88

Ponce de Leo´n MS, Golovanova L, Doronichev V, Romanova G,

Akazawa T, Kondo O, Ishida H, Zollikofer CP (2008) Neanderthal

brain size at birth provides insights into the evolution of human life

history. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(37):13764–13768

Rothenberg A (1990) Creativity in adolescence. Psychiatr Clin North

Am 13(3):415–434

Rozzi FVR, de Castro JMB (2004) Surprisingly rapid growth in

Neanderthals. Nature 428(29):936–939

Ruff CB, Trinkaus E, Holliday TW (1997) Body mass and

encephalization in Pleistocene Homo. Nature 387:173–176

Smith TM, Toussaint M, Reid DJ, Olejniczak AJ, Hublin JJ (2007)

Rapid dental development in a Middle Paleolithic Belgian Neanderthal. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104(51):20220–20225

Sorensen MV, Leonard WR (2001) Neandertal energetics and foraging

efficiency. J Hum Evol 40(6):483–495

Steegman AT, Cerny FJ, Holliday TW (2002) Neandertal cold adaptation: physiological and energetic factors. Am J Hum Biol 14

(5):566–583

Wood B, Collard M (1999) The human genus. Science 284

(5411):65–71



Evolutionary Locus of the Neanderthal Between

Chimpanzees and Modern Humans: A Working

Memory, Theory of Mind, and Brain

Developmental, Piagetian Perspective



25



Juko Ando



Abstract



A hypothetical psychological learning model of the Neanderthals is proposed by

interpolating the Neanderthals on a genetic, evolutional, and developmental continuum

between chimpanzees and modern humans based upon five empirical results found by

anthropological, behavioral, genetic, and cognitive psychological studies. The model

claims that the Neanderthals had limited working memory (WM) capacity, had a limited

theory of mind (ToM), and were at the preoperational stage. The main conclusion is that it

is the ability to teach and to learn through being taught that discriminates modern humans

from the Neanderthals because teaching behavior prevails even in hunter-gatherers and

teaching motivation has an evolutionary basis.

Keywords



Evolution of education  Theory of mind  Working memory

Piagetian developmental theory  Teaching motivation



25.1



Introduction



In this paper, a hypothetical psychological learning model of the

Neanderthals is proposed that interpolates the Neanderthals on a

genetic, evolutional, and developmental continuum between

existing chimpanzees and modern humans (H. sapiens), which

are the nearest species genetically to H. sapiens.

The evolutionary divergence of chimpanzees and humans

from their last common ancestor is estimated to have taken







Behavioral genetics







place about 7 million years ago. Since then, various species of

hominids, illustrated in Fig. 25.1, emerged and went extinct.

Among those extinct species, the nearest one genetically,

behaviorally, and culturally to H. sapiens is thought to have

been the Homo neanderthalensis. Therefore it is quite reasonable to assume that the cognitive and learning abilities of the

Neanderthals are evolutionarily and genetically identical or at

least similar to these existing species and, thus, that these

capacities and abilities are comparable in many aspects.



J. Ando (*)

Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Letters,

Keio University, Tokyo, Japan

e-mail: juko@msa.biglobe.ne.jp

# Springer Japan 2016

H. Terashima, B.S. Hewlett (eds.), Social Learning and Innovation in Contemporary Hunter-Gatherers,

Replacement of Neanderthals by Modern Humans Series, DOI 10.1007/978-4-431-55997-9_25



293



294



J. Ando



Fig. 25.1 Evolution of hominids

(Zimmer 2006)



In the current paper, the author develops a model of the

learning abilities of the Neanderthals, especially their capacity for theory of mind (ToM), working memory capacity and

its function, and characteristics of Piagetian developmental

stages, as interpolated between these characteristics as they

are present chimpanzees and anatomically modern humans

(AMH). Furthermore, the author will show empirical evidence of a psychological model of educational motivation

and teaching behavior in hunter-gatherers, which points to

the conclusion that it is “teaching behavior” that

discriminates the Neanderthals from AMH. In other words,

the hypothesis is that “learning by teaching” is what distinguished us cognitively and evolutionarily from Neanderthals.

The author acknowledges that there are a lot of controversial issues that remain to be discussed about the evidence

that underlies the conclusion of this paper. It is obvious that

the current discussion demands elaboration and appears to

dismiss the importance of having solid foundation on which



to build new hypotheses. Many readers may consider this

oversimplification and engagement in mere theoretical speculation. However, instead of elaborating on the theoretical

and empirical consistency and validity of the details under

discussion, the author wants readers to understand the

importance of getting an overview of the whole picture and

of first getting an investigation-worthy theoretical hypothesis on the table, the details of which can be examined,

developed, accepted, or rejected in later studies.



25.2



Theoretical Background of This

Discussion



The theoretical hypothesis underlying this paper is that

probability distribution of abilities between species, within

species, and even within an individual in a species is not

essentially discontinuous but quantitatively continuous.



Tài liệu bạn tìm kiếm đã sẵn sàng tải về

5 The Sociocultural Cultivation of Positive Attitudes Toward Learning: The Differentiating Factor in Learning Ability Betwe...

Tải bản đầy đủ ngay(0 tr)

×