![]() Flying evolved independently multiple times ( Ben-Hamo et al., 2016). Convergent evolution is not the exception, but the rule. For example, the hypothesis that episodic memory emerged in early mammals is not the same as a hypothesis that only mammals exhibit episodic memory. ![]() Proposing a hypothesis regarding the emergence of abilities along the evolutionary lineage from early bilaterians to humans is not the same thing as proposing a hypothesis regarding a unique ability of humans relative to other extant animals alive today. This requires an essential caveat to the hypotheses presented here. The scope of this paper is intentionally anthropocentric – it seeks to chronicle the phylogenetic history of behavioral abilities in the human lineage from early bilaterians and extant Homo sapiens. Thirdly, it develops hypotheses regarding the subset of behaviors that are frequently considered as “intelligent.” I will briefly review each of these three refinements to clarify the scope of the analysis herein. Secondly, it develops hypotheses only on the human lineage from early bilaterians to extant homo sapiens. Firstly, it develops hypotheses only on phylogenetic history. Given the breadth of this topic, the scope of this paper is narrowed in three ways. To aid this tracking of the phylogenetic refinement of behavior, this paper presents 13 hypotheses regarding the specific behavioral abilities that emerged at key milestones during the 600-million-year phylogenetic history from early bilaterians to extant humans. A challenge to interpreting human behavioral, intellectual, and cognitive faculties through the lens of phylogenetic refinement is in identifying the faculties present in our ancestors, as these were the building blocks upon which the process of phylogenetic refinement operated. This general idea of progressive complexification of behavior from simpler roots has been elegantly articulated in Paul Cisek’s theory of “phylogenetic refinement,” whereby an extant animal’s behavioral repertoire is interpreted as a consequence of evolutionary refinement from more basic phylogenetic building blocks ( Cisek, 2019). But all these varied faculties, which emerge from the complex human brain, are likely to have evolved from simpler prototypes in the inevitably simpler brains of our ancestors. We can build cognitive maps, infer intentions of others, remember specific historical events, communicate with each other using language, learn motor skills through observation, and more. In theory, studies of many closely related species are required in order to consider relevant evolutionary processes, as well as to develop functional hypotheses about the adaptive significance of various biological propensities and their interrelationships in the short and longer terms.Humans have an incredibly diverse suite of intellectual faculties. Further, because an increasing number of primate species are becom ing endangered, knowledge of their responsiveness to new environ ments is an essential requirement for effective breeding programmes in captivity, and for the translocation and rehabilitation of species in the wild. There is also increased awareness of the need to improve the care of primates in zoos and laboratories, including the enrichment of captive environments. For example, there is growing concern among biologists and conser vationists about the influence of habitat destruction, such as logging, on the fitness and survival of wild primates. ![]() By studying these patterns of responsiveness we not only gain useful knowledge about the structural, physiological and behavioural propensities of different species, but also acquire important information relating to issues of contemporary concern, such as conservation and the management of animals in the wild as well as in various forms of captivity. This book concerns the various ways that primates respond to environmental change. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |