November 16
Calling athletes “Neanderthals” may no longer be insulting enough to comfort embittered nerds. Recent paleontology indicates that Neanderthal Man did not walk slumped over with his head hanging and hands drooping near the earth as was once supposed. Arthritic degradation of an early specimen had deceived scientists, according to exhibits at Washington DC’s Natural History Museum. Now it appears that Neanderthal Man walked upright. His cranial capacity of over 1400 cm3 tells us that his brain was bigger than ours. And archeology has revealed that he probably cared for the sick and held ceremonies for the dead. We now consider Neanderthal Man closer to that unique specimen we call “modern man” – Homo sapiens sapiens, to the scientific community – and so scientists have reclassified him to Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. His taxonomical name differs from yours and mine only at the subspecies level. Neanderthal Man is now officially closer to modern man than upright man, Homo erectus, or tool-using man, Homo habilis.
Of course, the taxonomical structure and complex theories that surround each existing ancestral skeleton must continually adapt themselves to what scientists dig up. When oddities in the formation of Neanderthal Man’s bones were found to be arthritic rather than genetic, anthropologists’ theories about his lifestyle changed to accommodate a generally upright posture. The bones, scientists say, represent the facts. The theories are only interpretations. As Biblical literalists might tell you, the truth about man’s origins comes from the dust.
It was not so long ago that Biblical literalists controlled the descriptions western people propound to explain the world around them. Man arose spontaneously from dirt. Species differed because God had assembled them differently. The world was created on October 26, 4004 BC at 9am.
The anchoring points for these theories came from various passages in the Bible. From solid points of scripture, touted as indisputable truth, thinkers connected dots to form theories. By counting generations, for instance, an 18th century bishop uncovered the date of the world’s beginning. Today, the anchoring points for scientific thought are objective observations, like the discovery of prehistoric hominid footprints at Olduvi Gorge. These observations are considered factual and interpretation of them constitutes theory. Scientists interpret certain archaeological findings, for instance, to indicate that between 5 and 2 million years ago a certain line of apes began to walk upright.
In every age man has believed he knew the means of discovering the truth. Once man’s means was theological. Today it is empirical. But man only creates models for the world around him, only crafts mental frameworks to describe his world. Perhaps man has never encountered truth – he has only created more or less facile models to represent it. Even the purportedly fixed anchoring points for his models are subject to reevaluation as archaeological finds get discredited or scriptural declarations get declared metaphorical. Just as some Christians have claimed a mortal man could never look directly into the face of the Living God, a scientist must admit that we may never glimpse pure truth. We must make do with models, because they’re all we have.
Of course, the taxonomical structure and complex theories that surround each existing ancestral skeleton must continually adapt themselves to what scientists dig up. When oddities in the formation of Neanderthal Man’s bones were found to be arthritic rather than genetic, anthropologists’ theories about his lifestyle changed to accommodate a generally upright posture. The bones, scientists say, represent the facts. The theories are only interpretations. As Biblical literalists might tell you, the truth about man’s origins comes from the dust.
It was not so long ago that Biblical literalists controlled the descriptions western people propound to explain the world around them. Man arose spontaneously from dirt. Species differed because God had assembled them differently. The world was created on October 26, 4004 BC at 9am.
The anchoring points for these theories came from various passages in the Bible. From solid points of scripture, touted as indisputable truth, thinkers connected dots to form theories. By counting generations, for instance, an 18th century bishop uncovered the date of the world’s beginning. Today, the anchoring points for scientific thought are objective observations, like the discovery of prehistoric hominid footprints at Olduvi Gorge. These observations are considered factual and interpretation of them constitutes theory. Scientists interpret certain archaeological findings, for instance, to indicate that between 5 and 2 million years ago a certain line of apes began to walk upright.
In every age man has believed he knew the means of discovering the truth. Once man’s means was theological. Today it is empirical. But man only creates models for the world around him, only crafts mental frameworks to describe his world. Perhaps man has never encountered truth – he has only created more or less facile models to represent it. Even the purportedly fixed anchoring points for his models are subject to reevaluation as archaeological finds get discredited or scriptural declarations get declared metaphorical. Just as some Christians have claimed a mortal man could never look directly into the face of the Living God, a scientist must admit that we may never glimpse pure truth. We must make do with models, because they’re all we have.
posted by Jeb Butler at 6:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home