As an update to this blogpost, a discovery announced in December of 2014 claims that a shell found dating back to 540,000 years ago, is a new "first" demonstration of the origin of symbolic logic and the "I". It was believed to be the result of using a shark tooth to open sea shells to get food in what is now Java.
This is a highly problematic conclusion, however. When one looks closely at the picture it could just be random scratching. Another argument against this being the earliest symbolic logic is that there is nothing that occurred for over 400,000 years or so that followed it. The carved ochre found below was quickly followed by many other cave paintings, grave artifacts, jewelry, etc.
Q. How/why do we have an "I"? When did it come into existence?
G. This is a frequent question. An earlier blogpost "non-dual awakening - evolutionary step backward? or next step forward?" looked at this from a scientific, evolutionary perspective based upon how other primates, specifically chimpanzees, developed evolutionarily. While chimpanzees have some similar functional neuroanatomy, w/o a constructed language they don't likely have our "blah, blah", I/me/my default mental processes.
Some recent research, highlighted in a recent Scientific American article, looks at evolutionary anthropology work on our species, and the reasons and times that different functions developed and enabled increased creativity. There are some surprising results.
Our evolutionary branch emerged in Africa around six million years ago when it diverged from that of our nearest evolutionary kin, chimpanzees and bonobos. Bonobos are known for their affection and socialization as well as their sexual behavior, which is used for conflict appeasement, social status, affection, excitement, stress reduction, etc. (sound familiar?).
Bonobos probably separately evolved from chimpanzees about 1.5 to 2 million years ago when the Congo River formed. Neither species are great swimmers, so the ones south of the Congo became bonobos, while those north of the river became chimpanzees. Location, location, location.
Well, our ancestors didn't do much from a standpoint of "creativity" or evolutionary development for 3,400,000 years after the split. Like chimpanzees, we got plant and animal food by hand; no tools or anything "creative" survived from this period. For the next 1,600,000 years we worked on flaking stones by hitting one stone w/another stone to make multi-purpose hand axes. Not many "breakthroughs" unless you count flaking both sides of the stone rather than just one for 5,000,000 years.
Then, our ancestors, now Homo heidelbergensis, about 500,000 years ago (5.5 million years after we split off from chimpanzees) in South Africa (where we all came from) discovered that they could put stones on sticks to make spears. Homo heidelbergensis was likely the common ancestor for Homo sapiens (us) and the Neanderthals (named for the valley in Germany where they were discovered).
There is much controversy over whether we and the Neanderthals are really distinct species. There is strong genomic evidence of interbreeding between the two species; we have some Neanderthal genes, probably 1 - 4%. Some excellent survival traits came w/these genes, BTW. Say thank you to the Neanderthals. By adulthood, the Neanderthals had the same size or bigger brains than we currently have. They were also stronger, w/much stronger arms and hands. And we won!!!???
Sometime about 165,000 years ago, we picked up the pace and were heating a low grade, silica rock over a fire to make materials for shaping into spear points. Then 75,000 to 100,000 years ago, there was a big "discontinuity" (just after the space aliens visited), when we were making complex, multi-ingredient glues to fasten sharp stone points to arrows, making bows to shoot them, devising snares to capture small animals, and adorning ourselves w/shell beads.
Very importantly, @ Blombos Cave in South Africa, 75,000 years ago, our ancestors carved complex designs in some iron oxide; the first clear demonstration that they had developed abstract symbolic logic, behaved in a "cognitively modern way" with a syntactical, constructed language and w/it, a "self/I". The discontinuity in our creativity corresponded to these innovations. So that's the answer to today's quiz question; the "I" is about 75,000 years old.
How did this happen? What neuroanatomical/neurochemical innovation evolved to make this possible? When we split off from chimpanzees 6 million years ago, we both had mean cranial capacities of about 450 cubic centimeters (cc). By 1.6 million years ago, our ancestors, H. erectus, had a cranial capacity 930 cc, more than doubling our processing capacity. By 100,000 years ago, just when things really started to "happen", we had 1,330 cc cranial capacity, a 3X increase. Although "size does matter", there was another major change that has only been recently worked out.
At University of California, San Diego (UCSD), Katerina Semendeferi began focusing on the prefrontal cortex (in orange), which orchestrates thought and action to accomplish goals. Semendeferi and her colleagues looked at the regions of the prefrontal cortex in modern humans, chimpanzees and bonobos. The work is described in "Human prefrontal cortex: evolution, development and pathology", Teffer, K. and Semendeferi, K. in Progress in Brain Research, 195: 191-218 (2012).
One particular area, Broadman Area 10, at the very front/left of the brain above, which brings plans to fruition and organizes sensory input, doubled in volume after the split from the chimpanzees. Just as important, the spaces between neurons in Broadman area 10 widened by nearly 50 %. This is critical; the increased space could now accommodate more axons and dendrites on the neurons. This allows for much higher connectivity between neurons and much more complicated arrangements of networks of neurons for specific purposes.
Cognitive neuroscientist Liane Gabora of the University of British Columbia believes that two different types of creative functioning, one for free association and one for analysis, were facilitated by this improved arrangement. A bigger brain w/dispersed and interconnected areas allows for more different types of associated information and memories to be incorporated into creative solutions to problems.
A routine event for our distant ancestors like H. erectus, like brushing against a spiny bush, would just be a brief annoying pain. With this enhanced functional complexity in H. sapiens, it might now lead the way to developing a spear w/a sharp pointed tip, or a sewing needle.
What was missing was a mechanism to switch between the free association and analytical modes. This required the development of a "concentration adjustment" system for some neurotransmitter like dopamine. It apparently took tens of thousands of years to fine-tune this mechanism.
Something else was needed to maximize breakthroughs; the ability to cooperatively problem-solve. If there were others to provide input and modify new knowledge and developments, there was more likely to be what is called "cultural ratcheting". A study reported in Science in 2012 by Dean, et al. "Identification of the Social and Cognitive Processes Underlying Human Cumulative Culture" looked at how humans can do this, but chimpanzees and monkeys cannot.
Fifty-five chimpanzees and monkeys, and 35 school children were given a complex puzzle w/three incrementally difficult levels. Only 1 of the 55 in the groups of chimpanzees/monkeys solved the problem in more than 30 hours of trying. However in 2 1/2 hours, talking among themselves and showing the others their discoveries, 15 of the 35 children solved the highest level of the problem. There is a good Discover blog on this.
Other studies have demonstrated that another contributing factor was larger population density. Work by Coward, F. (University of London) and Grove, M. (University of Liverpool) in PaleoAnthropology in 2011, demonstrated that "cultural innovations need...large connected populations who can 'infect' one another". About 80,000 years ago, the H. sapiens population density in Africa reached that critical mass.
So, it took a long, long time for our ancestors to "get it together", but when they did, w/dramatically increased brain size, neuroanatomical and neurochemical restructuring, enhanced social and interaction skills, and lots of us, we created the iPad, FB and Snapchat, went to the moon, dug up Mars, etc.
This is a highly problematic conclusion, however. When one looks closely at the picture it could just be random scratching. Another argument against this being the earliest symbolic logic is that there is nothing that occurred for over 400,000 years or so that followed it. The carved ochre found below was quickly followed by many other cave paintings, grave artifacts, jewelry, etc.
Q. How/why do we have an "I"? When did it come into existence?
 |
| Carved ochre designs First demonstration of symbolic logic, language, and modern cognition 75,000 years ago |
G. This is a frequent question. An earlier blogpost "non-dual awakening - evolutionary step backward? or next step forward?" looked at this from a scientific, evolutionary perspective based upon how other primates, specifically chimpanzees, developed evolutionarily. While chimpanzees have some similar functional neuroanatomy, w/o a constructed language they don't likely have our "blah, blah", I/me/my default mental processes.
Some recent research, highlighted in a recent Scientific American article, looks at evolutionary anthropology work on our species, and the reasons and times that different functions developed and enabled increased creativity. There are some surprising results.
Our evolutionary branch emerged in Africa around six million years ago when it diverged from that of our nearest evolutionary kin, chimpanzees and bonobos. Bonobos are known for their affection and socialization as well as their sexual behavior, which is used for conflict appeasement, social status, affection, excitement, stress reduction, etc. (sound familiar?).
 |
| Bonobos |
Bonobos probably separately evolved from chimpanzees about 1.5 to 2 million years ago when the Congo River formed. Neither species are great swimmers, so the ones south of the Congo became bonobos, while those north of the river became chimpanzees. Location, location, location.
Well, our ancestors didn't do much from a standpoint of "creativity" or evolutionary development for 3,400,000 years after the split. Like chimpanzees, we got plant and animal food by hand; no tools or anything "creative" survived from this period. For the next 1,600,000 years we worked on flaking stones by hitting one stone w/another stone to make multi-purpose hand axes. Not many "breakthroughs" unless you count flaking both sides of the stone rather than just one for 5,000,000 years.
Then, our ancestors, now Homo heidelbergensis, about 500,000 years ago (5.5 million years after we split off from chimpanzees) in South Africa (where we all came from) discovered that they could put stones on sticks to make spears. Homo heidelbergensis was likely the common ancestor for Homo sapiens (us) and the Neanderthals (named for the valley in Germany where they were discovered).
There is much controversy over whether we and the Neanderthals are really distinct species. There is strong genomic evidence of interbreeding between the two species; we have some Neanderthal genes, probably 1 - 4%. Some excellent survival traits came w/these genes, BTW. Say thank you to the Neanderthals. By adulthood, the Neanderthals had the same size or bigger brains than we currently have. They were also stronger, w/much stronger arms and hands. And we won!!!???
Sometime about 165,000 years ago, we picked up the pace and were heating a low grade, silica rock over a fire to make materials for shaping into spear points. Then 75,000 to 100,000 years ago, there was a big "discontinuity" (just after the space aliens visited), when we were making complex, multi-ingredient glues to fasten sharp stone points to arrows, making bows to shoot them, devising snares to capture small animals, and adorning ourselves w/shell beads.
Very importantly, @ Blombos Cave in South Africa, 75,000 years ago, our ancestors carved complex designs in some iron oxide; the first clear demonstration that they had developed abstract symbolic logic, behaved in a "cognitively modern way" with a syntactical, constructed language and w/it, a "self/I". The discontinuity in our creativity corresponded to these innovations. So that's the answer to today's quiz question; the "I" is about 75,000 years old.
How did this happen? What neuroanatomical/neurochemical innovation evolved to make this possible? When we split off from chimpanzees 6 million years ago, we both had mean cranial capacities of about 450 cubic centimeters (cc). By 1.6 million years ago, our ancestors, H. erectus, had a cranial capacity 930 cc, more than doubling our processing capacity. By 100,000 years ago, just when things really started to "happen", we had 1,330 cc cranial capacity, a 3X increase. Although "size does matter", there was another major change that has only been recently worked out.
 |
| Katerina Semendeferi UCSD |
 |
| Prefrontal Cortex Broadman Area 10 |
 |
| Neuron w/Axons and Dendrites |
Cognitive neuroscientist Liane Gabora of the University of British Columbia believes that two different types of creative functioning, one for free association and one for analysis, were facilitated by this improved arrangement. A bigger brain w/dispersed and interconnected areas allows for more different types of associated information and memories to be incorporated into creative solutions to problems.
 |
| Liane Gabora U of British Columbia |
What was missing was a mechanism to switch between the free association and analytical modes. This required the development of a "concentration adjustment" system for some neurotransmitter like dopamine. It apparently took tens of thousands of years to fine-tune this mechanism.
Something else was needed to maximize breakthroughs; the ability to cooperatively problem-solve. If there were others to provide input and modify new knowledge and developments, there was more likely to be what is called "cultural ratcheting". A study reported in Science in 2012 by Dean, et al. "Identification of the Social and Cognitive Processes Underlying Human Cumulative Culture" looked at how humans can do this, but chimpanzees and monkeys cannot.
Fifty-five chimpanzees and monkeys, and 35 school children were given a complex puzzle w/three incrementally difficult levels. Only 1 of the 55 in the groups of chimpanzees/monkeys solved the problem in more than 30 hours of trying. However in 2 1/2 hours, talking among themselves and showing the others their discoveries, 15 of the 35 children solved the highest level of the problem. There is a good Discover blog on this.
Other studies have demonstrated that another contributing factor was larger population density. Work by Coward, F. (University of London) and Grove, M. (University of Liverpool) in PaleoAnthropology in 2011, demonstrated that "cultural innovations need...large connected populations who can 'infect' one another". About 80,000 years ago, the H. sapiens population density in Africa reached that critical mass.
So, it took a long, long time for our ancestors to "get it together", but when they did, w/dramatically increased brain size, neuroanatomical and neurochemical restructuring, enhanced social and interaction skills, and lots of us, we created the iPad, FB and Snapchat, went to the moon, dug up Mars, etc.
This week's New Scientist magazine is a special issue on the self. It includes some observations of how plastic the sense of self is and some speculations as to why we evolved this sense of self in the first place.
ReplyDeleteInteresting stuff! Although I can't help but be a little wary of these neurological descriptors of the Self. Doesn't this new understanding that the Self/Self-Realization can be mapped to neural processes brings a sense of impermanence to the phenomenon? Traditionally, Self-Realization was depicted in a more transcendent light, something that surpassed the body and mental cognition. With this thinking, what's stopping a Phineas Gage-esque blow to the head from ending the state of Stillness? Any thoughts on this matter would be greatly appreciated!
ReplyDeleteHi Anonymous,
DeleteGreat question. The cognitive neuroscience and evolutionary work isn't to understand the transcendent Self, it's to see what we can understand about how the brain functions to create a self/I/me/my, which is at the root of all of our self-referential thoughts, fears and desires.
The I/self is just something that developed very recent evolutionarily, and hence it can be deconstructed, it turns out, so these thoughts, fears and desires can fall away, or dramatically decrease in intensity. This results in concurrent decrease in worries, fears, depression, craving, suffering, etc. It's somewhat like understanding all we can about any other part of the body/mind, so we can improve its functioning and fix it if it malfunctions.
The transcendent, unchanging, all-pervasive Self is something we are finding increasing validation for from w/our latest physics. The blogposts "How Consciousness creates matter...The God particle", "Do your mystical experiences fit w/quantum physics? neuroscience?", and "Is the Universe alive? Does it evolve, think, reproduce?" all discuss the Self you refer to.
Many serious scientific folk are moving to the viewpoint that this "all pervasive" something, Higgs field or dark energy, is possibly conscious and Self-aware, and is "everything that is", which mirrors the descriptions of the classical Self in many texts like the Bhagavad Gita.
If, like Phineas Gage, you got a large iron railroad rod driven through your brain, your I/self might be greatly disrupted, as was his, but the Self would be unperturbed. The Stillness would still be there, and everywhere else, even if there was no ability to perceive it from the damaged brain.
Trust this is useful.
stillness