Back to History and Evolution
Archives.
History and Evolution:
By William E. Steinman:
Part 5, Origin of Man:
April 21, 2003:
In this part, I want to begin looking at what we know and can
surmise about man's evolution. In truth, we know very little.
We can surmise a great deal. All of these things happened relatively
recently on the geological scale of time. In fact everything we
know, or think we know, about man indicates human evolution began
in the Pliocene Epoch between 5 and 1.8 million years ago. This
is when Australopithecines or Southern Apes first appeared in
Africa. Many authorities consider these apes to be the ancestors
of Homo Sapiens or modern man.
For sure, there is a great deal of speculation involved in this. What we have are skulls and fragments of bone from Africa for a species of ape. These guys apparently were able to walk upright as opposed to the normal knuckle walk of their chimpanzee cousins. Some of these bone fragments date as far back as 4 million years. That's a very long time ago to state anything conclusively, but it is all we have. There is enough evidence to support the theory that these apes were able to use stone tools. However, there is some debate about whether they actually made tools or simply utilized available stones and bones.
Out of these apes, so goes the theory, evolved a fellow called Homo Habilis or handy man. That was about 2 million years ago. Homo Habilis is considered by some to be the first true member of the genus Homo. This is all based on some very slim evidence consisting again of bone fragments and skulls found in various places. Based on that, some archeologists are convinced the first man did not suddenly appear on earth. He evolved from apes.
The creationists notwithstanding, it does seem a bit more likely that we evolved from something rather than appearing out of nothing. All of the evidence we have points to the Southern Ape as that something. Since it all happened 2 billion years ago, we will never be able to prove any of this. All we can do is give it our best guess based on what we do know. So, until someone proves them wrong, I will go with what the scientists say.
It seems this Homo Habilis was smart enough to shape stone into simple tools. He had better hands and a larger brain for that than his Southern Ape ancestors. So he made cool things like chopping, cutting, and scraping tools. Theory has it that these fellows were not necessarily hunters, but were for sure scavengers. They lacked the wherewithal to bring down big game, but they could gather the remains of kills made by larger predators. It is possible that they also hunted small game such as rabbits.
It is clear that these folks traveled in groups and had some sort of cultural structure. What it was, we don't know. In fact, we don't even know exactly where they lived. Although most of the artifacts were found in sites in limited geographic areas, it is not clear that Homo Habilis actually lived at these sites. We have the same problem as concerns language. We simply lack sufficient evidence to say they did or did not use symbols to communicate.
What many scientists agree on is Homo Habilis was different from the Southern Ape. There is less agreement on whether he was a new species and man's first true ancestor. However, If we reject him as a link in the chain, we will have difficulty explaining whence came Homo Erectus or Upright Man. Pretty much everyone agrees that Homo Erectus is a true ancestor. I must guess he either evolved from Homo Habilis or directly from the Southern Ape. In either case, he is the next step in human evolution. Evidence indicates that he evolved about 1.6 million years ago. His big advantage over Homo Habilis was a larger brain.
Homo Erectus was a versatile vigorous type who hung around for a long time, until about 300,000 years ago. Assuming he did not evolve in several different places simultaneously, he seems to have migrated and wandered quite a bit. His remains were found in Europe, Asia, and Africa. He was also adaptable as to habitat. He lived in the open plains and in caves. This guy also learned to control fire which let him migrate into colder regions. As to tools, he was more sophisticate than Homo Habilis. He made more and better stone tools including a primitive ax.
For food, Homo Erectus was also versatile. It seems he was a gatherer and a hunter. With his improved brain and hands he was able to be successful in the hunt. He also learned to cook his meat to make it easier to eat. Remains indicate that he ate animal flesh, seeds, roots, leaves, birds, snakes, fish, crustaceans, and nuts. Like his descendants, Homo Sapiens, he was a true omnivore.
Out of Homo Erectus came Homo Sapiens or modern man. When we get to Homo Sapiens there is a great deal more information and also some existing primitive cultures that can be studied. Homo Sapiens are flexible, versatile and adaptable. Those are the attributes which characterize Homo Sapiens and are some of the reasons why mankind dominates the earth for better or worse.
We also dominate the other animals because of a combination of survival characteristics. Like Homo Erectus, we have good hands with opposed thumbs for handling objects. We also have a much larger brain which gives us the ability to use language. We can also design, plan and build things because of our brain. It seems ironic that the power of that brain which gave us such great survival advantage, may ultimately lead to the destruction of mankind. We may soon outsmart ourselves unless our ethical evolution overtakes our technical development.
Now the anthropologists can, will, and should continue to study and debate the details of man's evolution. I suspect, unless we develop time travel, we will never know for sure. For us, it is sufficient to understand that man did evolve from something. The most plausible path of that evolution is from the Southern Ape through Homo Habilis and Homo Erectus to Homo Sapiens. Although we assign time frames to these different forms of the species Homo, we can be sure there were no abrupt transitions from one to the next. It is best to view this whole process as a gradual evolution from apes to modern man. Accepting that as the most likely theory will allow us to look at some of the other aspects of man's evolution.
We can get to the ongoing evolution of Homo Sapiens and the ages of man in a following essay. First, I think we should look briefly beyond this physical evolution and human development. One outstanding area heretofore ignored is the evolution of consciousness in man. This is something we should not brush off. I believe it is at the heart of everything else about us. It is our consciousness and that alone that makes us unique among the animals. The key question is, what happened to man that finally made him conscious and distinguished him from the ape and when did it happen?
Somewhere in that evolutionary progression, we became aware of ourselves and our thought processes in a unique way. Man became conscious of himself such that he acquired the ability to observe himself and his own thoughts. I know of no other animal that can do that. That is the essence of the difference between the species Homo and all other species. Man became an observer of himself. We became aware of ourselves as separate from the environment. We developed a capacity that is generally called will. That is the ability to think and act other than instinctively, the ability to plan and to build.
Anthropologists do not and perhaps should not address the actual development of consciousness in man. The current problem is this study does not belong to any known scientific field. Anthropology is concerned with physical evidence. Psychology, as a healing science, ignores ancient history in favor of recent history. This leaves the study of consciousness to the field of theology and primitive religions. Since they have preordained explanations for everything, no study can be done, especial a study that looks beyond the six day creation theory.
So, as best I can, I will look beyond it myself. There are two important concepts in this. One is that man was not created out of whole cloth. He did evolve. The other, the question implied from that, is where is this going? Comparing ourselves to the earlier versions of the species Homo, we are in many ways a much improved version. This leads one to suppose that we will continue to evolve. There is not one shred of evidence to support the opposite notion, that we are at an evolutionary dead end. Thus, we can hope to become a much superior version of what we are now. We need not look too sharply about to notice areas that could be improved, particularly in the area of ethics.
As an attempt at humor, my spouse suggested the next stage of human evolution to be Homo Genized Or Integrated Man. I did the obligatory snort which I substitute for laughter, then I suddenly realized her insight. This development of homogeny can really be viewed as an evolutionary progression. This is not when we become color blind. We never will. It will be when skin color and race become no more significant in our relationships than shoe size or eye color. If could happen. It's somewhere near what I hope for as a first step.
Now, as my own attempt at humor, after Homo Genized we might
finally become Homo Civilius or civilized man. This is not where
we make bigger and better buildings and bridges. It is about how
well we care for each other and our earth. Civilization is not
about things, it is about behavior. There will be more on these
concepts further on. Next time, I will discuss three inexplicable
historic events which I have more or less slipped over.
Back to History and Evolution
Archives.
|
|
|
|