Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 186 posts

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#51

Post by ekianjo »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #16
WalterBright wrote: post #5

I'm curious why humans evolved intelligence and chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans did not.

We don't know. All of the great apes are incredibly intelligent in comparison to most other animals. The basic roots of our intelligence are probably a common feature to the whole family, but there's no consensus on why it's so advanced in humans. Any paleoanthropologist can rattle off about half a dozen possible explanations, but we honestly don't have enough evidence to really distinguish if, when, and how these we…

How about if we were the only apes to not fear fire as much and discovered that we get much more nutrients by cooking stuff?

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#52

Post by andrewflnr »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #16
WalterBright wrote: post #5

I'm curious why humans evolved intelligence and chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans did not.

We don't know. All of the great apes are incredibly intelligent in comparison to most other animals. The basic roots of our intelligence are probably a common feature to the whole family, but there's no consensus on why it's so advanced in humans. Any paleoanthropologist can rattle off about half a dozen possible explanations, but we honestly don't have enough evidence to really distinguish if, when, and how these we…

I hadn't heard the term "spandrel" before, especially not in this context. Makes sense, though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spandrel_(biology)

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#53

Post by AngryData »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #34
nn3 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans evolved intelligence too. They are smarter than most other critters in the jungle. Just all not as much as the lineage that leads to humans. It's actually quite difficult to define human intelligence. Every time we think we find something unique by humans eventually some animal turns up that can do it too. It may be all just a question of degree and how it's used.

Are there any other animals that have a system of writing?

No, but humans didn't have writing up until pretty recently either so I don't think that is a great measure of base intellectual capability.

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#54

Post by bigbrained124 »

WalterBright wrote: post #5

I'm curious why humans evolved intelligence and chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans did not.

I think everyone overlooks fungi/plant’s impact of evolution/adaptation.

Survival of the fittest never includes the gene impacts plants and fungi can force onto creatures.

Also cyclical 12kyr catastrophic events leading to small condensation of species under stress.

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#55

Post by throwaway173738 »

hiatus wrote: post #28
WalterBright wrote: post #5

I'm curious why humans evolved intelligence and chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans did not.

I have no expertise in the field whatsoever but can't help but wonder if it is at all related to our consumption of cooked foods. At the very least it reduces the incidence of parasites but I am sure there are myriad benefits beyond treating foods for longevity through methods like smoking.

I have zero expertise either, but I find this field fascinating. Cooking makes it easier to chew so we can devote less of our skulls to chewing muscles. At birth our skulls are barely small enough to fit through the birth canal in one orientation, and one of the prerequisites for a baby to be born is that it’s facing head down and shoulders rotated into that orientation. Maybe cooking is beneficial because it allowed us to have a bigger braincase but also it gave us access to more nutrients from the same food.

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#56

Post by AlotOfReading »

ekianjo wrote: post #51
AlotOfReading wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't know. All of the great apes are incredibly intelligent in comparison to most other animals. The basic roots of our intelligence are probably a common feature to the whole family, but there's no consensus on why it's so advanced in humans. Any paleoanthropologist can rattle off about half a dozen possible explanations, but we honestly don't have enough evidence to really distinguish if, when, and how these we…

How about if we were the only apes to not fear fire as much and discovered that we get much more nutrients by cooking stuff?

Stone tools predate even the oldest suggestions of intentional fire use by at least a million years, so the cooking hypothesis isn't particularly compelling. Elsewhere in this thread I've also discussed how it's not really an explanation either.

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#57

Post by andrewflnr »

WalterBright wrote: post #43
acchow wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Why humans evolved intelligence but orangutans did not". There's a different way to think about this that is closer to how evolution actually works and will make the answer clear. Our common ancestor (common to orangutans and humans) did evolve intelligence (concurrently with harnessing fire, clothing etc.). Not all of them, but some of them. And they broke off from the group. We now call them humans.

Intelligence must surely be a cluster of evolved changes, let's say A-Z. Each of those letters must have appeared, and been advantageous on their own (or they wouldn't have persisted). So why didn't chimps get some of them? For example, chimps have hands, but do not exhibit anywhere near the dexterity and agility of human hands.

They did get some of them. Functionally, chimps are pretty smart compared to almost anything but a human. Only if you define intelligence specifically as the gap between humans and chimps (or whatever other reference) can you say chimps didn't get any of the pieces. We can ask why humans have more of the pieces, but that's basically the same question as why any species diverges. So, some inscrutable combination of chance, path dependence, etc

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#58

Post by throwaway173738 »

Razengan wrote: post #26
WalterBright wrote: post #5

I'm curious why humans evolved intelligence and chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans did not.

Who says they didn't? What would "intelligence" look like WHILE it was evolving? A slightly more unsettling thought: How would newly-emerging intelligence FEEL like, internally? Also, how would humans fare if born and raised in the wild, without any language or tools taught to them?

I can extrapolate based on my toddler that a modern human dumped in the wild would invent language. He has made several phonemes that aren’t in the language we speak at home. And he’s clever enough that even though he’s never seen us stand on furniture, he still climbs drawers and chairs if there’s something he wants that’s out of reach. I think that tool use and language are borne of some innate drive that’s accelerated by culture.

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#59

Post by bigbrained124 »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #16
WalterBright wrote: post #5

I'm curious why humans evolved intelligence and chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans did not.

We don't know. All of the great apes are incredibly intelligent in comparison to most other animals. The basic roots of our intelligence are probably a common feature to the whole family, but there's no consensus on why it's so advanced in humans. Any paleoanthropologist can rattle off about half a dozen possible explanations, but we honestly don't have enough evidence to really distinguish if, when, and how these we…

The only logical pathway is that some genetic mutation or plant-based hallucination allowed for lack of animalistic fear/true context generation within the brain. Understanding that bear/tiger/snake/etc won’t kill you in certain circumstances, means you can expend exponentially less calories and focus on building tools etc. It allows for rapid growth across the species in many areas.

Re: Study of 1M-year-old skull points to earlier origins of modern humans

#60

Post by Rediscover »

strogonoff wrote: post #41
AlotOfReading wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't know. All of the great apes are incredibly intelligent in comparison to most other animals. The basic roots of our intelligence are probably a common feature to the whole family, but there's no consensus on why it's so advanced in humans. Any paleoanthropologist can rattle off about half a dozen possible explanations, but we honestly don't have enough evidence to really distinguish if, when, and how these we…

Considering human intelligence is very social, I wonder if bias to focus on individual humans leads us to a wrong way of understanding why it arose… One of my pet theories is that it may be related to vocal cord development[0], where losing certain physiology that allows apes to be louder allowed humans to be more specific , if quieter, with enhanced pitch control and stability offering higher information density com…

> ... vocal cord development ...

I've read, from a few separate sources that were not research papers, something similar that claimed the development was a result of existing in semi-aquatic environments such as home on land but swimming for food/safety. I neither agree or disagree (not my field, I don't possess appropriate background/information), but I do think of it when evolution of vocal cords is mentioned.

I don't recall the sources ATM, possibly something out of CoEvolution Quarterly or Bucky Fuller. Again, not research papers.

Post reply on HN