Anthropology #3 (Essay Sample)

Name
Professor
Institution
Date
Human Cognitive Development
The upper Paleolithic was the last subdivision in the Old Stone Age. These ancestors of man existed between 50,000 and 10,000 years ago in Africa, Europe and Asia. The upper Paleolithic is associated with the evolution of behavioral traits and early advent of agriculture. During this era, there was a notable increase in the diversity of artefacts. Bone artifacts and fine arts developed during this archeological period. It is also believed that during this period there was a crude form of fishing from the evidence found like in Blombos caves in South Africa. Among the artefacts that were found during this era, it was noted that there was significant differentiation and classification into different categories. These classification included things like blades, drilling and piercing tools. These tools were differentiated from each other as if they were used for different purposes. These tools are believed to have migrated to Europe 45,000 years ago (Ember and Melvin 34).
These evidence of sophistication and evolution of better tools shows that man ancestors at this time had standard to develop cognitive abilities. The imaginary revolution is thus evident in this era. The use of sophistication of tools led to the increase in the population and led to the extinction of the Neanderthal man. The ancestors who lived in the upper Paleolithic era were known as Cro-Magnon. They used sophisticated stone tools, carved and engraved pieces of bones, ivory, and practiced cave painting (Ember and Melvin 34).
The evolution from middle Paleolithic to upper-Paleolithic is termed as upper Paleolithic revolution. Another association of the upper Paleolithic to the imaginary revolution was the evidence of the first organized settlements into campsites each with storage pits. Artistic work also developed during this era. They painted, carved and engraved on bone or ivory like the Swimming Reindeer. Exotic raw materials were also found far from their sources suggesting that they had started some sort of trade links (Ember and Melvin 34). More complex social grouping emerged facilitated by the availability of abundant food sources and specialized tool types.
The improved imagination revolution during this stage saw the stone tool production and use reach its pinnacle. Blade technology and burin manufacturing among the imaginary development of these people. Blade technology improved the production by more than 100%. Very sharp, straight cutting edges were used to manufacture tools that they used to for food preparation. The new manufacturing technology saw to it that wood and bone working was achieved with ease and efficiency never experienced before. The culture of the hominids at the upper-Paleolithic era saw some form of refinement ranging from improved art and diet to the organization into social groups compared to the hominids in the middle Paleolithic era (Ember and Melvin 34). This shows that there was an imagination revolution during the upper Paleolithic era.
The human cognitive ability has evolved from the origin of evolution of man to the current day where the cognitive abilities are tremendous. At the beginning of the evolution the brain capacity was same to that of other primates. The brain capacity grew with time as the evolution proceeded with each new stage having better cognitive ability and bigger brain capacity. Several studies have been carried out and hypothesis and explanations put forward to explain the development of the cognitive ability in man. These hypothesis are scholarly positions that explains the significance, pace and punctuation of the origins of fully modern human cognition. Two of the scholarly positions are social brain hypothesis and ecological dominance-social competition model (Sternberg 34). These two theories were put forward by two scholars to explain the origin and development of human intelligence, the cognitive growth.
The social brain hypothesis proposes that the human intelligence did not evolve basically did not evolve to solve ecological problems but rather as means of surviving and for reproduction in large and complex social groupings. The social brain hypothesis was developed by Robin Dunbar, a British anthropologist. As the human ancestors continued to evolve, they started assuming behaviors that were associated with living in large social groups like formation of coalitions, deception, and reciprocal altruism. These behaviors were developed as the primates tried to understand the thoughts and emotions of other members of the social groups. At the beginning of evolution, the primates did not use to live in large social groupings. However, when evolution took shape and primates began to refine, the organized themselves in social groupings. The organizations required that the primates should adapt and learn to live with others in order to survive in the new evolutions (Sternberg 46).
According to the hypothesis, as the social groups increased, the number of variety of relationships in the group grew by orders of magnitude. In comparison to show the significance of the cognitive growth with evolution, the chimpanzees with a less cognitive ability live in groups of about 50 whereas humans with developed and complex cognitive ability live in groups of about 150. Dunbar said that there was evidence that the success of the social groups depended upon their size at the foundation. The grouping of around 150 members are found to be successful showing that at this size there was a balance between minimum size that could effectively function and the maximum size that could facilitate commitment to these communities. As per this hypothesis, hominids started to live in large groups and selection facilitated greater intelligence. Evidence was quoted on the relationship between neocortex size and the size of the social groups. The hypothesis further stipulates that it was because of the intelligence that these social groupings became more complex (Sternberg 38).
The social brain hypothesis is further supported by other studies that shows that social exchanges between individual animals is important in cognitive development. The social brain hypothesis is complete in its own way, however I feel that social grouping are not enough parameters to dictate cognitive development. There are however other animals or insects that live in far more large grouping that have less cognitive abilities compared to that of humans. I believe that there are other factors that could fuel cognitive growth rather than the demands of the social groupings. However, the hypothesis provided an explanation for the fact that primates large brains for body size in comparison to all other vertebrates. It suggests that primates developed large brains to manage the complex social groupings. The number of members maintained in a group demands more complex cognitive demands. The modern large social grouping in human beings ask for more complex and dynamic cognitive abilities (Sternberg 39).
The other position is the ecological dominance-social competition model. The model, human intelligence developed to significant levels due to the combination of ever increasing domination over habitat and increasing importance of social interactions. The model was developed by three scholars based on the model that was initiated by Richard D. Alexander. According to the model, as the population increased, the competition for habitat and sources of food increased. Selective pressure required human cognitive ability to grow and shift to adapting on how to dominate and survive the growing competition. As the hominid ancestors started to master the dynamics of hostile forces of nature, selective pressures that resulted from competition among the members of kin and other primates, human had to develop ways to make them suit the new environment. The needs made people to devise ways of making more food, to protect themselves and pro...